iJohnHenry
Apr 27, 10:29 AM
More like arguing about where the dessert forks and soup spoons go in the place settings. I don't think lifeboats have even entered into the conversation.
I believe the 'long form' is rearranging the deck chairs. :)
I believe the 'long form' is rearranging the deck chairs. :)
Liske
Aug 21, 01:28 AM
Quad G5 is only $2799 on the SAVE refurb page. Refurbs are the same as new with a new warranty. But I think that would be a poor choice compared to a Mac Pro. The Mac Pro is not cheaper because you have to add more expensive RAM. But it is faster overall and Rosetta Photoshop performance isn't bad. Quad G5 will also benefit from Leopard don't forget. It's not like Leopard is going to not be written to take advantage of the 64-bit G5 as well.
But I would not recomend a G5 Quad to anyone at this point. I'm pondering a Mac Pro purchase myself. But I'm going to try and hold out for a refurb or even see if I can wait for Clovertown. But I'm likely to be one of the first to snag a Mac Pro refurb when they hit the SAVE page in November-December. By then I may even be thinking about waiting for the January 9th SteveNote. Quad G5 is no slouch. But Mac Pro is faster overall.
What I most would like to know is how does the 2GHz Mac Pro stack up to the Quad G5.
And I thought you were married to your quad last week ......
But I would not recomend a G5 Quad to anyone at this point. I'm pondering a Mac Pro purchase myself. But I'm going to try and hold out for a refurb or even see if I can wait for Clovertown. But I'm likely to be one of the first to snag a Mac Pro refurb when they hit the SAVE page in November-December. By then I may even be thinking about waiting for the January 9th SteveNote. Quad G5 is no slouch. But Mac Pro is faster overall.
What I most would like to know is how does the 2GHz Mac Pro stack up to the Quad G5.
And I thought you were married to your quad last week ......
mabaker
Mar 31, 09:32 PM
Free, open, and free!!!!!!!!! Google fanboiis have been raving about Apple and Google is turning into the very same Xerox machine like the whole others out there. Not that it wasn�t copying Apple in first place.
It�s juts ironical.
It�s juts ironical.
Bonfire
Apr 25, 03:04 PM
Such a waste of time. If they're really that bothered by the "tracking," someone needs to tell them to put their phones on eBay and they'll get their money back in about 3 days to put towards another phone.
sth
Apr 5, 06:56 PM
Hoping they'll be a Final Cut Pro Express derived from this version.. the current Express is getting a bit long in the tooth. The UI is hideous by today's standards.
+1
Either that or if they release it on the AppStore: Make the base application as affordable as FCE and make the other parts of FCS seperate apps or in-App purchases.
Probably not at NAB, but many of the lines are due or overdue and they have made plenty of releases around NAB before (pretty much every year they have released something).
4/2010 - Macbook Pro
4/2008 - iMacs
4/2007 - Mac Pros
4/2006 - Macbook Pro
4/2005 - Power Macs
4/2004 - iBooks/iMacs
4/2003 - iBooks
I guess the iMacs are due before WWDC but I somehow don't think they'll release them the same day as the new Final Cut. This release of Final Cut has been years in the making, so they'll probably don't want the media coverage to be overshadowed by other announcements.
I'd love to see refreshed iMacs, though. ;)
+1
Either that or if they release it on the AppStore: Make the base application as affordable as FCE and make the other parts of FCS seperate apps or in-App purchases.
Probably not at NAB, but many of the lines are due or overdue and they have made plenty of releases around NAB before (pretty much every year they have released something).
4/2010 - Macbook Pro
4/2008 - iMacs
4/2007 - Mac Pros
4/2006 - Macbook Pro
4/2005 - Power Macs
4/2004 - iBooks/iMacs
4/2003 - iBooks
I guess the iMacs are due before WWDC but I somehow don't think they'll release them the same day as the new Final Cut. This release of Final Cut has been years in the making, so they'll probably don't want the media coverage to be overshadowed by other announcements.
I'd love to see refreshed iMacs, though. ;)
reden
Apr 6, 01:36 PM
I purchased a Xoom over the weekend it's a great device, a little heavy, but very awesome for its first pass. I used to own an iPad 1, gave it away, didn't want an iPad 2. Why do I need two devices of the same OS where the UI was designed for the iPhone (smaller device) to begin with? I love the versatility of honeycomb, widgets are phenomenal on a large tablet screen. Everything is great about the interface so far, although there are a few things here and there which make no sense, but I'm sure they'll fix that. I ran into some bugs, called Moto support, they troubleshooted with me, fixed it and were really cool about it. As far as hardware, the materials are great, but definitely Motorola needs to learn a thing or two about button placement. They put the sleep/wakeup button on the back of the device. I used to like to hit the home button on the iPad to wake it up and do stuff (while I was having a bowl of cereal for example), with the Xoom I can't do that, I HAVE to pick up the device. Another interface/hardware awkwardness are the volume buttons and I cannot find a way to change volume within the device itself, unless I press the volume hardware buttons a window will popup.
Other than that, I can live with all this, and the device is extremely awesome and a fresh feeling of a new UI the way it should be done for a tablet.
Other than that, I can live with all this, and the device is extremely awesome and a fresh feeling of a new UI the way it should be done for a tablet.
Silentwave
Aug 26, 04:48 PM
You're screwing up, intel. We don't want 300 trillion transistors on a 1 nm die. We want longer battery life. Idiots.
But there's no die size change here....
and doesn't transitioning to a smaller process usually mean improvements in that department anyways?
Next die change is the 45nm Intel Core Microarchitecture "Penryn" core for mobile- mid-2007 or thereabouts.
But there's no die size change here....
and doesn't transitioning to a smaller process usually mean improvements in that department anyways?
Next die change is the 45nm Intel Core Microarchitecture "Penryn" core for mobile- mid-2007 or thereabouts.
aohus
Apr 19, 01:52 PM
wow @ post 2.
apple will have a hard time fighting this in court.
apple will have a hard time fighting this in court.
BlizzardBomb
Jul 14, 03:40 PM
512MB RAM on low-end and an X1800 Pro on high-end. I must admit, I'm a little disappointed if this is true.
EDIT: MacRumors lists as X1800 Pro, AppleInsider says X1800 GTO.
EDIT: MacRumors lists as X1800 Pro, AppleInsider says X1800 GTO.
Eidorian
Jul 14, 05:43 PM
Interesting question, but I don't think any of us here will have the answers.
PCs don't use EFI. I don't know if a generic AGP/PCIe card can be initialized by EFI, or if the card will need some EFI code to be on-board.EFI can emulate BIOS though. It's basically what Boot Camp and the original Windows hack did.
As for OS X, I think we can be fairly certain that Apple will only bundle drivers for cards that Apple sells. If you install a third-party card, they will probably tell you that you'll need a driver from the card's manufacturer - that's what they've historically told customers.I've rarely noticed third party hardware that requires drivers. Most of them simply say "Requires OS 8.x, 9.x., 10.x". Of course newer things like 802.11g and USB 2.0 are going to need a version of OS X.
Now, assuming that the Mac firmware (including whatever EFI drivers they include in it) is capable of initializing a generic video card, then there should be no need for more than a device driver, which the card vendors can probably provide, if they are so inclined. If the cards will require special ROM code for EFI, however, then we're back to the same problem that plagued the PPC systems.You don't need a special ROM code for the auxiliary hardware. The video BIOS doesn't change when you boot between OS X and Windows.
PCs don't use EFI. I don't know if a generic AGP/PCIe card can be initialized by EFI, or if the card will need some EFI code to be on-board.EFI can emulate BIOS though. It's basically what Boot Camp and the original Windows hack did.
As for OS X, I think we can be fairly certain that Apple will only bundle drivers for cards that Apple sells. If you install a third-party card, they will probably tell you that you'll need a driver from the card's manufacturer - that's what they've historically told customers.I've rarely noticed third party hardware that requires drivers. Most of them simply say "Requires OS 8.x, 9.x., 10.x". Of course newer things like 802.11g and USB 2.0 are going to need a version of OS X.
Now, assuming that the Mac firmware (including whatever EFI drivers they include in it) is capable of initializing a generic video card, then there should be no need for more than a device driver, which the card vendors can probably provide, if they are so inclined. If the cards will require special ROM code for EFI, however, then we're back to the same problem that plagued the PPC systems.You don't need a special ROM code for the auxiliary hardware. The video BIOS doesn't change when you boot between OS X and Windows.
SevenInchScrew
Aug 12, 11:05 AM
similar genre given racing, but one is a simulator - the other is, a bit more fictional (in a sense).
but anyway, thats a technicality. no doubt that NFS seems to be higher grossing and more popular, as GT targets a pretty acute market. i wonder if GT5 will change that at all.
My point is, he was trying to use GT's high sales as a quantifier of the series greatness. Then, when I showed 2 examples of other racing game series with higher sales, he said they were different types of racing games, and that they don't count. Which is understandable, because they are not the same type of game. But then, ultimately, as I said before, if you don't count those other types of racing games, you're really only comparing GT to Forza, since that is the only other similar game.
But what does that prove? A game series that has been out for almost 13 years has sold more than a similar type of game series that has only been out for a little over 5 years. Big shock there. I'll be the first to admit that Forza isn't even remotely close to as big of a sales hit as the GT series. But, like I've said before, liking a game is a subjective thing, and everyone is entitled to their own choices. But sales are an objective thing, that has no relevance to somethings greatness.
but anyway, thats a technicality. no doubt that NFS seems to be higher grossing and more popular, as GT targets a pretty acute market. i wonder if GT5 will change that at all.
My point is, he was trying to use GT's high sales as a quantifier of the series greatness. Then, when I showed 2 examples of other racing game series with higher sales, he said they were different types of racing games, and that they don't count. Which is understandable, because they are not the same type of game. But then, ultimately, as I said before, if you don't count those other types of racing games, you're really only comparing GT to Forza, since that is the only other similar game.
But what does that prove? A game series that has been out for almost 13 years has sold more than a similar type of game series that has only been out for a little over 5 years. Big shock there. I'll be the first to admit that Forza isn't even remotely close to as big of a sales hit as the GT series. But, like I've said before, liking a game is a subjective thing, and everyone is entitled to their own choices. But sales are an objective thing, that has no relevance to somethings greatness.
HecubusPro
Aug 26, 05:57 PM
NOT true, I think. Macbooks already have new features like a magnetic latch and easy upgradeability. We will see this at the very least in the next MBP update, as Apple has never let consumer features be absent from pro machines for long
I certainly hope this is true. Of course, if the MBP doesn't have some of the cool features in the MB (upgradable HDD, etc.) it's not going to deter me from getting the merom MPB when it starts shipping. Still, it wouldn't hurt.
I certainly hope this is true. Of course, if the MBP doesn't have some of the cool features in the MB (upgradable HDD, etc.) it's not going to deter me from getting the merom MPB when it starts shipping. Still, it wouldn't hurt.
kdarling
Mar 31, 04:16 PM
Yet what he said is 100% accurate..Weird how that can happen sometimes.
Gruber is rarely accurate in his conclusions, and this time is no exception.
None of what is happening smacks of being a "bait-and-switch" as he claims. That would've required extremely clever pre-planning years ago on the part of Google.
Instead, it's got all the hallmarks of too little pre-planning.
Anyone with experience dealing with large projects can see that Rubin has belatedly come to realize that things were getting out of control. Now he is goofing up trying to take full control himself instead of doing the smart thing and first getting a consensus from the OHA members.
Gruber is rarely accurate in his conclusions, and this time is no exception.
None of what is happening smacks of being a "bait-and-switch" as he claims. That would've required extremely clever pre-planning years ago on the part of Google.
Instead, it's got all the hallmarks of too little pre-planning.
Anyone with experience dealing with large projects can see that Rubin has belatedly come to realize that things were getting out of control. Now he is goofing up trying to take full control himself instead of doing the smart thing and first getting a consensus from the OHA members.
LagunaSol
Apr 6, 04:10 PM
That didn't actually happen.
But he did mention the iPad does not run a tablet OS (talking point achievement accomplished!), so Google gives him a cookie for that!
But he did mention the iPad does not run a tablet OS (talking point achievement accomplished!), so Google gives him a cookie for that!
danz1123
Jun 11, 11:21 AM
Anyone know if I place a preorder on the 19th what the chances are I'll be able to make a reservation for the 24th?
Sydde
Mar 19, 06:22 PM
OMG. I guess I should not have deleted those White House E-mails as spam. :eek:
I imagine you got them because they thought the .ca stood for California
I imagine you got them because they thought the .ca stood for California
janstett
Sep 13, 01:11 PM
Sheesh...just when I'm already high up enough on Apple for innovating, they throw even more leaps and bounds in there to put themselves even further ahead. I can't wait 'til my broke @$$ can finally get the money to buy a Mac and chuck all my Windows machines out the door.
I'm sure we'll see similar efforts from other PC manufacturers eventually, but let's see the software use those extra cores in Windows land. Ain't gonna happen...not on the level of what Apple's doing at least.
First, this is INTEL innovating, not Apple.
Second, Apple has been the one lagging behind on multiprocessor support. Pre OSX it was a joke of a hack to support multi CPUs in Mac OS and you had to have apps written to take advantage of it with special libraries.
On Windows, the scheduler automatically handles task scheduling no matter how many processors you have, 1 or 8. Your app doesn't have to "know" it's on a single or multiple processor system or do anything special to take advantage of multiple processors, other than threading -- which you can do on a single processor system anyway. Most applications are lazy and unimaginative, and do everything in a single thread (worse, the same thread that is processing event messages from the GUI, which is why apps lock up -- when they end up in a bad state they stop processing events from the OS and won't paint, resize, etc.). But when you take advantage of multithreading, there are some sand traps but it's a cool way to code and that's how you take advantage of multiple cores without having to know what kind of system you are on. I would assume OSX, being based on BSD, is similar, but I don't know the architecture to the degree I know Windows.
In Windows, you can set process "affinity", locking it down to a fixed processor core, through Task Manager. Don't know if you can do that in OSX...
I'm sure we'll see similar efforts from other PC manufacturers eventually, but let's see the software use those extra cores in Windows land. Ain't gonna happen...not on the level of what Apple's doing at least.
First, this is INTEL innovating, not Apple.
Second, Apple has been the one lagging behind on multiprocessor support. Pre OSX it was a joke of a hack to support multi CPUs in Mac OS and you had to have apps written to take advantage of it with special libraries.
On Windows, the scheduler automatically handles task scheduling no matter how many processors you have, 1 or 8. Your app doesn't have to "know" it's on a single or multiple processor system or do anything special to take advantage of multiple processors, other than threading -- which you can do on a single processor system anyway. Most applications are lazy and unimaginative, and do everything in a single thread (worse, the same thread that is processing event messages from the GUI, which is why apps lock up -- when they end up in a bad state they stop processing events from the OS and won't paint, resize, etc.). But when you take advantage of multithreading, there are some sand traps but it's a cool way to code and that's how you take advantage of multiple cores without having to know what kind of system you are on. I would assume OSX, being based on BSD, is similar, but I don't know the architecture to the degree I know Windows.
In Windows, you can set process "affinity", locking it down to a fixed processor core, through Task Manager. Don't know if you can do that in OSX...
Rm.237
Apr 8, 08:28 AM
me too! I wanna learn!
How does withholding stock from the public aid a company? I can imagine holding them till everything is registered in their system and accounted for. But turning people away when they actually do have stock doesn't sound like a good business practice to me
Sorry if this has been beaten to death over the next nine pages but I just don't have the time to read it all this morning.
It's very simple really. Each day a retail outlet like Best Buy has a budget they want to hit. Even though it depends on local let's call it $75,000. Now let's say in this very high pressure competitive environment I have already made budget but know that tomorrow my budget is going to be $100,000. I'm a little nervous about hitting that but know that I got like 15 iPads sitting in the back. Very simple solution. Do not sell anymore iPads for the day and wait to sell them tomorrow! The iPads alone will net me 10,000 of that budget. No way am I going to sell them after I've made todays goal.
This is just one of many different scenarios but they all are very similar. Should I hold iPads in the back until it looks like we may not hit budget? Should I hold them off for tomorrows monster budget? Should I sell them to go over budget and be tops for the day in the district? Etc, etc, etc.
How does withholding stock from the public aid a company? I can imagine holding them till everything is registered in their system and accounted for. But turning people away when they actually do have stock doesn't sound like a good business practice to me
Sorry if this has been beaten to death over the next nine pages but I just don't have the time to read it all this morning.
It's very simple really. Each day a retail outlet like Best Buy has a budget they want to hit. Even though it depends on local let's call it $75,000. Now let's say in this very high pressure competitive environment I have already made budget but know that tomorrow my budget is going to be $100,000. I'm a little nervous about hitting that but know that I got like 15 iPads sitting in the back. Very simple solution. Do not sell anymore iPads for the day and wait to sell them tomorrow! The iPads alone will net me 10,000 of that budget. No way am I going to sell them after I've made todays goal.
This is just one of many different scenarios but they all are very similar. Should I hold iPads in the back until it looks like we may not hit budget? Should I hold them off for tomorrows monster budget? Should I sell them to go over budget and be tops for the day in the district? Etc, etc, etc.
guzhogi
Sep 13, 08:53 AM
A bit pointless given that no software utilises the extra cores yet. But nice to know, I guess.
I'm still getting used to having two cores in my laptop!
This is a bit of a chicken and the egg problem. Hardware companies don't want to release multicore hardware b/c no software is out to support it and software people don't want to ship multiprocessor software b/c no multiproc hardware is out. Since there are a few multiproc computers out now, some software companies might start multithreading their apps, most people probably don't have it them yet.
Also, some apps won't really benefit from being multithreaded. Take a basic calculator. Why would you really need it to take advantage of multiproc computers? It isn't that processor heavy to do 2+2. AV software, like iTunes, Final Cut Pro, etc., could greatly benefit from multiproc systems. One core can do the audio while the other does the video for FC or iTunes could use one core for playing music and the other for ripping.
Something I'd like to see is to have AV stuff offloaded to the sound or graphics card to speed it up. I've heard of a company called Aspex Semiconductors (www.aspex-semi.com) that designs PCI cards that speed up MPEG encoding. Might be nice for video pros.
I'm still getting used to having two cores in my laptop!
This is a bit of a chicken and the egg problem. Hardware companies don't want to release multicore hardware b/c no software is out to support it and software people don't want to ship multiprocessor software b/c no multiproc hardware is out. Since there are a few multiproc computers out now, some software companies might start multithreading their apps, most people probably don't have it them yet.
Also, some apps won't really benefit from being multithreaded. Take a basic calculator. Why would you really need it to take advantage of multiproc computers? It isn't that processor heavy to do 2+2. AV software, like iTunes, Final Cut Pro, etc., could greatly benefit from multiproc systems. One core can do the audio while the other does the video for FC or iTunes could use one core for playing music and the other for ripping.
Something I'd like to see is to have AV stuff offloaded to the sound or graphics card to speed it up. I've heard of a company called Aspex Semiconductors (www.aspex-semi.com) that designs PCI cards that speed up MPEG encoding. Might be nice for video pros.
ECUpirate44
Apr 27, 08:13 AM
I think it's kind of cool. How do I see the tracking map before Apple throws out the update :o
milatchi
Mar 22, 07:00 PM
When will RIM realize that nothing they can create, have created, or ever will create can be as good as something created by Apple? Some companies: Google, Microsoft, and RIM will just never learn.
Steve Jobs = Genius
Steve Jobs = Genius
epitaphic
Sep 13, 02:00 PM
I think you've misunderstood. Merom/Conroe/Woodcrest are one microarch now. That's Intel's point -- the core is essentially the same.
Conroe and its derivatives are a step away from Intel's former flagship NetBurst, but even these processors are a bit of a dying breed: during Intel's shift to 45nm, the company will no longer focus on derived microprocessor cores in favor of refined unified core architectures.
So what do you think they meant with M/C/W being a derived arch and Penryn,etc being unified archs?
From what I understood, they'll stop having different characteristics (FSB,RAM,Cache) and instead just differentiate them with MHz and core count. Hence all the stories that future Intel chips (starting with Penryn I presume) won't use FSB.
Conroe and its derivatives are a step away from Intel's former flagship NetBurst, but even these processors are a bit of a dying breed: during Intel's shift to 45nm, the company will no longer focus on derived microprocessor cores in favor of refined unified core architectures.
So what do you think they meant with M/C/W being a derived arch and Penryn,etc being unified archs?
From what I understood, they'll stop having different characteristics (FSB,RAM,Cache) and instead just differentiate them with MHz and core count. Hence all the stories that future Intel chips (starting with Penryn I presume) won't use FSB.
thunng8
Apr 8, 06:53 PM
CPU isn't the only thing that changed. AMD 6750M (~30W) has higher TDP than NVidia GT 330M (~23W). I had to put ~ because their TDPs are not officially stated by AMD or NVidia so it's just based on previous GPUs and their TDPs. The point is that AMD 6750M has higher TDP.
330M is slightly underclocked, so that 23W would be a bit lower. However, the test where it was 40W higher was a CPU benchmark. It would have not stressed the GPU.
I guess we will have to wait and see, but an ULV in 13" would be more than a disappointment.
It would mean ~50% drop in frame rates for games.
330M is slightly underclocked, so that 23W would be a bit lower. However, the test where it was 40W higher was a CPU benchmark. It would have not stressed the GPU.
I guess we will have to wait and see, but an ULV in 13" would be more than a disappointment.
It would mean ~50% drop in frame rates for games.
Chundles
Jul 20, 08:36 AM
The Mactopus??
Notice time. I bags it, I said it first, it's MINE!!!
My only...
My Mactopus...
Notice time. I bags it, I said it first, it's MINE!!!
My only...
My Mactopus...
No comments:
Post a Comment