NebulaClash
Apr 6, 01:29 PM
This can't be right. MR posters have assured me that the Xoom is better than the iPad. I mean, if you can't trust MR posters, whom can you trust?
[G5]Hydra
Jul 15, 04:23 PM
Early Blu-Ray burners can't read or write CDs, and are slow at DVDs. Maybe we'll see a Blu-Ray burner and a high-speed DVD�R(W)/CD-R(W).
Exactly right. Apple seems cozy with Pioneer, they did debut the original Superdrive in a PowerMac remember, and Pioneer's BDR-101A Blu-ray burner can't read or write CDs. Dual opticals would have nothing to do with Apple wanting to make people copy discs or doing anything made simple with two opticals. Pioneer debuted the BDR-101A (http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/article/0,aid,125581,00.asp) a few months ago at $1000 retail and if Apple gets a nice discount to use them they would need to go with an additional drive to be able to do CD's.
-Jerry C.
Exactly right. Apple seems cozy with Pioneer, they did debut the original Superdrive in a PowerMac remember, and Pioneer's BDR-101A Blu-ray burner can't read or write CDs. Dual opticals would have nothing to do with Apple wanting to make people copy discs or doing anything made simple with two opticals. Pioneer debuted the BDR-101A (http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/article/0,aid,125581,00.asp) a few months ago at $1000 retail and if Apple gets a nice discount to use them they would need to go with an additional drive to be able to do CD's.
-Jerry C.
PBF
Mar 26, 05:52 PM
does anyone else thing launchpad is the worst idea yet?
Maybe not the worst, but definitely the most useless.
Spotlight does a so much better job.
Maybe not the worst, but definitely the most useless.
Spotlight does a so much better job.
kdarling
Apr 19, 02:43 PM
That sort of misstates the test for likelihood of confusion. A consumer might, for example, believe that Apple licenses or otherwise blesses the Samsung products. That's probably good enough.
Thank you for the correction!
Please stop spreading FUD. If you knew anything about the history of the iPhone, you would know that it was announced and previewed at MacWorld 2007.
"FUD" is a big strong, don't you think? But you are correct; the F700 was shown off a couple of weeks later.
As I've said many times, 2006 was the time that everyone of us in the business (not casual consumers) knew that touchscreen phones were coming. Many companies were working on them; some quicker than others. They had no need to copy from each other; there's only a few major ways to do an all-touch phone without getting weird.
That's why Jobs felt he had to show off the iPhone before the other trade shows came along, long before it was ready for sale. He did not want to be seen as second in line. (It had nothing to do with the FCC... that's a story for the naive.)
Thank you for the correction!
Please stop spreading FUD. If you knew anything about the history of the iPhone, you would know that it was announced and previewed at MacWorld 2007.
"FUD" is a big strong, don't you think? But you are correct; the F700 was shown off a couple of weeks later.
As I've said many times, 2006 was the time that everyone of us in the business (not casual consumers) knew that touchscreen phones were coming. Many companies were working on them; some quicker than others. They had no need to copy from each other; there's only a few major ways to do an all-touch phone without getting weird.
That's why Jobs felt he had to show off the iPhone before the other trade shows came along, long before it was ready for sale. He did not want to be seen as second in line. (It had nothing to do with the FCC... that's a story for the naive.)
iGary
Sep 12, 11:02 AM
The folks over at Anandtech have dropped engineering samples of the quad core cloverton into a Mac Pro - http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2832&p=6
and it worked ... all eight cores were recognised.
The rest of the article was interesting too.
This willl probably be the update I purchase next year - if it makes it into the Mac Pro - thanks for the link.
and it worked ... all eight cores were recognised.
The rest of the article was interesting too.
This willl probably be the update I purchase next year - if it makes it into the Mac Pro - thanks for the link.
macpross
Aug 6, 01:34 PM
As Apple applied for the trademark, it will not be approved.
It is up to Apple how they want to proceed. A fight that can't win, no matter how much money they have.
Mac Pro has been the premier Mac dealer in the same county as Apple since 1988. Out of all the names for this new line of computers, why choose one that they know they cannot have.
We are already getting countless support calls for the macbook pro. It seems they assume we made them When we can't help them, they seem to get very upset.
Mac Pro is in a position to file for a court order not to release any computer that bears our name.
So get ready WWDC, we will be watching.
Mike Ajlouny
President
MAC-PRO.com
It is up to Apple how they want to proceed. A fight that can't win, no matter how much money they have.
Mac Pro has been the premier Mac dealer in the same county as Apple since 1988. Out of all the names for this new line of computers, why choose one that they know they cannot have.
We are already getting countless support calls for the macbook pro. It seems they assume we made them When we can't help them, they seem to get very upset.
Mac Pro is in a position to file for a court order not to release any computer that bears our name.
So get ready WWDC, we will be watching.
Mike Ajlouny
President
MAC-PRO.com
shamino
Jul 20, 09:32 AM
Is having more cores more energy efficient than having one big fat ass 24Ghz processor? Maybe thats a factor in the increasing core count.
Actually, this is well documented.
There are serious electrical and physical problems with jacking up clock speeds much further than they are now. Intel managed to push their chips to 3.4GHz, but the power consumed was tremendous.
When you can't ramp up the clock speed, your next best alternative is to go for as much parallelism as you can - increase the number of instructions you can execute in a single clock.
Chip makers achieve this in a wide variety of ways, including multiple CPU packages on a motherboard, multiple cores per CPU package, multiple threads per core, and multiple functional units per thread.
And yes, a single CPU at 3GHz can easily consume more power than two CPUs (or two cores) at 1.5GHz.
As for your theoretical 24GHz processor, such a thing is simply not possible with today's technology. (Well, there were some university experiments that hit insanely fast speeds, but don't expect commercial products any time soon.) Given the heat/power curves of today's chips, I wouldn't want to think about the cooling requirements of a 24GHz chip if you could somehow manage to build one.
Of course, breakthroughs do happen, and higher clock speeds might become practical in the future. But multi-core tech isn't going away - we'll simply end up with multiple cores at higher clock speeds.
Actually, this is well documented.
There are serious electrical and physical problems with jacking up clock speeds much further than they are now. Intel managed to push their chips to 3.4GHz, but the power consumed was tremendous.
When you can't ramp up the clock speed, your next best alternative is to go for as much parallelism as you can - increase the number of instructions you can execute in a single clock.
Chip makers achieve this in a wide variety of ways, including multiple CPU packages on a motherboard, multiple cores per CPU package, multiple threads per core, and multiple functional units per thread.
And yes, a single CPU at 3GHz can easily consume more power than two CPUs (or two cores) at 1.5GHz.
As for your theoretical 24GHz processor, such a thing is simply not possible with today's technology. (Well, there were some university experiments that hit insanely fast speeds, but don't expect commercial products any time soon.) Given the heat/power curves of today's chips, I wouldn't want to think about the cooling requirements of a 24GHz chip if you could somehow manage to build one.
Of course, breakthroughs do happen, and higher clock speeds might become practical in the future. But multi-core tech isn't going away - we'll simply end up with multiple cores at higher clock speeds.
mc68k
Dec 4, 12:38 PM
I think you may have saw the Ferrari 458....yep im pretty sure thats what i saw! pretty cool this game
my PSN name is psychofetus
my PSN name is psychofetus
NoSmokingBandit
Dec 10, 07:07 PM
I finished the Sebastien Loeb Challenge. It was incredible.
I got a few decent shots along the way. I have more but i got tired of the copy/paste routine.
I think they turned out alright, its the first time i've actually played with all of the settings.
Clicky for 1920x1080
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a93/canada2113/gt5/EigerNordwandKTrail.jpg
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a93/canada2113/gt5/ChamonixMain.jpg
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a93/canada2113/gt5/Toscana.jpg
(it was in the middle of the day. filters are fun)
I got a few decent shots along the way. I have more but i got tired of the copy/paste routine.
I think they turned out alright, its the first time i've actually played with all of the settings.
Clicky for 1920x1080
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a93/canada2113/gt5/EigerNordwandKTrail.jpg
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a93/canada2113/gt5/ChamonixMain.jpg
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a93/canada2113/gt5/Toscana.jpg
(it was in the middle of the day. filters are fun)
Nuck81
Nov 24, 08:49 PM
I didn't start to care for the game until I changed the gas and brake to the right and left trigger instead of the awkward right stick. Once i did that the racing really started to feel better.
It's incredibly easy. Even with a severely underpowered car in some races I have yet to lose at the default difficulty.
Also Im disappointed in the graphics. I really don't think it looks as good as nfs shift, which for the time being is still my favourite racer this gen.
It's incredibly easy. Even with a severely underpowered car in some races I have yet to lose at the default difficulty.
Also Im disappointed in the graphics. I really don't think it looks as good as nfs shift, which for the time being is still my favourite racer this gen.
cgc
Jul 21, 03:20 PM
All I will say is that you are not a typical user. You are not even close to typical.
OK. So maybe you need ten thousand cores and three million gigabytes of RAM. Don't think for an instant that the majority of the world shares your requirements.
It must take a lot of cores to RIP DVDs and seed them...:confused:
OK. So maybe you need ten thousand cores and three million gigabytes of RAM. Don't think for an instant that the majority of the world shares your requirements.
It must take a lot of cores to RIP DVDs and seed them...:confused:
Lord Blackadder
Mar 23, 12:18 AM
George W. Bush is responsible for another calamity: me posting in PRSI, one of my many occasional weaknesses.
Indeed. The last presidency drew me here as well.
Indeed. The last presidency drew me here as well.
parapup
Apr 6, 10:20 AM
For a programmer dealing with Terminal, Xcode, Netbeans, Eclipse, etc (not graphic intensive softwares), would this macbook air be a better deal than the 13/15" Macbook pro?
Anyone?
Sure if they allow you to bump up the memory to 4GB it should be more than usable especially with the SSD. May be you will need to hook up an external disk for storage needs but apart from that it'll all be good with the i5/7 lineup.
Anyone?
Sure if they allow you to bump up the memory to 4GB it should be more than usable especially with the SSD. May be you will need to hook up an external disk for storage needs but apart from that it'll all be good with the i5/7 lineup.
LagunaSol
Mar 23, 09:28 AM
It's telling that a discussion about RIM's and Samsung's tablet devices devolve into a battle over the English language and the proper positioning of the pinky finger while drinking tea.
My hunch is these "iPad Killer" devices will get similar attention from the typical consumer (Zzzz....) while the iPad continues to snowball into an iPod-like phenomenon. ;)
My hunch is these "iPad Killer" devices will get similar attention from the typical consumer (Zzzz....) while the iPad continues to snowball into an iPod-like phenomenon. ;)
Multimedia
Jul 15, 05:15 AM
I prefer the Simpsons' parody of that cartoon:
"...and I'll make Ted Kennedy pay, if he fights back I'll say that he's gay."
But seriously, the $1799 price point is a step in the right direction. If we could get it down to $1599 or <gasp> $1499, then that would be the de facto mini tower so many have clamored for. I would like a redesigned case, but that'll come eventually.
Sometimes the right price can make a person forget about what might have been.We have that already on the Refurbished page. :) Dual Core 2GHz G5 is only $1699 there. Quad only $2799. So your dream of $1499 will come when the 2GHz Core 2 Duo Mac Pro hits the refurb page - which, according to recent history, should happen before Christmas.I believe that the MacBook was on the refurb page in around 3-4 weeks. The iMac Core Duo took AGES though.Yes MacBook broke the speed record for shift to the refurb page in record time. Right now everything is up there except the 17" MacBook Pros. My Quad made it there in only 3 months last Winter.
"...and I'll make Ted Kennedy pay, if he fights back I'll say that he's gay."
But seriously, the $1799 price point is a step in the right direction. If we could get it down to $1599 or <gasp> $1499, then that would be the de facto mini tower so many have clamored for. I would like a redesigned case, but that'll come eventually.
Sometimes the right price can make a person forget about what might have been.We have that already on the Refurbished page. :) Dual Core 2GHz G5 is only $1699 there. Quad only $2799. So your dream of $1499 will come when the 2GHz Core 2 Duo Mac Pro hits the refurb page - which, according to recent history, should happen before Christmas.I believe that the MacBook was on the refurb page in around 3-4 weeks. The iMac Core Duo took AGES though.Yes MacBook broke the speed record for shift to the refurb page in record time. Right now everything is up there except the 17" MacBook Pros. My Quad made it there in only 3 months last Winter.
citizenzen
Mar 22, 06:54 PM
As others have pointed out, killing a peaceful protester (or non-involved innocent civilian for that matter) is never justified.
I'm not trying to justify it.
What I'm asking is, does it justify the action that we're taking?
That, I'm not sold on.
I'm not trying to justify it.
What I'm asking is, does it justify the action that we're taking?
That, I'm not sold on.
BaldiMac
Apr 19, 04:34 PM
I'm speaking about estimated Q1/11 to Q4/10 numbers (the est. Q1/11 numbers is what that news was about...). And what about reading the graphs I posted yourself? :rolleyes:
I like how you completely ignored the part of my post that proved your claim to be wrong. :rolleyes:
I like how you completely ignored the part of my post that proved your claim to be wrong. :rolleyes:
ssk2
Mar 22, 03:28 PM
I know I haven't been on this forum for as long as some, but this topic again proves why I'm often dissuaded from posting more regularly.
The constant foot-stomping, ridiculing without even trying, 'my Dad-is-better-than-your-Dad' attitude towards other manufacturers, the list is ongoing. How can any of us write off the Playbook or the Samsung tablet without even trying them? Yes, they are second and third to the market, but then so was Apple with the first iteration of its smartphone. Now look where we are.
The iPad two does have some shortcomings, few of which are worth going to to here. However, the OS of these devices IS crucial and we are beginning to see iOS creaking slightly. In terms of looks and notifications, for me, Apple is lagging. I like how the Playbook looks and potentially, should operate. Will I make a snap judgement? No. I'll try the damn thing first before making a judgement.
Do I see these tablets wiping out the iPad? Not a chance. Not in a million years. Do I see future versions of the Playbook and Samsung tabs wiping out the iPad? Perhaps, who can say. Mobile computing and tablets are here to stay now - saying and believing that the iPad will remain as dominant is pure wishful thinking from the more fanboy-minded of us.
The constant foot-stomping, ridiculing without even trying, 'my Dad-is-better-than-your-Dad' attitude towards other manufacturers, the list is ongoing. How can any of us write off the Playbook or the Samsung tablet without even trying them? Yes, they are second and third to the market, but then so was Apple with the first iteration of its smartphone. Now look where we are.
The iPad two does have some shortcomings, few of which are worth going to to here. However, the OS of these devices IS crucial and we are beginning to see iOS creaking slightly. In terms of looks and notifications, for me, Apple is lagging. I like how the Playbook looks and potentially, should operate. Will I make a snap judgement? No. I'll try the damn thing first before making a judgement.
Do I see these tablets wiping out the iPad? Not a chance. Not in a million years. Do I see future versions of the Playbook and Samsung tabs wiping out the iPad? Perhaps, who can say. Mobile computing and tablets are here to stay now - saying and believing that the iPad will remain as dominant is pure wishful thinking from the more fanboy-minded of us.
batitombo
Apr 25, 02:20 PM
I'm so over this ****
Jigga Beef
Apr 27, 07:54 AM
Yeah totally, its necessary to check it at every wi-fi hot-spot. Just to make sure wi-fi still exsist..
AppleKrate
Sep 19, 05:29 AM
Why do you even visit this site? You are doing nothing but criticising Apple and their products. Please leave.
Ps. If I was Admin I would ban you :p
You guys crack me UP! Peace and love, they're only machines (ah, but what machines...) :)
Ps. If I was Admin I would ban you :p
You guys crack me UP! Peace and love, they're only machines (ah, but what machines...) :)
jonnysods
Apr 8, 06:04 AM
Seems like a pretty big slap on the wrist. Wonder if this is true....
mmmcheese
Sep 13, 01:02 PM
Anyone seen this?
http://images.dailytech.com/nimage/1775_large_longtermroadmap.png
The real architecture changes are coming June then June then June 2012. With derivatives in the years between.
So Merom(Merom Santa Rosa)/Conroe/Woodcrest(Clovertown) are the end of the road of separate chips. No more mobile/desktop/sever chip... all are the same (should expect mobiles to have the lowest MHz, then desktop, then toping out with server)
And what's interesting is that each architecture change will be a leap in performance similar to Pentium D to Conroe transition. (source) (http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=2649)
Screw Tigerton, Penryn's next (probably June 2007)
Screw that, I'm not going to buy until Gesher!
http://images.dailytech.com/nimage/1775_large_longtermroadmap.png
The real architecture changes are coming June then June then June 2012. With derivatives in the years between.
So Merom(Merom Santa Rosa)/Conroe/Woodcrest(Clovertown) are the end of the road of separate chips. No more mobile/desktop/sever chip... all are the same (should expect mobiles to have the lowest MHz, then desktop, then toping out with server)
And what's interesting is that each architecture change will be a leap in performance similar to Pentium D to Conroe transition. (source) (http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=2649)
Screw Tigerton, Penryn's next (probably June 2007)
Screw that, I'm not going to buy until Gesher!
shamino
Jul 20, 09:37 AM
But as some already pointed out, many applications can't use multiple cores, therefore you won't get any performance improvements with multi cores.
A single application, if not multithreaded, won't see any performance boost.
But if you're running multiple applications at once, your overall system performance will definitely improve.
Also note that many of Apple's system facilities (like Core Image) are internally multithreaded. So apps that use these system services will see performance boosts even if the application developer didn't write any multithreading code into the app.
I am also certain that we'll see more and more developers using multithreading, now that all but the cheapest systems sold will have at least two cores. Especially with those apps that are CPU-intensive, and could therefore gain the most from multiprocessing.
(Gee, it seems like it was only a few short years ago that we were having this same discussion about AltiVec :) )
A single application, if not multithreaded, won't see any performance boost.
But if you're running multiple applications at once, your overall system performance will definitely improve.
Also note that many of Apple's system facilities (like Core Image) are internally multithreaded. So apps that use these system services will see performance boosts even if the application developer didn't write any multithreading code into the app.
I am also certain that we'll see more and more developers using multithreading, now that all but the cheapest systems sold will have at least two cores. Especially with those apps that are CPU-intensive, and could therefore gain the most from multiprocessing.
(Gee, it seems like it was only a few short years ago that we were having this same discussion about AltiVec :) )