SteveRichardson
Jul 27, 10:27 AM
MBPs the end of august? I START school in the end of august.
ughghghghghghg
ughghghghghghg
bassfingers
Apr 25, 02:14 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
money grubbers
I agree, Apple is pretty ridiculous at times.
That must be who you meant, since you clearly haven't had time to read the lawsuit yet.
Or do you think all lawsuits are 'money grubbers'?
Hey was probably talking about the money grubbers filing the lawsuit
money grubbers
I agree, Apple is pretty ridiculous at times.
That must be who you meant, since you clearly haven't had time to read the lawsuit yet.
Or do you think all lawsuits are 'money grubbers'?
Hey was probably talking about the money grubbers filing the lawsuit
blackburn
Mar 26, 05:45 AM
I still don't get it, why do we apple users have to pay for os updates? The hardware is already expensive as hell.
mcrain
Mar 17, 12:51 PM
How many times did Barack Obama attempt to draw a difference between himself and Hillary by saying "I was against the war from the beginning."? Lots. He was against the war from the beginning, and he campaigned on ending the Iraq war and escalating the Afghanistan war in an attempt to do what we went there for in the first place; and actually plan on an orderly end of the conflict. So, yes, you are correct. He was against the Iraq war from the beginning, and he said so. Bravo, 1-1 so far.
How many times did he attempt to portray himself as the polar opposite of George Bush, especially his foreign policy? Lots. In what ways has he not been the polar opposite? Do you have examples or cites? He did try to close Guantanamo, and the GOP blocked him. He actually put in place a time table for withdrawal from Iraq. He actually focused our efforts on Afghanistan; the war that started in response to 9/11 (almost 10 years ago btw).
How many times did he say that he was going to repair the view of America in the eyes of the Muslim world? Lots. Hasn't he? A dead fish would have had a better image than GWB in that part of the world.
How many times did he the right wing media say he would talk to leaders of 'terrorist nations' without preconditions? Lots. Fixed that for ya.
How many times did he attempt to portray himself as the polar opposite of George Bush, especially his foreign policy? Lots. In what ways has he not been the polar opposite? Do you have examples or cites? He did try to close Guantanamo, and the GOP blocked him. He actually put in place a time table for withdrawal from Iraq. He actually focused our efforts on Afghanistan; the war that started in response to 9/11 (almost 10 years ago btw).
How many times did he say that he was going to repair the view of America in the eyes of the Muslim world? Lots. Hasn't he? A dead fish would have had a better image than GWB in that part of the world.
How many times did he the right wing media say he would talk to leaders of 'terrorist nations' without preconditions? Lots. Fixed that for ya.
princealfie
Nov 29, 11:26 AM
I really don't harbor any hope that this could really be considered as royalty payment by the courts, it was just a little fantasy.
The real implication is on the moral front. You mentioned "group think" and I think that is the real danger for the record labels. If enough people were to convince themselves that the record label has grabbed enough money upfront, then they could step across the moral line that keeps them from piracy.
It's not law enforcement, or the actions of RIAA, that prevents the vast majority from crossing the line into piracy, it's their own built-in moral objection to it.
If the record labels remove this moral hurdle through their own actions, then there are not enough police officers, federal agencies, or private enforcement groups to even begin to stem the resulting piracy wave.
Uhhh... right. :eek:
The real implication is on the moral front. You mentioned "group think" and I think that is the real danger for the record labels. If enough people were to convince themselves that the record label has grabbed enough money upfront, then they could step across the moral line that keeps them from piracy.
It's not law enforcement, or the actions of RIAA, that prevents the vast majority from crossing the line into piracy, it's their own built-in moral objection to it.
If the record labels remove this moral hurdle through their own actions, then there are not enough police officers, federal agencies, or private enforcement groups to even begin to stem the resulting piracy wave.
Uhhh... right. :eek:
snebes
Apr 19, 04:33 PM
Why is it so hard for people to read English. Nowhere does it indicate those are numbers for the first quarter. In fact it is pretty clear it does not actually include the month of March..
Apples Q1 2011 ended around January this year. I don't have exact dates on hand, but their fiscal year starts in September.
Apples Q1 2011 ended around January this year. I don't have exact dates on hand, but their fiscal year starts in September.
The ArchAngel
Mar 26, 08:22 AM
I'm shocked at how many people are so willing to just wave away all the nice under-the-hood changes and improvements that Lion offers just because there aren't any super-radical UI changes... really disappointing to be honest. Does it really have to be all flashy to be of interest to you? What, the functional side of things doesn't matter any more?
As an amateur OS X developer, I really hate this attitude because it will end up slowing Lion adoption. That really sucks, because there are a ton of awesome changes in 10.6 that I (and many, many other developers) would love to take advantage of to make their software even greater, but it's not going to be viable to go Lion-only for said features until Lion is installed on the majority of Macs out there.
I hear what you're saying, and agree in large part, but since when did most consumers select products on grounds other than primarily looks?
As an amateur OS X developer, I really hate this attitude because it will end up slowing Lion adoption. That really sucks, because there are a ton of awesome changes in 10.6 that I (and many, many other developers) would love to take advantage of to make their software even greater, but it's not going to be viable to go Lion-only for said features until Lion is installed on the majority of Macs out there.
I hear what you're saying, and agree in large part, but since when did most consumers select products on grounds other than primarily looks?
motulist
Aug 11, 12:49 PM
... It may launch this month, or a year from now.
I think you misunderstood. By "delays that could set it back as far as next year," I interpret that to mean calendar year. So my reading of what the rumor is suggesting is that at the most it'll be released sometime within the first 3 months of or 7 months from now.
I think you misunderstood. By "delays that could set it back as far as next year," I interpret that to mean calendar year. So my reading of what the rumor is suggesting is that at the most it'll be released sometime within the first 3 months of or 7 months from now.
mwswami
Jul 20, 11:56 AM
See http://www.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.aspx?i=2772 for comparison of Woodcrest, Opteron, and Ultrasparc T1.
Dual Woodcrest (4 threads) easily outperformed Ultrasparc T1 (32 threads). The power consumption of the dual 3.0GHz Woodcrest system came out to be 245W compared to 188W for the Sun T2000 with 8-core Ultrasparc T1. But, the metric that's most important is performance/watt and that's where Woodcrest came out as a clear winner.
Dual Woodcrest (4 threads) easily outperformed Ultrasparc T1 (32 threads). The power consumption of the dual 3.0GHz Woodcrest system came out to be 245W compared to 188W for the Sun T2000 with 8-core Ultrasparc T1. But, the metric that's most important is performance/watt and that's where Woodcrest came out as a clear winner.
DocNo
Apr 11, 10:00 AM
I'm sure they will still be shipping since they support the current Final Cut Studio 3 reeaallllyyy well. Lets face it the thing thats coming out will not support the old Plug-ins or workflows and will not be the replacement for FCP that everyone was expecting.
I find this line of "reasoning" fascinating.
If Apple was really intent of "throwing the baby out with the bathwater" and totally re-defining the way FCP works then why, pray tell, are they bothering to (presumably) announce the new FCP to industry and film editing heavyweights?
That seems rather daft - if Apple is no longer catering to them, why announce to them?
How can Apple simultaneously be a marketing genius (it is the only reason people buy iPods, iPhones and iPads after all!) and stupid enough to target people they are getting ready to diss?
I'll have the popcorn ready for tomorrow as well as my running shoes so I can sidestep all the backpedaling that will be happening :rolleyes:
I find this line of "reasoning" fascinating.
If Apple was really intent of "throwing the baby out with the bathwater" and totally re-defining the way FCP works then why, pray tell, are they bothering to (presumably) announce the new FCP to industry and film editing heavyweights?
That seems rather daft - if Apple is no longer catering to them, why announce to them?
How can Apple simultaneously be a marketing genius (it is the only reason people buy iPods, iPhones and iPads after all!) and stupid enough to target people they are getting ready to diss?
I'll have the popcorn ready for tomorrow as well as my running shoes so I can sidestep all the backpedaling that will be happening :rolleyes:
orthodoc
Nov 28, 08:22 PM
Actually, they do. They also got paid on every blank tape sold when cassettes were big. I think it is crazy for everyone to think that the music industry is greedy when it getting squeezed out of all of their revenue streams. So, Apple makes hundreds of millions off of their back on the itunes site, and a billion off of iPod sales, and they cannot share in the wealth?
It doesn't cost the consumer any more, why wouldn't you want the people who actually make the music you are listening to get compensated?
This debate is stale. People want something for nothing.
Getting squeezed out of a revenue stream is just part of being in business. Either adapt or go away. Nothing entitles them to a portion of the iPod sales. They make their money off of the sale of the actual music they produce. Should they get a portion of each computer sold as well? After all, the computer is used to both download and play the music. Dumb argument.
It doesn't cost the consumer any more, why wouldn't you want the people who actually make the music you are listening to get compensated?
This debate is stale. People want something for nothing.
Getting squeezed out of a revenue stream is just part of being in business. Either adapt or go away. Nothing entitles them to a portion of the iPod sales. They make their money off of the sale of the actual music they produce. Should they get a portion of each computer sold as well? After all, the computer is used to both download and play the music. Dumb argument.
Multimedia
Jul 27, 11:26 PM
if merom produces less heat.. i would think that apple will quickly update both MB and MBP so it won't be releasing anymore problematic notebooksYes your logic is impecible. But Apple does not act on logic. They are in it for the money. :D
mdelvecchio
Mar 31, 03:28 PM
The question is what will Google do when they do publish the source code? All of these people pointing and laughing didn't read the article.
no, the question is: "Is this evil?" when google starts rejecting Facebook Android phones, or android versions using Bing and not Google...
thats the question.
no, the question is: "Is this evil?" when google starts rejecting Facebook Android phones, or android versions using Bing and not Google...
thats the question.
Jimmieboy
Sep 19, 04:07 AM
An update isn't going to make me go out and by a macbook or macbook pro. I'm waiting for leopard. Hopefully the updates (if any) will lower the price of the ibooks. I'm kinda interested in getting a new one for cheap. Anyway
Moyank24
Apr 27, 12:30 PM
I suspected it was a copy, I've never trusted the president, and I probably never will.
You suspected what was a copy? Had you just read the article before commenting, you would have known it was a copy.
And you don't trust the President? Shocking.
You suspected what was a copy? Had you just read the article before commenting, you would have known it was a copy.
And you don't trust the President? Shocking.
Mtn Tamale
Jul 14, 03:27 PM
If they use single woodcrest CPU's instead of Conroe in the lower end, it isn't because marketing is driving the decision, it would likely be manufacturing and operations, probably a volume/pricing decision. If the most popular Powermacs are low and high end, which I believe is true, then there is benefit to making all Woodcrest. If Apple only populated the scantily sold highest end model with Woodcrest chips they would likely have to sell them for too much.
I'm talking about Core2 Duo machines - either Conroe or Woodcrest.
Ports? My G5 tower had no more ports than any other PC I've seen. My current CD iMac actually lacks any kind of high-speed port for external hard-drives or burners.
Software? OK, I know it's supposed to be a selling point, but there's not a damn thing outside of iTunes I use in iLife enough to justify hardware prices at any level. They're nice freebies, but I happily pay the Apple Tax to have an OS that works with me rather than against me. Unquestionably worth it, but I'm not going to pretend that I'm getting good value in the (theoretical) hardware.
I think I know what the apologists will say - no one else will offer Woodcrest in a low-end pro machine, they'll use Conroe. And yeah, that's probably true, but for a reason - there's no reason to put Woodcrest in the low-end tower offering, aside from a desire to perpetuate the artifical line distinctions. Which isn't going to cut it in the Intel world.
I'm talking about Core2 Duo machines - either Conroe or Woodcrest.
Ports? My G5 tower had no more ports than any other PC I've seen. My current CD iMac actually lacks any kind of high-speed port for external hard-drives or burners.
Software? OK, I know it's supposed to be a selling point, but there's not a damn thing outside of iTunes I use in iLife enough to justify hardware prices at any level. They're nice freebies, but I happily pay the Apple Tax to have an OS that works with me rather than against me. Unquestionably worth it, but I'm not going to pretend that I'm getting good value in the (theoretical) hardware.
I think I know what the apologists will say - no one else will offer Woodcrest in a low-end pro machine, they'll use Conroe. And yeah, that's probably true, but for a reason - there's no reason to put Woodcrest in the low-end tower offering, aside from a desire to perpetuate the artifical line distinctions. Which isn't going to cut it in the Intel world.
Moyank24
Apr 27, 12:02 PM
I'm not a birther. But I would love to know why the certificate looks new when the president is nearly 50. Now I'm about five months older than he, my original birth certificate has faded. The certificate he produced clearly isn't the original. Or if it is the original, it's astoundingly well-preserved.
He hasn't been carrying this around for 50 years. Did you actually read the article?
The White House also released a letter from the president on April 22 requesting two certified copies of his original certificate of live birth. Also released was a letter from Loretta Fuddy, Hawaii's director of health, approving the request.
The president's personal counsel, Judith Corley, traveled to Hawaii to pick up the documents and carried them back to Washington on a plane. The documents arrived at the White House around 5 p.m. Tuesday.
He hasn't been carrying this around for 50 years. Did you actually read the article?
The White House also released a letter from the president on April 22 requesting two certified copies of his original certificate of live birth. Also released was a letter from Loretta Fuddy, Hawaii's director of health, approving the request.
The president's personal counsel, Judith Corley, traveled to Hawaii to pick up the documents and carried them back to Washington on a plane. The documents arrived at the White House around 5 p.m. Tuesday.
Multimedia
Jul 21, 12:20 PM
It really depends on your application.
On the desktop, if you're a typical user that's just interested in web surfing, playing music files, organizing your photo collection, etc., more than two cores will probably not be too useful. For these kinds of users, even two cores may be overkill, but two are useful for keeping a responsive UI when an application starts hogging all the CPU time.
If you start using higher-power applications (like video work - iMovie/iDVD, for instance) then more cores will speed up that kind of work (assuming the app is properly multithreaded, of course.) 4-core systems will definitely benefit this kind of user.
With current applications, however, I don't think more than 4 cores will be useful. The kind of work that will make 8 cores useful is the kinds that requires expensive professional software - which most people don't use...
Cluster computing has similar benefits. With 8 cores in each processor, it is almost as good as having 8 times as many computers in the cluster, and a lot less expensive. This concept will scale up as the number of cores increases, assuming motherbaords can be designed with enough memory and FSB bandwidth to keep them all busy.
I think we might see a single quad-core chip in consumer systems, like the iMac. I think it is likely that we'll see them in Pro systems, like the Mac Pro (including a high-end model with two quad-core chips.)
I think processors with more than 4 cores will never be seen outside of servers - Xserves and maybe some configurations of Mac Pro. Mostly because that's where there is a need for this kind of power.I strongly disagree. I could use 16 cores right now for notihng more than simple consumer electronics video compression routines. There will be a Mac Pro with 8 cores this Winter 2007.
You are completely blind to the need for many cores right now for very simple stupid work. All I want to do is run 4 copies of Toast while running 4 copies of Handbrake simultaneously. Each wants 2 cores or more. So you are not thinking of the current need for 16 cores already.
This is not even beginning to discuss how many Final Cut Studio Editors need 16 Cores. Man, I can't believe you wrote that. I think you are overlooking the obvious - the need to run multiple copies of today's applicaitons simultaneously.
So as long as the heat issue can be overcome, I don't see why 8 Cores can't belong inside an iMac by the end of 2008.
I apologize if I read a little hot. But I find the line of thought that 4 or 8 Cores are enough or more than enough to really annoy me. They are not nearly enough for those of us who see the problem of not enough cores EVERY DAY. The rest of you either have no imagination or are only using your Macs for word processing, browsing and email.
I am sincerely frustrated by not having enough cores to do simple stupid work efficiently. Just look at how crippled this G5 Quad is already only running three things. They can't even run full speed due to lack of cores.
On the desktop, if you're a typical user that's just interested in web surfing, playing music files, organizing your photo collection, etc., more than two cores will probably not be too useful. For these kinds of users, even two cores may be overkill, but two are useful for keeping a responsive UI when an application starts hogging all the CPU time.
If you start using higher-power applications (like video work - iMovie/iDVD, for instance) then more cores will speed up that kind of work (assuming the app is properly multithreaded, of course.) 4-core systems will definitely benefit this kind of user.
With current applications, however, I don't think more than 4 cores will be useful. The kind of work that will make 8 cores useful is the kinds that requires expensive professional software - which most people don't use...
Cluster computing has similar benefits. With 8 cores in each processor, it is almost as good as having 8 times as many computers in the cluster, and a lot less expensive. This concept will scale up as the number of cores increases, assuming motherbaords can be designed with enough memory and FSB bandwidth to keep them all busy.
I think we might see a single quad-core chip in consumer systems, like the iMac. I think it is likely that we'll see them in Pro systems, like the Mac Pro (including a high-end model with two quad-core chips.)
I think processors with more than 4 cores will never be seen outside of servers - Xserves and maybe some configurations of Mac Pro. Mostly because that's where there is a need for this kind of power.I strongly disagree. I could use 16 cores right now for notihng more than simple consumer electronics video compression routines. There will be a Mac Pro with 8 cores this Winter 2007.
You are completely blind to the need for many cores right now for very simple stupid work. All I want to do is run 4 copies of Toast while running 4 copies of Handbrake simultaneously. Each wants 2 cores or more. So you are not thinking of the current need for 16 cores already.
This is not even beginning to discuss how many Final Cut Studio Editors need 16 Cores. Man, I can't believe you wrote that. I think you are overlooking the obvious - the need to run multiple copies of today's applicaitons simultaneously.
So as long as the heat issue can be overcome, I don't see why 8 Cores can't belong inside an iMac by the end of 2008.
I apologize if I read a little hot. But I find the line of thought that 4 or 8 Cores are enough or more than enough to really annoy me. They are not nearly enough for those of us who see the problem of not enough cores EVERY DAY. The rest of you either have no imagination or are only using your Macs for word processing, browsing and email.
I am sincerely frustrated by not having enough cores to do simple stupid work efficiently. Just look at how crippled this G5 Quad is already only running three things. They can't even run full speed due to lack of cores.
dukebound85
Dec 7, 05:07 PM
would those that have played this game reccomend getting it? or are there too many cons (standard cars, multiple versions of one car, bad AI in racing, bad physics in damage esp with standard, etc) that would lead to buyers remorse?
Keep in mind, I have played quite abit of Forza, but now have a PS3 and want agood racing sim but just keep hearing bad things about this game (largely being an incomplete game)
Keep in mind, I have played quite abit of Forza, but now have a PS3 and want agood racing sim but just keep hearing bad things about this game (largely being an incomplete game)
turtlebud
Aug 7, 11:47 PM
does anyone see a potential for a security breach with the ichat feature that lets you take over someone's desktop? (the purpose is of course to collaborate or to help them fix a problem)
Homy
Jul 20, 11:44 AM
eight cores + Tiger = Octopussy?!?:p
LagunaSol
Mar 23, 09:28 AM
It's telling that a discussion about RIM's and Samsung's tablet devices devolve into a battle over the English language and the proper positioning of the pinky finger while drinking tea.
My hunch is these "iPad Killer" devices will get similar attention from the typical consumer (Zzzz....) while the iPad continues to snowball into an iPod-like phenomenon. ;)
My hunch is these "iPad Killer" devices will get similar attention from the typical consumer (Zzzz....) while the iPad continues to snowball into an iPod-like phenomenon. ;)
TrollToddington
Apr 6, 01:21 PM
You can't please everyone with a tiny 11" or 13" machine. I think people on here expect far too much from such a small package. If you want the best of all worlds go and get the uber 15" with 256GB SSD. If you pay anything less you are in for a compromise.
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
0 comments:
Post a Comment