aafuss1
Aug 6, 05:48 PM
What about TV Show downloads in the UK? Pleeeeaaaase!!! :rolleyes:
Looking foward to these Mac Pros though, my Dad is definatley going to buy one. :D
Thanks, Joe.
That would be good-if BBC signs up. Aussie's already have TV shows (for $1.99)-but on the Nine Network's nineMSN (http://ninemsn.com.au)site.
Keeping track of WWDC time-use the Extra-Clocks. Not as accurate as a internet updating clock, but does the job for me.
iPod shuffle-not being updated (because of the nano),but at least Apple gave those owners a volume limit.
Looking foward to these Mac Pros though, my Dad is definatley going to buy one. :D
Thanks, Joe.
That would be good-if BBC signs up. Aussie's already have TV shows (for $1.99)-but on the Nine Network's nineMSN (http://ninemsn.com.au)site.
Keeping track of WWDC time-use the Extra-Clocks. Not as accurate as a internet updating clock, but does the job for me.
iPod shuffle-not being updated (because of the nano),but at least Apple gave those owners a volume limit.
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.
Keebler
Apr 10, 04:01 PM
i know i'll be hanging around my macs looking for internet news on Tuesday.
I do think it was a pr*ck move they pulled - one i would have expected from the microsoft of old holding everyone by the short n' curlys! :(
And, I didn't travel much, but did a few times and I know i wouldn't be happy if my trip to Vegas was suddenly cancelled b/c of showboating.
I worked for a software company years ago and those events were months, if not a full year's worth of planning, energy and sales forecasted. Such a crucial way for a company to interact with their users.
Let's hope the release justifies forcing the other sponsors to pull.
I do think it was a pr*ck move they pulled - one i would have expected from the microsoft of old holding everyone by the short n' curlys! :(
And, I didn't travel much, but did a few times and I know i wouldn't be happy if my trip to Vegas was suddenly cancelled b/c of showboating.
I worked for a software company years ago and those events were months, if not a full year's worth of planning, energy and sales forecasted. Such a crucial way for a company to interact with their users.
Let's hope the release justifies forcing the other sponsors to pull.
nefan65
Apr 6, 02:29 PM
I'm not joking when I say this - I held off buying a Macbook for years purely because I didn't want to be associated with these hardcore Apple fanboys who live under Steve Job's bed. It's quite sickening.
I love Apple products, but doesn't mean you have to be blind to the alternatives. It's absolutely amazing how easily people can be brainwashed.
It's a two way street, really. I mean, what would one expect to see/read on a Mac rumor board?
I've been on the other boards, like Android and non-Apple computers and they're just as bad. Some people bash Apple because it's the cool/in thing to do. The Android fanatics are worse in some cases. Their biggest argument is "Open" and "Choice". Sounds familiar...kind of like the Linux crowd back in the day. Where are they now?
In the end, buy what you want and need. It's your money, your choice. If you don't like what someone else bought, get over it. Does it affect you? Does it somehow change how you live? I could give a flying f*&k what my neighbor buys. Whether it's a car, golf clubs, PC, phone, whatever...
Spouting off sounds like jealousy...
I love Apple products, but doesn't mean you have to be blind to the alternatives. It's absolutely amazing how easily people can be brainwashed.
It's a two way street, really. I mean, what would one expect to see/read on a Mac rumor board?
I've been on the other boards, like Android and non-Apple computers and they're just as bad. Some people bash Apple because it's the cool/in thing to do. The Android fanatics are worse in some cases. Their biggest argument is "Open" and "Choice". Sounds familiar...kind of like the Linux crowd back in the day. Where are they now?
In the end, buy what you want and need. It's your money, your choice. If you don't like what someone else bought, get over it. Does it affect you? Does it somehow change how you live? I could give a flying f*&k what my neighbor buys. Whether it's a car, golf clubs, PC, phone, whatever...
Spouting off sounds like jealousy...
coolbreeze
Apr 7, 11:35 PM
You might want to look at Best Buy's pricing again.
All iPads, iPods and Macs are sold $.99 (at minimum) above Apple.
Time Capsule 1TB $334.99 at Best Buy, $299.00 at Apple
2TB $499.99, $499.00 at Apple
Airport Extreme - $189.99 at Best Buy $179.00 at Apple
Express, $109.99 at Best Buy, $99.00 at Apple
The small accessories are just as bad. And Apple isn't the only brand they mark over MSRP too. I wouldn't be surprised is Bose products were too.
This.
I went to buy a Time Capsule 1TB from these goons one day and noticed the pricing. I pulled up Apple.com's pricing of the TC and asked the "mac specialist" WHY they are charging a $34.99 premium over Apple themselves. He instantly said "no problem, we'll price match." I told him I'd buy it now for instant gratification, and then order from Amazon for $285 w/no tax and free Prime shipping.
Then I'd return the overpriced "pricematched" one back to best buy. He said I can't do that.
I did it 48 hrs later.
I hate that place. If they just had the MSRP Apple price on the shelf without me having to catch them trying to make an extra few bucks, I would have bought it and walked out happy.
That stunt pissed me off and I hope they had to resell it as an open box.
I hate Best Buy.
All iPads, iPods and Macs are sold $.99 (at minimum) above Apple.
Time Capsule 1TB $334.99 at Best Buy, $299.00 at Apple
2TB $499.99, $499.00 at Apple
Airport Extreme - $189.99 at Best Buy $179.00 at Apple
Express, $109.99 at Best Buy, $99.00 at Apple
The small accessories are just as bad. And Apple isn't the only brand they mark over MSRP too. I wouldn't be surprised is Bose products were too.
This.
I went to buy a Time Capsule 1TB from these goons one day and noticed the pricing. I pulled up Apple.com's pricing of the TC and asked the "mac specialist" WHY they are charging a $34.99 premium over Apple themselves. He instantly said "no problem, we'll price match." I told him I'd buy it now for instant gratification, and then order from Amazon for $285 w/no tax and free Prime shipping.
Then I'd return the overpriced "pricematched" one back to best buy. He said I can't do that.
I did it 48 hrs later.
I hate that place. If they just had the MSRP Apple price on the shelf without me having to catch them trying to make an extra few bucks, I would have bought it and walked out happy.
That stunt pissed me off and I hope they had to resell it as an open box.
I hate Best Buy.
DJMastaWes
Aug 27, 06:47 PM
I don't think we're going to see Merom in the MacBook Pros tomorrow. Of course, I'm HOPEING. If they were annouced tomorrow, it would make not only my day, but my month! I've been waiting since June and was expecing it at WWDC. So I'm keeping my fingers crosses 100%. If the're annouced tomorrow, I'm going to order it withen the first 5 minuts of me finding out.
Hopefully this will be my order.
15" MacBook Pro
2.33GHz
2GB Ram
256MB VRAM
Superdrive
+BT Mighty Mouse (x2)
BT Keyboard
Some sort of bag for the MBP
D-Link USB Bluetooth drive
*Crosses fingers*
Hopefully this will be my order.
15" MacBook Pro
2.33GHz
2GB Ram
256MB VRAM
Superdrive
+BT Mighty Mouse (x2)
BT Keyboard
Some sort of bag for the MBP
D-Link USB Bluetooth drive
*Crosses fingers*
squeeks
Apr 28, 03:44 PM
I think it is absolutely appalling that you people are calling anyone who just wanted proof that Obama is qualified, per the constitution, to be president (being born in America) a racist. That is an awful big accusation and personally I can't believe the administration at MR allows that kind of talk.
This is exactly why I no longer donate to this site.
This is exactly why I no longer donate to this site.
iJohnHenry
Mar 23, 11:46 AM
Some called them 'the coalition of the billing' because so many members were paid off in some way.
For the Brits, that would be 'the coalition of the shilling'. :p
For the Brits, that would be 'the coalition of the shilling'. :p
Motley
Nov 28, 06:14 PM
Hadn't seen it posted yet:
Coming off of their deal with Zune, Universal is now considering getting money for each iPod sold.
Why Thank you Microsoft! (http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=technologyNews&storyid=2006-11-28T213349Z_01_N28267036_RTRUKOC_0_US-MEDIA-SUMMIT-UNIVERSALMUSIC-IPOD.xml):mad:
Coming off of their deal with Zune, Universal is now considering getting money for each iPod sold.
Why Thank you Microsoft! (http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=technologyNews&storyid=2006-11-28T213349Z_01_N28267036_RTRUKOC_0_US-MEDIA-SUMMIT-UNIVERSALMUSIC-IPOD.xml):mad:
leekohler
Apr 27, 09:43 AM
Did he release a different form of the document today?
I really couldn't give a ratass if he ever released it.
But to say it could not be released? Cmon this is CIA/Secret Service information gathering 101.
Some of the crap that was dug up in for back ground investigations makes getting a birth certificate look easy.
OMG- you're one of them. :eek: Please go get a hobby.
I really couldn't give a ratass if he ever released it.
But to say it could not be released? Cmon this is CIA/Secret Service information gathering 101.
Some of the crap that was dug up in for back ground investigations makes getting a birth certificate look easy.
OMG- you're one of them. :eek: Please go get a hobby.
ZLurker
Aug 12, 02:05 AM
Mac OS Kitten.
LOL!!
Good one!
LOL!!
Good one!
ryanw
Aug 25, 09:26 PM
Funny how I just came across this thread, as I'm in the middle of an Apple support nightmare as well (I have one of those MacBooks that just turns itself off for no reason - completely unacceptable). I have been routed through 12 people over 3 calls, with several promises of "expedited resolution"s but no tangible result.
Although it's possible (and likely) that the prevalence of the MacBook defects have been overblown, I do know that Apple's support process puts you through a lot of hoops to get any major issue resolved (e.g., replacing a clearly defective product). Each person I've talked to has been courteous, but in the end I still have no faith in their ability to actually solve my problem in a timely manner.
Frustrated Apple User
I've seen this happen to me personally... the macbook just shuts down on me. I "THINK" I have linked it to the magnetic money clip in my pocket. I THINK when I put the macbook on my lap it thinks I have shut the cover due to the magnetic latch. Is it possible you're putting near or on something magnetic?
Although it's possible (and likely) that the prevalence of the MacBook defects have been overblown, I do know that Apple's support process puts you through a lot of hoops to get any major issue resolved (e.g., replacing a clearly defective product). Each person I've talked to has been courteous, but in the end I still have no faith in their ability to actually solve my problem in a timely manner.
Frustrated Apple User
I've seen this happen to me personally... the macbook just shuts down on me. I "THINK" I have linked it to the magnetic money clip in my pocket. I THINK when I put the macbook on my lap it thinks I have shut the cover due to the magnetic latch. Is it possible you're putting near or on something magnetic?
Silentwave
Aug 6, 10:19 AM
Well...I've used and ENJOYED iMac G4 for five years which is still going strong by the way. I just can't help but wonder how stupid and childish it is to expect that Apple will upgrade it already awesome MBP. The Merom CPU has very minor perforformance benefit over Yonah until Santa Rosa is out next year. It has double the L2 catch, 140M more transistors and 3 Watt/hour more cons (34W/H) than Yonah (31W/H). Conroe with faster FSB is a totally different story. So I personally have nothing against those poor souls expecting new notebooks but sympothy.
The benchmarks show it actually has better performance with almost exactly the same battery life.
I'm positive Apple will go merom ASAP simply because their competition will, and it is a 64 bit chip.
The benchmarks show it actually has better performance with almost exactly the same battery life.
I'm positive Apple will go merom ASAP simply because their competition will, and it is a 64 bit chip.
Bye Bye Baby
Jul 21, 03:33 AM
With all these new technologies with 4, 8 and eventually 24-core capacities (some time in the not too distant future) all running at 64-bit, we musn't forget that software also has tobe developed for these machienes in order to get the most out of the hardware. At the moment we aren't even maximising core-duo, let alone a quad core and all the rest!!!!
Besides, for 90% of what non-pro users do, these advances will help very little. Internet will still run at the same spead and my ipod will still chug along with USB2 etc.
Pros with pro apps acn rejoice, only if software keeps the pace!!!
Let's hope so!!!
Besides, for 90% of what non-pro users do, these advances will help very little. Internet will still run at the same spead and my ipod will still chug along with USB2 etc.
Pros with pro apps acn rejoice, only if software keeps the pace!!!
Let's hope so!!!
Chundles
Jul 20, 09:44 AM
Just stating 'I knew that' I just used it as an example. Chundles gets confused easily so I have to make things simple. Hi Chundles :D
You'll keep...:p
You'll keep...:p
SkyStudios
Apr 25, 04:41 PM
|
Wrapped in the flag of
american flag tattoos designs.
Shockey Eagle Tattoo Design
Reacent Post
dethmaShine
Apr 19, 02:37 PM
WRONG! They weren't invented at Apple's Cupertino HQ, they were invented back in Palo Alto (Xerox PARC).
Secondly, your source is a pro-Apple website. Thats a problem right there.
I'll give you a proper source, the NYTimes, which wrote an article on Xerox vs Apple back in 1989, untarnished, in its raw form. Your 'source' was cherry picking data.
Here is one excerpt.
Then Apple CEO John Sculley stated:
^^ thats a GLARING admission, by the CEO of Apple, don't you think? Nevertheless, Xerox ended up losing that lawsuit, with some saying that by the time they filed that lawsuit it was too late. The lawsuit wasn't thrown out because they didn't have a strong case against Apple, but because of how the lawsuit was presented as is at the time.
I'm not saying that Apple stole IP from Xerox, but what I am is that its quite disappointing to see Apple fanboys trying to distort the past into making it seem as though Apple created the first GUI, when that is CLEARLY not the case. The GUI had its roots in Xerox PARC. That, is a FACT.
Who said Apple created the first GUI.
Jobs himself credits Xerox for their GUI. :rolleyes:
Secondly, your source is a pro-Apple website. Thats a problem right there.
I'll give you a proper source, the NYTimes, which wrote an article on Xerox vs Apple back in 1989, untarnished, in its raw form. Your 'source' was cherry picking data.
Here is one excerpt.
Then Apple CEO John Sculley stated:
^^ thats a GLARING admission, by the CEO of Apple, don't you think? Nevertheless, Xerox ended up losing that lawsuit, with some saying that by the time they filed that lawsuit it was too late. The lawsuit wasn't thrown out because they didn't have a strong case against Apple, but because of how the lawsuit was presented as is at the time.
I'm not saying that Apple stole IP from Xerox, but what I am is that its quite disappointing to see Apple fanboys trying to distort the past into making it seem as though Apple created the first GUI, when that is CLEARLY not the case. The GUI had its roots in Xerox PARC. That, is a FACT.
Who said Apple created the first GUI.
Jobs himself credits Xerox for their GUI. :rolleyes:
CFreymarc
Apr 12, 01:23 AM
I hope not. I want the 5 now :)
Correction, the iPhone 4G starts production in September.
Correction, the iPhone 4G starts production in September.
Rodimus Prime
Mar 22, 04:14 PM
honestly I like the smaller 7in size for tablets. 10 ins is just a little to large for my task.
For me size requirements is something that can fit into a coat pocket/ outside pocket of my backpack.
Both of which a 10in tablet is just to large for but a 7 in is a great sweet spot for it.
For me size requirements is something that can fit into a coat pocket/ outside pocket of my backpack.
Both of which a 10in tablet is just to large for but a 7 in is a great sweet spot for it.
WiiDSmoker
Apr 6, 01:22 PM
I hope that number keeps rising; we need competition to not let Apple rest on it's laurels.
Multimedia
Jul 20, 04:50 PM
So We May Be Seeing A Very Short Life For What Steve Introduces August 7. If true, this looks like Steve may be able to claim an all Quad Core plus Oct Core on top Mac Pro line PLUS Quad Core iMacs at his annual SF MacWorld SteveNote January 9,2007 perhaps with Leopard on board as well. Wouldn't that be a Merry belated Christmas and a Happiest of New Years? :eek: :D :p :cool: ;) :)
JAT
Apr 6, 03:53 PM
What you and every other non-informed are missing is the Xoom lack of apps is a not really a con for 2 reason.
1. Unlike iOS, ALL APPS, in the android market scale to fit the 1280x800 screen. No x1 or x2 crap. So I can still ENJOY my facebooke app on a larger screen. Nothing is lost. "optimized for tablets" gives me the same information just with a different interface. So long has my twitter app or facebooke or squeezebox app scale so i can see all. I am a happy camper.
2. Unlike iOS i would argue that the xoom needs LESS apps to do functions that take iOS 3 or 4 apps to do. I dont need goodreader or the like because I have a native file system. I dont need skyfire because i have flash. I dont need to open in here, open in there. Every app can have access to each other...
Scale?? Access to each other??
I'm beginning to wonder if you have ever used EITHER iOS or Android.
1. Unlike iOS, ALL APPS, in the android market scale to fit the 1280x800 screen. No x1 or x2 crap. So I can still ENJOY my facebooke app on a larger screen. Nothing is lost. "optimized for tablets" gives me the same information just with a different interface. So long has my twitter app or facebooke or squeezebox app scale so i can see all. I am a happy camper.
2. Unlike iOS i would argue that the xoom needs LESS apps to do functions that take iOS 3 or 4 apps to do. I dont need goodreader or the like because I have a native file system. I dont need skyfire because i have flash. I dont need to open in here, open in there. Every app can have access to each other...
Scale?? Access to each other??
I'm beginning to wonder if you have ever used EITHER iOS or Android.
After G
Aug 26, 04:09 PM
If the power consumption is the same... does that mean that the Merom and the current chips suck the same amount energy while going full throttle?
If the above is true, if you turned down the Merom to match the speed of the current chips, wouldn't the Merom be drawing 20% less power?
In other words if the Merom and the current chip were both going 60 mph down the freeway, would the Merom be drawing less power?
Am I missing something here (such as the basics of electricity, the basic way that chips work, etc.)?
512keThey'd draw the same power, but the Merom would be done faster at the same clock rate. So you use less power by taking less time to do your work. That and better power saving modes.
If the above is true, if you turned down the Merom to match the speed of the current chips, wouldn't the Merom be drawing 20% less power?
In other words if the Merom and the current chip were both going 60 mph down the freeway, would the Merom be drawing less power?
Am I missing something here (such as the basics of electricity, the basic way that chips work, etc.)?
512keThey'd draw the same power, but the Merom would be done faster at the same clock rate. So you use less power by taking less time to do your work. That and better power saving modes.
rdowns
Apr 6, 01:53 PM
Wow. All the hype and pent up anti-Apple demand and all they could muster was 100K units. Very poor. Where are the other Android tablets?
As for the RIM Playbook, that **** is DOA.
WebOS will be way to late to the game but HP has huge retail distribution.
I think Apple has won this one.
As for the RIM Playbook, that **** is DOA.
WebOS will be way to late to the game but HP has huge retail distribution.
I think Apple has won this one.
0 comments:
Post a Comment