Hugh
Mar 3, 10:23 PM
Being gay is not a sin, homosexual actions are a sin.
Query: How do meat bags such as yourself live with such amounts of water sloshing around in you?
That is because we are ugly bags of water. ;)
Browse dresses from Vera Wang,
vera-wang-wedding-dresses
vera wang wedding gowns. vera
Vera Wang – #1 wedding dress
Vera Wang Wedding Dresses:
Bridal Dresses: Vera Wang
Vera Wang Wedding Dresses Sew
Vera wang wedding Dress Bride
Vera Wang 2009 Spring bridal
Wedding Dress Vera wang
Vera Wang#39;s Bridal 2009
Vera Wang Wedding Dress
wedding dresses vera-wang-
vera wang wedding
Vera Wang Wedding Dress
vera wang bridal dresses.
Query: How do meat bags such as yourself live with such amounts of water sloshing around in you?
That is because we are ugly bags of water. ;)
gus6464
Mar 22, 08:20 PM
If you meant the HTC View for Sprint (aka the Flyer), then I don't think it needs Honeycomb right away to become popular.
It'll start with Gingerbread, Sense and the Scribe pen technology, which is plenty to play and be useful with.
I'm looking forward to trying its ability to allow typed, drawn, and voice memos during the day, saved into Evernote. Latest demo video here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dVK-OTnxnp0). HTC is going out on a limb here, but I think it's a good one.
The Flyer is a good concept but I think holding it back is Sense and not necessarily Gingerbread. Sense has become too clunky and sluggish for it's own good and at the end of the day is it really needed? HTC should just concentrate on making apps that take advantage of the scribe pen than building everything around Sense. Android has evolved enough that there is no need for Sense, Motoblur, Touchwiz anymore. Make it optional not mandatory. I have seen way too many apps not work correctly just because of the damn UI layer that the manufacturer is running. It would be very easy to have all those UI's available on the app market and allow the consumer to make a choice. Differentiate your product by the hardware and build quality, and not some clunky, useless UI overlay.
It'll start with Gingerbread, Sense and the Scribe pen technology, which is plenty to play and be useful with.
I'm looking forward to trying its ability to allow typed, drawn, and voice memos during the day, saved into Evernote. Latest demo video here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dVK-OTnxnp0). HTC is going out on a limb here, but I think it's a good one.
The Flyer is a good concept but I think holding it back is Sense and not necessarily Gingerbread. Sense has become too clunky and sluggish for it's own good and at the end of the day is it really needed? HTC should just concentrate on making apps that take advantage of the scribe pen than building everything around Sense. Android has evolved enough that there is no need for Sense, Motoblur, Touchwiz anymore. Make it optional not mandatory. I have seen way too many apps not work correctly just because of the damn UI layer that the manufacturer is running. It would be very easy to have all those UI's available on the app market and allow the consumer to make a choice. Differentiate your product by the hardware and build quality, and not some clunky, useless UI overlay.
freebooter
Nov 28, 09:39 PM
Just greed, plain and simple.
richard.mac
Mar 26, 11:34 PM
anyone heard of a date (even some unconfirmed rumour) that Lion will see a dev/RC update?
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.
jmsait19
Aug 26, 05:39 PM
This is interesting, BUT, from what I know, Intel announced the desktop (Conroe) Core 2 Duo proccessor on July 27, and as far as I know, no Conroe systems are shipping right now, almost a month later.
Dell has announced some Conroe systems that you can order, but as far as I know they aren't readily shipping yet.
that's because conroe wouldn't have been an upgrade compared to what apple already had out (maybe the imac, but merom waiting for merom would keep it cooler inside). The only thing left to change at that point was the PowerMac and they put Woodcrest in it and that one IS shipping.
Dell has announced some Conroe systems that you can order, but as far as I know they aren't readily shipping yet.
that's because conroe wouldn't have been an upgrade compared to what apple already had out (maybe the imac, but merom waiting for merom would keep it cooler inside). The only thing left to change at that point was the PowerMac and they put Woodcrest in it and that one IS shipping.
IceMacMac
Apr 10, 08:55 PM
...and I hate having to render. I hate the various pixel aspect ratios and formats there are, including PAL and NTSC....
Steve Jobs reality distortion field must be supercharged these days, where with a new release of FCP Apple might instantly re-write broadcasting standards and give millions of people new TVs that don't require NTSC and PAL.
You aren't expecting much at all! :D
Steve Jobs reality distortion field must be supercharged these days, where with a new release of FCP Apple might instantly re-write broadcasting standards and give millions of people new TVs that don't require NTSC and PAL.
You aren't expecting much at all! :D
Liebo11
Aug 7, 07:49 PM
does upgrading to leopard cost money for tiger users?
Reventon
Nov 24, 12:53 PM
Mine is installing right now too. The install process is rather long and tedious, but I can't wait to try out the Top Gear track first if I can. I wonder how many petrolheads are going to do that first? :D
tortoise
Aug 7, 06:32 PM
I wonder how "Time Machine" is implemented.
Probably the same way it is in scalable transactional databases that use multi-versioning concurrency protocols (e.g. PostgreSQL and Oracle). No data is over-written, and every "update" actually creates a new record version. The concept is virtually identical, except that in databases the default behavior is to delete old versions that no transaction is using any more. Such file systems are often implemented now as MVCC-style databases with file system semantics.
In fact, PostgreSQL used to have a feature many years ago called "time travel" that would let you query a consistent view of the database at any point in its past.
Probably the same way it is in scalable transactional databases that use multi-versioning concurrency protocols (e.g. PostgreSQL and Oracle). No data is over-written, and every "update" actually creates a new record version. The concept is virtually identical, except that in databases the default behavior is to delete old versions that no transaction is using any more. Such file systems are often implemented now as MVCC-style databases with file system semantics.
In fact, PostgreSQL used to have a feature many years ago called "time travel" that would let you query a consistent view of the database at any point in its past.
NJRonbo
Jun 12, 08:34 AM
Not bad at all.
NY Guitarist
Apr 5, 08:50 PM
I agree I for see FCP needing Mac OS X Lion
I'm just guessing but it's possible that Apple will announce the new FCS and ship it when Lion ships, perhaps around the June WWDC.
I'm just guessing but it's possible that Apple will announce the new FCS and ship it when Lion ships, perhaps around the June WWDC.
ugp
Jun 22, 08:58 AM
My local store has received no information or shipment orders as of yet. A few new SKUs generated in the system for accessories but that is it so far.
As soon as I hear from my friend I will post updates.
Still don't have much faith though...
As soon as I hear from my friend I will post updates.
Still don't have much faith though...
dgree03
Apr 6, 03:58 PM
1. Have you seen how those apps "scale" on XOOM? That doesn't make them optimized for tablets, just fit more screen space and even that doesn't work that well.
2. Bull.
YOU apparently havent seen how apps scale first hand. Like i said ill take that over x1, x2 ANY day.
Scale?? Access to each other??
I'm beginning to wonder if you have ever used EITHER iOS or Android.
HAHA, Yes I own a XOOM and a Ipad 2(previously Ipad 1).
YOU apparently havent used either at any length.
My point still stands, I can use less apps to accomplish the same goals on a XOOM than i can on a Ipad.
If you have any other first hand usage that proves me wrong.. go for it.
2. Bull.
YOU apparently havent seen how apps scale first hand. Like i said ill take that over x1, x2 ANY day.
Scale?? Access to each other??
I'm beginning to wonder if you have ever used EITHER iOS or Android.
HAHA, Yes I own a XOOM and a Ipad 2(previously Ipad 1).
YOU apparently havent used either at any length.
My point still stands, I can use less apps to accomplish the same goals on a XOOM than i can on a Ipad.
If you have any other first hand usage that proves me wrong.. go for it.
obeygiant
Mar 17, 01:03 PM
Obeygiant, you have a way of distilling issues down to their core. The funny thing is, I don't think Lee even realizes he's doing it.
Yeah I'm pretty sure I'm on his ignore list. lol
Yeah I'm pretty sure I'm on his ignore list. lol
mdntcallr
Sep 20, 04:10 PM
hey ill be happy as apple keeps the mac pro on the cutting edge, but anything to be able to bring the ram cost down would be awesome.
this buffered ram is expensive.
all the other ram out there is getting cheaper, but not this stuff they want in the mac pro.
this buffered ram is expensive.
all the other ram out there is getting cheaper, but not this stuff they want in the mac pro.
RedTomato
Jul 20, 11:35 AM
Definitely need 8 cores me.
One for running whatever program I'm working on.
One for running the OS X interface, with Core Image, and bells and whistles and brass knobs and shiny candy.
One for running Azerus or LimeWire or one of these Bittorrent clients that all seem to be in Java on the mac, and all slow my machine to a crawl..
One for running Firefox and rendering these java / flash adverts that seem to slow my machine to a crawl.
One for doing the video rendering that still slows my machine to a crawl for hours and hours.
One for running the Windows XP virtualisation machine in a window on my desktop that seemed to slow my machine to a crawl last time I tried it.
Vera Wang Bridal Gowns
Vera Wang Wedding Dress
One for running whatever program I'm working on.
One for running the OS X interface, with Core Image, and bells and whistles and brass knobs and shiny candy.
One for running Azerus or LimeWire or one of these Bittorrent clients that all seem to be in Java on the mac, and all slow my machine to a crawl..
One for running Firefox and rendering these java / flash adverts that seem to slow my machine to a crawl.
One for doing the video rendering that still slows my machine to a crawl for hours and hours.
One for running the Windows XP virtualisation machine in a window on my desktop that seemed to slow my machine to a crawl last time I tried it.
MacRumors
Jul 27, 09:34 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Intel announced (http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/07/27/core2duo/index.php) the long anticipated Core 2 Duo processors today. Intel announced 10 new chips including 5 designed for latops (Merom) and 5 for desktops (Conroe).
Core 2 Duo runs at slower clock speeds than Pentium-era chips, but is still more productive because it handles more calculations per clock cycle, said Sean Tucker, a product manager at HP. Thanks to that slower speed, 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.
Intel has already started shipping Core 2 Duo chips to manufacturers, so the first Core 2 Duo Desktop machines should reach consumers in early August. Meanwhile Core 2 Duo laptops will reach consumers by the end of August.
Conroe and Merom are successors to the Core Duo processor which was introduced by Intel early this year. The Core Duo (Yonah) was the first Intel chip used in Apple's switch to intel earlier this year.
At present Apple's lineup is as follows:
Intel: MacBook, MacBook Pro, iMac, Mac mini: Core Duo or Core Solo (Yonah)
PowerPC: PowerMac, Xserve: PowerPC 970 (G5)
Newer processors from Intel sharing a new architecture now include:
Core 2 Duo mobile (Merom)
Core 2 Duo desktop (Conroe)
Xeon 5100 (Woodcrest)
Woodcrest is rumored (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060711225142.shtml) to be used in the Mac Pro, which is expected be released at WWDC 2006. Apple's use of the Core 2 Duo is not yet clear, but the Core 2 Duo mobile (Merom) is pin compatible (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/06/20060613185240.shtml) with the current Core Duo (Yonah). This means that Apple could easily upgrade the existing Intel-based Macs to the newer processor with no design changes.
Intel announced (http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/07/27/core2duo/index.php) the long anticipated Core 2 Duo processors today. Intel announced 10 new chips including 5 designed for latops (Merom) and 5 for desktops (Conroe).
Core 2 Duo runs at slower clock speeds than Pentium-era chips, but is still more productive because it handles more calculations per clock cycle, said Sean Tucker, a product manager at HP. Thanks to that slower speed, 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.
Intel has already started shipping Core 2 Duo chips to manufacturers, so the first Core 2 Duo Desktop machines should reach consumers in early August. Meanwhile Core 2 Duo laptops will reach consumers by the end of August.
Conroe and Merom are successors to the Core Duo processor which was introduced by Intel early this year. The Core Duo (Yonah) was the first Intel chip used in Apple's switch to intel earlier this year.
At present Apple's lineup is as follows:
Intel: MacBook, MacBook Pro, iMac, Mac mini: Core Duo or Core Solo (Yonah)
PowerPC: PowerMac, Xserve: PowerPC 970 (G5)
Newer processors from Intel sharing a new architecture now include:
Core 2 Duo mobile (Merom)
Core 2 Duo desktop (Conroe)
Xeon 5100 (Woodcrest)
Woodcrest is rumored (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060711225142.shtml) to be used in the Mac Pro, which is expected be released at WWDC 2006. Apple's use of the Core 2 Duo is not yet clear, but the Core 2 Duo mobile (Merom) is pin compatible (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/06/20060613185240.shtml) with the current Core Duo (Yonah). This means that Apple could easily upgrade the existing Intel-based Macs to the newer processor with no design changes.
emulator
Mar 26, 10:07 AM
Since when do companies release several GMs? betas, release candidates yes, but there should and will be only ONE gold master.
And zero "golden master". :D
And zero "golden master". :D
gnasher729
Aug 18, 03:31 PM
Thats showing that the quad core Mac Pro is essentially the same speed as dual core Mac Pro. To translate it to normal mac scenario: If apple releases a 2.66GHz Conroe iMac/Mac/whathaveyou it will be able to crunch through FCP/Photoshop/etc faster than a Mac Pro because it can use regular DDR2 and won't suffer from horrendous memory latency.
It only shows that one company can expect to get massive complaints from its customers soon about its crappy software. An H.264 encoder can easily use two dozen cores if they are there (apart from the fact that it might be limited by the speed of the DVD drive if you encode straight from DVD); there is no reason at all why this software shouldn't be twice as fast on a Quad core and four times as fast on an eight core machine.
It only shows that one company can expect to get massive complaints from its customers soon about its crappy software. An H.264 encoder can easily use two dozen cores if they are there (apart from the fact that it might be limited by the speed of the DVD drive if you encode straight from DVD); there is no reason at all why this software shouldn't be twice as fast on a Quad core and four times as fast on an eight core machine.
LagunaSol
Apr 27, 08:24 AM
Its not about being a criminal or paranoid. This data is for the sole purpose of marketers to sell us crap.
Well, I'm tired of seeing ads everywhere I turn. You can't go to the bathroom now without seeing a ad shoved in your face and its becoming tiresome.
Perhaps we can interest you in a *free mobile OS? Android. By Google.
*funded by advertising
Well, I'm tired of seeing ads everywhere I turn. You can't go to the bathroom now without seeing a ad shoved in your face and its becoming tiresome.
Perhaps we can interest you in a *free mobile OS? Android. By Google.
*funded by advertising
fithian
Apr 8, 07:55 AM
Just for entertainment, go to a Worst Buy and sidle up to a sales guy giving his pitch to an unsuspecting victim. I only ever go there to see a model in person before ordering online or elsewhere. I do purchase items at local stores who respect the customer and don't tell blatant lies about the products.
frunkis54
Apr 27, 09:29 AM
It is not surprising (http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/iphone.pdf) (pdf).
yep 4b says it all. saying if we don't want to be tracked if we don't want to by not using any app that tracks. seriously?. or by turning off location on the iphone. well we know that doesn't make a difference for this.
yep 4b says it all. saying if we don't want to be tracked if we don't want to by not using any app that tracks. seriously?. or by turning off location on the iphone. well we know that doesn't make a difference for this.
acearchie
Apr 5, 04:51 PM
Now this sounds exciting!
No comments:
Post a Comment