kas23
Apr 10, 07:23 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2 like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C134 Safari/6533.18.5)
Interesting news, but the bit about booting competitors is downright disgusting.
It's not like they threatened anyone. They likely went to the organizers and said "We'd like to make a really cool announcement at your event but we'd need most of your presentation and sponsorship space to do it." SuperMeet said sure, Apple paid, and here we are. It's not like the other sponsors didn't get their money back (I'm assuming.)
Yeah, I'm sure that's what happened...if they were dealing with the Apple of 5 years ago. But, no, we now see today's Apple in action. The same Apple that stole that hot chick's iAd app idea, the same that "asked" Toyota to remove the Scion ad from Cydia, the same that sent out their own ninja's to search some dude's house for the iPhone 4 prototype, etc.
Interesting news, but the bit about booting competitors is downright disgusting.
It's not like they threatened anyone. They likely went to the organizers and said "We'd like to make a really cool announcement at your event but we'd need most of your presentation and sponsorship space to do it." SuperMeet said sure, Apple paid, and here we are. It's not like the other sponsors didn't get their money back (I'm assuming.)
Yeah, I'm sure that's what happened...if they were dealing with the Apple of 5 years ago. But, no, we now see today's Apple in action. The same Apple that stole that hot chick's iAd app idea, the same that "asked" Toyota to remove the Scion ad from Cydia, the same that sent out their own ninja's to search some dude's house for the iPhone 4 prototype, etc.
yac_moda
Jul 21, 12:39 PM
Get with the program you guys ...
... start think the way APPLE think :eek:
Apple will NOT release such a HIGH END MACchine without spotlighting a use :eek: :eek:
Such a most excellent MACchine would be released with Bluray and the computing power would be used to burn to ALL THAT SPACE in human as opposed to GEOLOGICAL time spans :eek: :eek: :eek:
... start think the way APPLE think :eek:
Apple will NOT release such a HIGH END MACchine without spotlighting a use :eek: :eek:
Such a most excellent MACchine would be released with Bluray and the computing power would be used to burn to ALL THAT SPACE in human as opposed to GEOLOGICAL time spans :eek: :eek: :eek:
eeboarder
Jul 27, 03:25 PM
this blog was also written by jason o'grady, aka the PowerPage rumor site. his writing means nothing to me.
It is a rumor.....just like many other things including almost everything on this site. You just have to decide for yourself really.
It is a rumor.....just like many other things including almost everything on this site. You just have to decide for yourself really.
balamw
Aug 7, 04:24 PM
If Apple had had that feature for years and MS would include it into Vista now, you'd call it copying, no !? ;)
If you were picking on Mail.app's Stationery I'd probably agree with you.
None of the things that Time Machine have been compared to seem even close to what they are planning to do. Including my own VMS file versioning analogies. System Restore is not capable of restoring a single file, and particularly not within a running application. It seems kind of more like a system wide undo function when it comes to files...
B
If you were picking on Mail.app's Stationery I'd probably agree with you.
None of the things that Time Machine have been compared to seem even close to what they are planning to do. Including my own VMS file versioning analogies. System Restore is not capable of restoring a single file, and particularly not within a running application. It seems kind of more like a system wide undo function when it comes to files...
B
k995
Apr 20, 02:03 PM
Who says? Some people refer to the Samsung F700, but that was shown for the first time a month after the iPhone, and released about five months after the iPhone. (Faked images by Android fanboys won't count in court).
LG prada was shown before iphone was shown. And it shares lenty of things with the iphone that was released later.
LG prada was shown before iphone was shown. And it shares lenty of things with the iphone that was released later.
Apple Corps
Jul 27, 10:29 AM
"...Core 2 Duo chips need less electricity, drawing just 65 watts compared to the Pentium 4�s 95 watts and Pentium D�s 130 watts"
Good Lord - does anybody know what the G5 is? I'd imagine that the elaborate cooling system in the current G5 towers probably won't be needed it it's running anything like the D's...
And about the WWDC, I think it is possible for Merom laptops, Core 2 iMacs, Leopard Preview, Mac Pro's and possibly Movie service. However, I think the movie thing could be replaced by a larger capacity nano but that's about it. Only 1, at most, iTunes/iPod announcement with all the Mac stuff that should be addressed.
100watts @ 2.5 GHz on the MP970 90mm fab.
Good Lord - does anybody know what the G5 is? I'd imagine that the elaborate cooling system in the current G5 towers probably won't be needed it it's running anything like the D's...
And about the WWDC, I think it is possible for Merom laptops, Core 2 iMacs, Leopard Preview, Mac Pro's and possibly Movie service. However, I think the movie thing could be replaced by a larger capacity nano but that's about it. Only 1, at most, iTunes/iPod announcement with all the Mac stuff that should be addressed.
100watts @ 2.5 GHz on the MP970 90mm fab.
janstett
Oct 23, 11:44 AM
Unfortunately not many multithreaded apps - yet. For a long time most of the multi-threaded apps were just a select few pro level things. 3D/Visualization software, CAD, database systems, etc.. Those of us who had multiprocessor systems bought them because we had a specific software in mind or group of software applications that could take advantage of multiple processors. As current CPU manufacturing processes started hitting a wall right around the 3GHz mark, chip makers started to transition to multiple CPU cores to boost power - makes sense. Software developers have been lazy for years, just riding the wave of ever-increasing MHz. Now the multi-core CPUs are here and the software is behind as many applications need to have serious re-writes done in order to take advantage of multiple processors. Intel tried to get a jump on this with their HT (Hyper Threading) implementation that essentially simulated dual-cores on a CPU by way of two virtual CPUs. Software developers didn't exactly jump on this and warm up to it. But I also don't think the software industry truly believed that CPUs would go multi-core on a mass scale so fast... Intel and AMD both said they would, don't know why the software industry doubted. Intel and AMD are uncommonly good about telling the truth about upcoming products. Both will be shipping quad-core CPU offerings by year's end.
What you're saying isn't entirely true and may give some people the wrong idea.
First, a multicore system is helpful when running multiple CPU-intensive single-threaded applications on a proper multitasking operating system. For example, right now I'm ripping CDs on iTunes. One processor gets used a lot and the other three are idle. I could be using this CPU power for another app.
The reality is that to take advantage of multiple cores, you had to take advantage of threads. Now, I was doing this in my programs with OS/2 back in 1992. I've been writing multithreaded apps my entire career. But writing a threaded application requires thought and work, so naturally many programmers are lazy and avoid threads. Plus it is harder to debug and synchronize a multithreaded application. Windows and Linux people have been doing this since the stone age, and Windows/Linux have had usable multiprocessor systems for more than a decade (it didn't start with Hyperthreading). I had a dual-processor 486 running NT 3.5 circa 1995. It's just been more of an optional "cool trick" to write threaded applications that the timid programmer avoids. Also it's worth noting that it's possible to go overboard with excessive threading and that leads to problems (context switching, thrashing, synchronization, etc).
Now, on the Mac side, OS 9 and below couldn't properly support SMP and it required a hacked version of the OS and a special version of the application. So the history of the Mac world has been, until recently with OSX, to avoid threading and multiprocessing unless specially called for and then at great pain to do so.
So it goes back to getting developers to write threaded applications. Now that we're getting to 4 and 8 core systems, it also presents a problem.
The classic reason to create a thread is to prevent the GUI from locking up while processing. Let's say I write a GUI program that has a calculation that takes 20 seconds. If I do it the lazy way, the GUI will lock up for 20 seconds because it can't process window messages during that time. If I write a thread, the calculation can take place there and leave the GUI thread able to process messages and keep the application alive, and then signal the other thread when it's done.
But now with more than 4 or 8 cores, the problem is how do you break up the work? 9 women can't have a baby in a month. So if your process is still serialized, you still have to wait with 1 processor doing all the work and the others sitting idle. For example, if you encode a video, it is a very serialized process. I hear some work has been done to simultaneously encode macroblocks in parallel, but getting 8 processors to chew on a single video is an interesting problem.
What you're saying isn't entirely true and may give some people the wrong idea.
First, a multicore system is helpful when running multiple CPU-intensive single-threaded applications on a proper multitasking operating system. For example, right now I'm ripping CDs on iTunes. One processor gets used a lot and the other three are idle. I could be using this CPU power for another app.
The reality is that to take advantage of multiple cores, you had to take advantage of threads. Now, I was doing this in my programs with OS/2 back in 1992. I've been writing multithreaded apps my entire career. But writing a threaded application requires thought and work, so naturally many programmers are lazy and avoid threads. Plus it is harder to debug and synchronize a multithreaded application. Windows and Linux people have been doing this since the stone age, and Windows/Linux have had usable multiprocessor systems for more than a decade (it didn't start with Hyperthreading). I had a dual-processor 486 running NT 3.5 circa 1995. It's just been more of an optional "cool trick" to write threaded applications that the timid programmer avoids. Also it's worth noting that it's possible to go overboard with excessive threading and that leads to problems (context switching, thrashing, synchronization, etc).
Now, on the Mac side, OS 9 and below couldn't properly support SMP and it required a hacked version of the OS and a special version of the application. So the history of the Mac world has been, until recently with OSX, to avoid threading and multiprocessing unless specially called for and then at great pain to do so.
So it goes back to getting developers to write threaded applications. Now that we're getting to 4 and 8 core systems, it also presents a problem.
The classic reason to create a thread is to prevent the GUI from locking up while processing. Let's say I write a GUI program that has a calculation that takes 20 seconds. If I do it the lazy way, the GUI will lock up for 20 seconds because it can't process window messages during that time. If I write a thread, the calculation can take place there and leave the GUI thread able to process messages and keep the application alive, and then signal the other thread when it's done.
But now with more than 4 or 8 cores, the problem is how do you break up the work? 9 women can't have a baby in a month. So if your process is still serialized, you still have to wait with 1 processor doing all the work and the others sitting idle. For example, if you encode a video, it is a very serialized process. I hear some work has been done to simultaneously encode macroblocks in parallel, but getting 8 processors to chew on a single video is an interesting problem.
Satori
Apr 6, 03:57 PM
It'll take a while for any of the Android tabs to get a market foothold because Apple has all of the mindshare with the iPad right now... and every time a competitor releases a tab they give Apple more publicity by declaring that they have the iPad killer!
For the average consumer, iPad is the category so it'll take a while for the competitors to register.
Maybe, this will play out they same way as the iPhone, where android devices slowly took a foothold and then overtook iOS in market share. However, the ascendancy of android with the average consumer was at least partly because carriers who couldn't sell the iphone from the start had to push something else. This isn't the case with the iPad because they are unlocked and any carrier can sell them with a sim or wifi modem. So it might equally be like the iPod, where many worthy competitors were released but none captured a significant market share.
I guess that time will tell.
For the average consumer, iPad is the category so it'll take a while for the competitors to register.
Maybe, this will play out they same way as the iPhone, where android devices slowly took a foothold and then overtook iOS in market share. However, the ascendancy of android with the average consumer was at least partly because carriers who couldn't sell the iphone from the start had to push something else. This isn't the case with the iPad because they are unlocked and any carrier can sell them with a sim or wifi modem. So it might equally be like the iPod, where many worthy competitors were released but none captured a significant market share.
I guess that time will tell.
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.
Mess
Apr 27, 08:22 AM
completely blown out of proportion!
The data is sent anonymously and doesn�t give you an accurate pinpoint of where you are if any indication of where you are. It�s not exactly used to come and get you if you have been somewhere you shouldn�t have been :rolleyes: so kick back and relax.
Way too much fuss about nothing personally! :p
The data is sent anonymously and doesn�t give you an accurate pinpoint of where you are if any indication of where you are. It�s not exactly used to come and get you if you have been somewhere you shouldn�t have been :rolleyes: so kick back and relax.
Way too much fuss about nothing personally! :p
lsvtecjohn3
Apr 19, 03:07 PM
Well you can see that with the Mac. About 3% worldwide marketshare but Apple makes tons of money with it.
And eveybody crys tears here when some 5 year old Windows games finally get ported to MacOS. You want that to happen with the iPhone and iOS compared to Android? Fine. But I'm sure 99% of iPhone buyers don't want that scenario.
HA I knew you were going to say that. developer prefer to develop for iOS. iOS user spend more money on Apps than Android user. Plus iPod Touch user can use the same apps as the iPhone. There won't be a Windows for the smartphones theres already too many players in the game.
And eveybody crys tears here when some 5 year old Windows games finally get ported to MacOS. You want that to happen with the iPhone and iOS compared to Android? Fine. But I'm sure 99% of iPhone buyers don't want that scenario.
HA I knew you were going to say that. developer prefer to develop for iOS. iOS user spend more money on Apps than Android user. Plus iPod Touch user can use the same apps as the iPhone. There won't be a Windows for the smartphones theres already too many players in the game.
Hellhammer
Nov 27, 02:21 AM
Somehow I feel this game is too short and easy. I've had it for 3 days and I'm already level 18 and all races are way too easy to win. When I look at it, there aren't that many races in the game. IMO too many of those "you need this specific car to compete" races and then there is on race. Spent 400k on a Lambo to get into one race lol.
Maybe I waited too much but unless the Extreme Series is going to offer some more challenge, this will feel a bit lame. Sure there is online but still.
Maybe I waited too much but unless the Extreme Series is going to offer some more challenge, this will feel a bit lame. Sure there is online but still.
BeefUK
Jul 27, 09:59 AM
Merom in a macbook is all I want, add in 2GB of RAM, and that'll do me. Although they'll be released in the MBP first............looks like more waiting for my first mac!!!:(
PLEASE PLEASE hurry, I wanna get rid of my PC. The case in like a wind turbine and the CRT monitor is like a heater!
PLEASE PLEASE hurry, I wanna get rid of my PC. The case in like a wind turbine and the CRT monitor is like a heater!
lazyrighteye
Aug 11, 10:50 AM
Using TimeMachine, Steve is going to release it two years ago.
That made my Friday... which may actually be a sad comment on things in my world. :D
That made my Friday... which may actually be a sad comment on things in my world. :D
slackpacker
Apr 10, 06:43 AM
Finally, while I don't know whether software stocks are different from hardware stocks, I just checked Apple's website, and FCS, FCE, and FCServer are readily available for shipping within 24 hours.
I'm sure they will still be shipping since they support the current Final Cut Studio 3 reeaallllyyy well. Lets face it the thing thats coming out will not support the old Plug-ins or workflows and will not be the replacement for FCP that everyone was expecting.
I'm sure they will still be shipping since they support the current Final Cut Studio 3 reeaallllyyy well. Lets face it the thing thats coming out will not support the old Plug-ins or workflows and will not be the replacement for FCP that everyone was expecting.
craig jones
Sep 13, 01:10 PM
The OS takes advantage of the extra 4 cores already therefore its ahead of the technology curve, correct? Gee, no innovation here...please move along folks. :rolleyes:
As for using a Dell, sure they could've used that. Would Windows use the extra 4 cores? Highly doubtful. Microsoft has sketchy 64 bit support let alone dual core support; I'm not saying "impossible" but I haven't read jack squat about any version of Windows working well with quad cores. You think those fools (the same idiots who came up with Genuine Advantage) actually optimized their OS to run in an 8 core setup? Please pass along what you're smoking. :rolleyes:
How do you know these things? Is Windows' 64-bit support sketchier than OS X's? Of course not. OS X has little 64-bit support and none at all for Intel. Windows also supports far more than 2 or 4 cores (although there are license restrictions). Windows has run on far more than 8 cores for a long, long time. You realize they have an actual presence in the server market, don't you?
As for using a Dell, sure they could've used that. Would Windows use the extra 4 cores? Highly doubtful. Microsoft has sketchy 64 bit support let alone dual core support; I'm not saying "impossible" but I haven't read jack squat about any version of Windows working well with quad cores. You think those fools (the same idiots who came up with Genuine Advantage) actually optimized their OS to run in an 8 core setup? Please pass along what you're smoking. :rolleyes:
How do you know these things? Is Windows' 64-bit support sketchier than OS X's? Of course not. OS X has little 64-bit support and none at all for Intel. Windows also supports far more than 2 or 4 cores (although there are license restrictions). Windows has run on far more than 8 cores for a long, long time. You realize they have an actual presence in the server market, don't you?
dejo
Aug 7, 06:51 PM
Would Dashcode be considered part of the "Enhanced Dashboard" choice?
boncellis
Jul 27, 04:54 PM
Dan=='s mockup is something that I had considered before, I remember talking about it with Yvan 256 at some point as something like "the return of the Cube." I think it's a pretty good design, the guts of the Mini are so packed as it is, an expanded case would allow for a substantial upgrade in components, including the oft clamored for dedicated GPU.
Another way Apple could do it is just to elongate the Mini's case to make it just as svelte vertically, only slightly wider. Could you take a run at that one Dan==? ;)
Another way Apple could do it is just to elongate the Mini's case to make it just as svelte vertically, only slightly wider. Could you take a run at that one Dan==? ;)
DeVizardofOZ
Aug 27, 04:46 AM
No hard feelings indeed, but please show me numbers and facts, not anecdotal evidence of some dozens/hundreds of people (as compared to millions of purchasers). I will take your point when you do that, thanks very much. And really, to say that 25% of Apple products are lemons is to be, at very least, extremely glib.
Besides, if Apple is able to replace/fix those that have problems, there is no reason to complain whatsoever...this is what guarantees and technical support are for.
Especially the last paragraph of your rebuttal shows that you have not read ALL the threads about MB and MBp problems. I really would like to hear you, when you had your MBP replaced 3 times and still have problems... I have friends who just upgraded to MBPs all have one or more problems, ranging from screen, heat, whine, keyboard, and other problems, some of which they still have to discover. Sorry, buddy, but it truly looks like getting a good MBP is LUCK. I own a couple of laptops, my oldest ones are 9 years old (TOSHIBA), and never ever did I have problems like the ones described on these boards.
Proof my butt.... Wouldn"t it be nice if these threads had only happy APPLE fans? Dream on.
We are consumers, and should not accept getting a refurb lemon... but a new, preferably working product.
Besides, if Apple is able to replace/fix those that have problems, there is no reason to complain whatsoever...this is what guarantees and technical support are for.
Especially the last paragraph of your rebuttal shows that you have not read ALL the threads about MB and MBp problems. I really would like to hear you, when you had your MBP replaced 3 times and still have problems... I have friends who just upgraded to MBPs all have one or more problems, ranging from screen, heat, whine, keyboard, and other problems, some of which they still have to discover. Sorry, buddy, but it truly looks like getting a good MBP is LUCK. I own a couple of laptops, my oldest ones are 9 years old (TOSHIBA), and never ever did I have problems like the ones described on these boards.
Proof my butt.... Wouldn"t it be nice if these threads had only happy APPLE fans? Dream on.
We are consumers, and should not accept getting a refurb lemon... but a new, preferably working product.
bandalay
Apr 25, 01:43 PM
That something that could be explained in two lines by someone in the know has to go to a Federal lawsuit. Clearly Apple is trying to avoid getting drawn into a privacy discussion, because as we know, there's no end to the absurd lengths people will declare their rights trod upon.
Someone's trying to make a "big thing�" out of this.
Someone's trying to make a "big thing�" out of this.
zerofour
Mar 26, 06:42 AM
Got to wait for the results from the beta testers who buy 10.7 on release. Learn the lessons of 10.6, I waited until 10.6.2 was out!
Or in my case, until 10.6.6 !!! (Came a bit late to the snow party...)
Will def be waiting for 10.7.1 or 10.7.2, just makes sense :)
Or in my case, until 10.6.6 !!! (Came a bit late to the snow party...)
Will def be waiting for 10.7.1 or 10.7.2, just makes sense :)
cr2sh
Jul 14, 06:11 PM
The thing I like least about this rumor is that it specifies only a 320GB harddrive.
The current configs (quad g5) were released in October of last year, in that time harddrive capacities have increased well beyond that (320) small number.
The new machines will get 500GB drives I have to believe.
:confused:
The current configs (quad g5) were released in October of last year, in that time harddrive capacities have increased well beyond that (320) small number.
The new machines will get 500GB drives I have to believe.
:confused:
Evangelion
Apr 8, 05:03 AM
[B]Until Apple can get more of its own stores it needs BB more than BB needs it. So I doubt Apple went all hurt or p.o.'d girlfriend on them.
The problem is not the number of retail-locations selling iPads, the problem is number of iPads in those stores. Now that BB is out of the picture, other retailers can receive more units. Now Apple can stop supplying BB-stores, and use those units to supply some other stores instead. You know, stores that actually sell the product to a customer?
The problem is not the number of retail-locations selling iPads, the problem is number of iPads in those stores. Now that BB is out of the picture, other retailers can receive more units. Now Apple can stop supplying BB-stores, and use those units to supply some other stores instead. You know, stores that actually sell the product to a customer?
-aggie-
Jun 22, 08:08 AM
I'm tired of wading through all these posts. I didn't see it mentioned, but does anyone know if the Shack is carrying the 32GB iPhone 4?
No comments:
Post a Comment