aiqw9182
Apr 16, 01:53 AM
No different? What planet on you living on because it's not Earth.... The link quoted tested a slow 2.5" drive and still showed a 3.5x speed improvement. USB3 can only go as fast as the drive it's connected to. You're going to find that out with TB as well. You can't make gold out of dirt.
These people on here suggesting Intel should can USB3 are not real computer users. They're non-computer types that don't know WTF they're talking about. Period. There is NO reason to NOT use USB3 on new computers. Their cost is next to nothing. They're 100% backwards compatible with USB2.0,1.1 and 1.0 and you'll need those ports regardless whether your computer has TB or not. Not having USB3 simply means less flexibility. Even if you hate it, your friend comes over with his 7200RPM USB3 drive and connects it to your Mac using USB 2.0 and instead of going 110MB/sec as it would under USB3, it goes 30-35MB/sec under USB 2.0. He then asks you why your Mac SUCKS SO HARD and your reply will be that he should have paid $400 for that drive with a TB connector instead of $150 with a USB3 connector (even though TB will not go faster because that's the limit of the drive itself). Your friend will then suggest you give him some money since you're stinking loaded to WASTE $250 more on the TB drive when USB3 would have done just as well. But then you remind him that Apple don't support no stinking USB3 and he then tells you that his PC just 'PWNED' your 'Crapple'. :eek:
Apple isn't doing themselves ANY favors to ignore mainstream tech. They want TB? Fine, but don't leave out USB3 to spite yourself. Oh wait. They already did that with Blu-Ray.... :rolleyes:
Or you could just buy a multi-port Thunderbolt adapter(that supports USB 3) for less than $10 when they are released making your half-baked scenario completely worthless.
Lol
Oh and why would someone pay extra money for a drive that can reach at the LOWEST twice the performance of USB 3? Gee, I wonder. I'd love to know where you got the sales figures from also.
These people on here suggesting Intel should can USB3 are not real computer users. They're non-computer types that don't know WTF they're talking about. Period. There is NO reason to NOT use USB3 on new computers. Their cost is next to nothing. They're 100% backwards compatible with USB2.0,1.1 and 1.0 and you'll need those ports regardless whether your computer has TB or not. Not having USB3 simply means less flexibility. Even if you hate it, your friend comes over with his 7200RPM USB3 drive and connects it to your Mac using USB 2.0 and instead of going 110MB/sec as it would under USB3, it goes 30-35MB/sec under USB 2.0. He then asks you why your Mac SUCKS SO HARD and your reply will be that he should have paid $400 for that drive with a TB connector instead of $150 with a USB3 connector (even though TB will not go faster because that's the limit of the drive itself). Your friend will then suggest you give him some money since you're stinking loaded to WASTE $250 more on the TB drive when USB3 would have done just as well. But then you remind him that Apple don't support no stinking USB3 and he then tells you that his PC just 'PWNED' your 'Crapple'. :eek:
Apple isn't doing themselves ANY favors to ignore mainstream tech. They want TB? Fine, but don't leave out USB3 to spite yourself. Oh wait. They already did that with Blu-Ray.... :rolleyes:
Or you could just buy a multi-port Thunderbolt adapter(that supports USB 3) for less than $10 when they are released making your half-baked scenario completely worthless.
Lol
Oh and why would someone pay extra money for a drive that can reach at the LOWEST twice the performance of USB 3? Gee, I wonder. I'd love to know where you got the sales figures from also.
madmax14304
Mar 23, 05:07 PM
Hopefully DWI checkpoints yield such low benefits from these apps that they become extinct although I doubt it. Hassling thousands of honest, sober citizens to catch the 1-2% legally intoxicated drivers isn't worth the price we all pay. I question our freedom in America each time I drive up to a checkpoint. If you're wondering, no I've never received a DWI nor driven intoxicated and I still hate these checkpoints. They don't make me feel safer on the road.
jrv3034
Oct 12, 01:07 PM
there is no such thing as charity in america, it always comes through commerce. why not just donate the $200 bux? does a lot more than the 10 bux you are donating now, so you can justify getting a new ipod. hell i would buy a red ipod just cos of the color i don't see why the cos has to be associated with it, if they're gonna do this they might as well just donate 10% of all ipod sales. at least it does something more than haveing a "show off" recipet for your so called act of charity.
"Hi i'm bono, there's a huge aids problem in africa and people don't pay attention, heres a new ipod"
wtf.
The point is, If I'm going to buy an iPod, I might as well buy the one that gives a little to those who need it. Everybody wins. How can this be a bad thing?
"Hi i'm bono, there's a huge aids problem in africa and people don't pay attention, heres a new ipod"
wtf.
The point is, If I'm going to buy an iPod, I might as well buy the one that gives a little to those who need it. Everybody wins. How can this be a bad thing?
Analog Kid
Aug 31, 05:27 PM
Not keynote at AppleExpo Paris, but a press event that day in the US and streamed to London? So crazy it might be true...
$15 downloads just won't fly with me, nor will $10. As it stands, I can buy a DVD from Amazon for $10, get it the next day, and not have to back it up somewhere... Gotta get it down to $5 or less for me to be interested-- maybe $10 for pre-releases.
I'm all over a video iPod though.
$15 downloads just won't fly with me, nor will $10. As it stands, I can buy a DVD from Amazon for $10, get it the next day, and not have to back it up somewhere... Gotta get it down to $5 or less for me to be interested-- maybe $10 for pre-releases.
I'm all over a video iPod though.
Dont Hurt Me
Sep 4, 03:30 PM
Business channel has had a lot of talk about a Apple Pod video phone but I would rather see a Cube redo. How about Cube squared.
bushido
Apr 25, 01:46 PM
would be nice timing to put my late 09 mbp to rest
eddieairplanes
May 3, 12:37 PM
Anyone know how long it usually takes Amazon to get these in?
ipedro
Apr 22, 02:41 AM
I have no idea how this would be useful. Buffer times, connection loss, no WiFi around, these are all problems that will prevent this from working.
What's wrong with storing music on hard drives locally?
Buffer times and connection loss could be eliminated as problems very easily:
When you load a playlist, your iPhone begins to download all the songs immediately in the background. Since a song is only a few megabytes, several songs could be downloaded in the span of one song during playback. These songs are then cached in a pre-determined sized local library and kept there until needed to make room for new incoming songs. A smart system could be employed to determine songs that should be prioritized to be kept in cache based on playcount and other listening patterns.
In an iPhone with 32GB of flash, a few GB of music could be cached without taking much room yet storing massive amounts of songs without the risk of interruption from slow or loss of connection.
What I'm looking forward to the most is how this service will work with video. I love Apple's move to a streaming format for tv because downloading and storing movies and tv shows is unsustainable in the long term. Laptops and iOS devices have limited HDD/flash space and it's a complex chore to maintain a video library on an external HDD separate from your iTunes music library. Backing up is also a problem for libraries that can exceed a TB or more.
Buying the rights to a movie or TV episode is preferable. You can then stream that video to any iTunes enabled device including in a mobile device like an iPad which would otherwise not be able to hold much video because of its limited storage capacity.
Finally, one important thing to note is that this cloud locker will free one more of the chains that is preventing iPad from becoming autonomous from a computer. With mobileMe taking care of syncing email, address book, iCal, and bookmarks, and now this music locker taking care of granting you access to your entire iTunes library, you won't need to sync an iPad/iPod/iPhone to a Mac or PC again. Poof! There's your wireless syncing that everybody's been clamouring for.
What's wrong with storing music on hard drives locally?
Buffer times and connection loss could be eliminated as problems very easily:
When you load a playlist, your iPhone begins to download all the songs immediately in the background. Since a song is only a few megabytes, several songs could be downloaded in the span of one song during playback. These songs are then cached in a pre-determined sized local library and kept there until needed to make room for new incoming songs. A smart system could be employed to determine songs that should be prioritized to be kept in cache based on playcount and other listening patterns.
In an iPhone with 32GB of flash, a few GB of music could be cached without taking much room yet storing massive amounts of songs without the risk of interruption from slow or loss of connection.
What I'm looking forward to the most is how this service will work with video. I love Apple's move to a streaming format for tv because downloading and storing movies and tv shows is unsustainable in the long term. Laptops and iOS devices have limited HDD/flash space and it's a complex chore to maintain a video library on an external HDD separate from your iTunes music library. Backing up is also a problem for libraries that can exceed a TB or more.
Buying the rights to a movie or TV episode is preferable. You can then stream that video to any iTunes enabled device including in a mobile device like an iPad which would otherwise not be able to hold much video because of its limited storage capacity.
Finally, one important thing to note is that this cloud locker will free one more of the chains that is preventing iPad from becoming autonomous from a computer. With mobileMe taking care of syncing email, address book, iCal, and bookmarks, and now this music locker taking care of granting you access to your entire iTunes library, you won't need to sync an iPad/iPod/iPhone to a Mac or PC again. Poof! There's your wireless syncing that everybody's been clamouring for.
notabadname
Apr 19, 12:42 PM
Well of course they will respond "strongly". As if they would respond with a; "Yep, you got us on this one, where do we send the Billion dollar check".
g7by08believeit
Oct 12, 05:55 PM
I second this prediction
I don't really feel like reading the article from the Chicago Tribune again, but I believe (though, due to my lack of reading it again, I may be creating a major faux-pas) that it said that she bought ten of the red iPods... so unless she only has 10 guests, I'm doubting that EVERYONE will get one; however, I do agree that there will be some sort of giveaway.
Cheers
I don't really feel like reading the article from the Chicago Tribune again, but I believe (though, due to my lack of reading it again, I may be creating a major faux-pas) that it said that she bought ten of the red iPods... so unless she only has 10 guests, I'm doubting that EVERYONE will get one; however, I do agree that there will be some sort of giveaway.
Cheers
cube
May 3, 11:44 AM
As before, that support is entirely derived from ATI's GPUs and the available number of outputs.
You can get 5 Mini-DisplayPort connectors on a single slot video card.
You can daisy chain multiple monitors with DisplayPort 1.2, and it has much more bandwidth than a Thunderbolt channel.
You can get 5 Mini-DisplayPort connectors on a single slot video card.
You can daisy chain multiple monitors with DisplayPort 1.2, and it has much more bandwidth than a Thunderbolt channel.
Multimedia
Sep 10, 07:45 PM
Face it the Conroe Mac is coming.
iMac 24" - $1999
Mac Pro (downgraded to 2.0 Ghz) + 23" - 3198
That is a $1k price gap.
A high quality midtower would fit perfectly. They have another chip to differentiate the product matrix. It is coming!
Mac Mini - Core Duo (yonah) - base entry machine. 2 RAM slots
iMac - Core 2 Duo (Merom) - All in one basic to prosumer models, quiet operation and powerful. 2 RAM Slots
"Mac" - Core 2 Duo (Conroe) - mini tower 1 optical, 2 drives, 2 PCIe, 4 RAM Slots - prosumer to low end workstation.
Mac Pro - Xeon (Woodcrest) - Full tower 2 processors, 8 RAM slots, 4 PCIe, 2 optical, 4 drive bays. - Mid to high end workstation.
Face it Apple left the biggest gap between the iMac and the Pro machine ever! There was no crippled tower to span the distance between the two. Apple wants to expand market share. They have a power processor that will not step on the toes of the machine above or below. Why wouldn't they use it. Before all the desktops ran the G5. It was difficult to provide product differentiation without gobbling sales up internally. Here the highest end Conroe cannot match the lowest end dual Woodcrest at highly threaded apps. This is a win-win situation. It will either come out on Tuesday or another special event in early october.I sure hope you are right. I totally agree with your analysis.It will be headless and upgradable to attract the Windows gamers. They already have monitors, keyboards and mice. A little BootCamp goes a long way.I want this to be where Kentsfield and Tigerton wind up for less than $2k. The existing base of over 25 Million Mac owners also already have this stuff. But they will come with a keyboard and mouse. :)
iMac 24" - $1999
Mac Pro (downgraded to 2.0 Ghz) + 23" - 3198
That is a $1k price gap.
A high quality midtower would fit perfectly. They have another chip to differentiate the product matrix. It is coming!
Mac Mini - Core Duo (yonah) - base entry machine. 2 RAM slots
iMac - Core 2 Duo (Merom) - All in one basic to prosumer models, quiet operation and powerful. 2 RAM Slots
"Mac" - Core 2 Duo (Conroe) - mini tower 1 optical, 2 drives, 2 PCIe, 4 RAM Slots - prosumer to low end workstation.
Mac Pro - Xeon (Woodcrest) - Full tower 2 processors, 8 RAM slots, 4 PCIe, 2 optical, 4 drive bays. - Mid to high end workstation.
Face it Apple left the biggest gap between the iMac and the Pro machine ever! There was no crippled tower to span the distance between the two. Apple wants to expand market share. They have a power processor that will not step on the toes of the machine above or below. Why wouldn't they use it. Before all the desktops ran the G5. It was difficult to provide product differentiation without gobbling sales up internally. Here the highest end Conroe cannot match the lowest end dual Woodcrest at highly threaded apps. This is a win-win situation. It will either come out on Tuesday or another special event in early october.I sure hope you are right. I totally agree with your analysis.It will be headless and upgradable to attract the Windows gamers. They already have monitors, keyboards and mice. A little BootCamp goes a long way.I want this to be where Kentsfield and Tigerton wind up for less than $2k. The existing base of over 25 Million Mac owners also already have this stuff. But they will come with a keyboard and mouse. :)
Yvan256
Sep 14, 11:42 AM
Any chance we'll see an Apple widescreen H.264/AAC camcorder there? And how about an iPod dock connector/cable to use an iPod for storage to keep the costs down (and sell more iPods)?
munkery
Mar 23, 04:20 PM
http://www.macforensicslab.com/ProductsAndServices/index.php?main_page=document_general_info&products_id=174
Much of the information in the PDF (http://www.macforensicslab.com/Malware_on_Mac_OS_X.pdf) associated with this article (http://www.macforensicslab.com/ProductsAndServices/index.php?main_page=document_general_info&products_id=174) is incorrect. For example:
Page 26
It refers to the bundle architecture as insecure. The argument presented would be true if security sensitive apps were not owned by system. Given that they are owned by system, malware cannot modify the bundle of an app owned by system without authentication when the app is run with user privileges in an admin or standard account.
For example, show package contents of iTunes, Safari, or Mail and try to create a folder in the bundle. In relation to the example in the article, try renaming iTunes. The argument in the article relies on actions that can not be completed in an OS X admin account; these type of changes are even more restricted in a standard account.
Apps not owned by system are vulnerable but without privilege escalation can not install rootkits or keyloggers. Even apps owned by system run with user privileges and require privilege escalation to install dangerous payloads.
Mac OS X does not prompt for authentication if you install apps in the proper location for that user account type. When installed in the proper location, apps are sandboxed from the system level of Mac OS X by the Unix DAC model used within Mac OS X.
Windows is less secure because most apps (Chrome only exception I can recall) install their associated files in levels of the system that require authentication regardless of user account type (unless Admin in Windows XP because running as superuser - no authentication required to install with elevated privileges - very dangerous). It is easier to trick Windows users to install a trojan with elevated privileges given that almost all apps ask for authentication to install and the user can not distinguish the intent of that authentication.
Page 30
The claim that the Application folder is unprotected is false. Security sensitive apps within the Application folder are owned by system.
Also, security sensitive system binaries are still stored in /bin and /sbin in Mac OS X.
Page 31
The ability to read the contacts stored in Address Book could be used by a worm to propagate. But, malware that uses this to spread is not likely to appear in the wild if the malware is not profitable. It is unlikely that malware will be profitable without being able to hook (this is a specific function) into apps owned by system.
Page 33
Starts off talking about trojans, trojans are easily avoided with user knowledge in Mac OS X because most apps do not require authentication to install if installed in the appropriate location where the Unix DAC model protects the system.
Viruses using the model shown in the article will not be successful without privilege escalation. This is the reason why Mac OS X malware is not successful in the wild.
By default, very few server side services are exposed in Mac OS X and those that are exposed are sandboxed. Vectors for worm propagation are limited to client side. Client side worms require authentication to install and spread if do not include privilege escalation via exploitation because of the Unix DAC model used in Mac OS X. Trojans used to trick users to authenticate are less likely to be successful in Mac OS X as stated above.
Much of the information in the PDF (http://www.macforensicslab.com/Malware_on_Mac_OS_X.pdf) associated with this article (http://www.macforensicslab.com/ProductsAndServices/index.php?main_page=document_general_info&products_id=174) is incorrect. For example:
Page 26
It refers to the bundle architecture as insecure. The argument presented would be true if security sensitive apps were not owned by system. Given that they are owned by system, malware cannot modify the bundle of an app owned by system without authentication when the app is run with user privileges in an admin or standard account.
For example, show package contents of iTunes, Safari, or Mail and try to create a folder in the bundle. In relation to the example in the article, try renaming iTunes. The argument in the article relies on actions that can not be completed in an OS X admin account; these type of changes are even more restricted in a standard account.
Apps not owned by system are vulnerable but without privilege escalation can not install rootkits or keyloggers. Even apps owned by system run with user privileges and require privilege escalation to install dangerous payloads.
Mac OS X does not prompt for authentication if you install apps in the proper location for that user account type. When installed in the proper location, apps are sandboxed from the system level of Mac OS X by the Unix DAC model used within Mac OS X.
Windows is less secure because most apps (Chrome only exception I can recall) install their associated files in levels of the system that require authentication regardless of user account type (unless Admin in Windows XP because running as superuser - no authentication required to install with elevated privileges - very dangerous). It is easier to trick Windows users to install a trojan with elevated privileges given that almost all apps ask for authentication to install and the user can not distinguish the intent of that authentication.
Page 30
The claim that the Application folder is unprotected is false. Security sensitive apps within the Application folder are owned by system.
Also, security sensitive system binaries are still stored in /bin and /sbin in Mac OS X.
Page 31
The ability to read the contacts stored in Address Book could be used by a worm to propagate. But, malware that uses this to spread is not likely to appear in the wild if the malware is not profitable. It is unlikely that malware will be profitable without being able to hook (this is a specific function) into apps owned by system.
Page 33
Starts off talking about trojans, trojans are easily avoided with user knowledge in Mac OS X because most apps do not require authentication to install if installed in the appropriate location where the Unix DAC model protects the system.
Viruses using the model shown in the article will not be successful without privilege escalation. This is the reason why Mac OS X malware is not successful in the wild.
By default, very few server side services are exposed in Mac OS X and those that are exposed are sandboxed. Vectors for worm propagation are limited to client side. Client side worms require authentication to install and spread if do not include privilege escalation via exploitation because of the Unix DAC model used in Mac OS X. Trojans used to trick users to authenticate are less likely to be successful in Mac OS X as stated above.
drumrobot
May 3, 11:05 AM
what about target display mode on the 21/24" models?
There isn't a 24" model. That was discontinued years ago.
There isn't a 24" model. That was discontinued years ago.
Mac'nCheese
Apr 17, 04:57 PM
ACSH is a right wing think tank, eco-imperialism needs not further explanation, winteryknight is the same.
There's no science in any of the articles to back up your claims, only opinion. Could you please provide links to the actual science?
I don't know if i can. Give me some time. But doesn't it make sense that if u stop using something that killed disease spreading insects that the insects will continue to spread the disease?
There's no science in any of the articles to back up your claims, only opinion. Could you please provide links to the actual science?
I don't know if i can. Give me some time. But doesn't it make sense that if u stop using something that killed disease spreading insects that the insects will continue to spread the disease?
PlaceofDis
Oct 12, 02:44 PM
kinda looks like a Target iPod Nano, no? :p
RoelJuun
Apr 22, 08:51 AM
It would take so much space when everybody uploads their own library to Apple's data center(s). You'd have countless double songs on their servers, all with different sizes, bitrates etc. One single file (with backups etc.) would be more efficient. But I like to keep my own file info/cover art etc. So what will the size of our own disk be? I hope more than my iPod Shuffle…
MUCKYFINGERS
Oct 27, 08:18 PM
Just for the record, I hate greencepeace and everything they stand for.
Just for the record, if you are against Apple getting rid of those toxic chemical compounds that can mess kids up, you sound like the type of guy who I would not want to associate with.
Just for the record, if you are against Apple getting rid of those toxic chemical compounds that can mess kids up, you sound like the type of guy who I would not want to associate with.
fetchmebeers
Sep 12, 03:45 PM
Take it back!! They will give you another one with NO questions asked!! See upper posts!
O MY GAWD..... are you sure????
that'd be totally awesome dude..... if it were the case
but what about an extra fee that some else mentioned??
so are you saying that it's only possible within that 10 day period??
well then i'm eligible for it.... i might try that asap, hmm
O MY GAWD..... are you sure????
that'd be totally awesome dude..... if it were the case
but what about an extra fee that some else mentioned??
so are you saying that it's only possible within that 10 day period??
well then i'm eligible for it.... i might try that asap, hmm
cmaier
Nov 14, 12:35 PM
Boo Hoo Rogue Amoeba. How stupid? Devs need to grow up.
And we have a winner, ladies an gentleman. The Stupidest Post.
And we have a winner, ladies an gentleman. The Stupidest Post.
MacinDoc
Sep 10, 09:57 PM
According to the Page 2 Rumors there are some significant speed ups to OpenGL in the next update to 10.4 due to multithreading. Apple has had 4 processor systems for over a year now. I would think they have some ideas about how to make use of it.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but it appears that the improvement was significantly overstated. Macrumors has now updated that thread (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=232126).
Sorry to burst your bubble, but it appears that the improvement was significantly overstated. Macrumors has now updated that thread (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=232126).
EagerDragon
Sep 5, 08:26 PM
Darn it, 6 more days to go.
macintel4me
Sep 4, 10:30 PM
I think I really figure it out now.
FrontRow/AirPort Express/iTunes-downloadable/iPod-docking station Media Center device. It will sync your iPod wireless too.
Here's why...
1) People are buying iPods and iTunes' videos already at 320x240 and being profitable; no reason to change
2) People can now stream music, videos (home or purchased), pics to their TV wirelessly
3) People can now sync music, videos (home or purchased), pics to their iPod wirelessly
4) This is NOT meant to compete with Blockbuster. It's simply bringing the computer's content to the living room...not the computer itself.
How much do you want to bet that this 'special event' will be streamed using this device. You heard it here!
FrontRow/AirPort Express/iTunes-downloadable/iPod-docking station Media Center device. It will sync your iPod wireless too.
Here's why...
1) People are buying iPods and iTunes' videos already at 320x240 and being profitable; no reason to change
2) People can now stream music, videos (home or purchased), pics to their TV wirelessly
3) People can now sync music, videos (home or purchased), pics to their iPod wirelessly
4) This is NOT meant to compete with Blockbuster. It's simply bringing the computer's content to the living room...not the computer itself.
How much do you want to bet that this 'special event' will be streamed using this device. You heard it here!
No comments:
Post a Comment