leekohler
Apr 27, 10:17 AM
Stay classy Faux News:
Image (http://images1.dailykos.com/i/user/6685/what-it-says-fox.png)
I'm seriously beginning to lose my patience with idiots. Is anyone else completely sick of these fools?
Image (http://images1.dailykos.com/i/user/6685/what-it-says-fox.png)
I'm seriously beginning to lose my patience with idiots. Is anyone else completely sick of these fools?
dejo
Aug 7, 06:51 PM
Would Dashcode be considered part of the "Enhanced Dashboard" choice?
dclocke
Sep 19, 09:43 AM
You're so wrong. Most people posting in this thread don't have a clue what 64 bit computing really means. They just think they have to have it because it's the newest thing.
That doesn't mean they think they need a 64-bit processor just so they can use a lot of RAM. I may be wrong, but the content of your post certainly doesn't justify this assertion.
That doesn't mean they think they need a 64-bit processor just so they can use a lot of RAM. I may be wrong, but the content of your post certainly doesn't justify this assertion.
ergle2
Sep 14, 10:49 PM
Really, completely new? As in, to Core 2 what the G5 was to G4? In just two years?? I guess they're really ramping things up... Core 3 Hexa Mac Pros, anyone?
Intel's stated plans as I understand them are thus:
A new micro-arch every 2 years. I don't think they mean brand new so much as "significant changes/improvements". Whether this is akin to Yonah->Conroe or Netburst->Conroe remains to be seen, but more like the former (or perhaps Pentium-M -> Merom -- Core Duo was very much a stop-gap). Little has been released about Nehalem, but at one time it was slated as "based on Banias/Dothan", due in 2005 and expected to ramp to 9/10GHz.
"Off" years will recieve derivative versions (e.g. Merom->Penryn), which appears to be mostly stuff like L2 cache increases, faster FSB speeds (at least while we have FSBs - 2008 looks like the year for DCI, finally), die shrinks, increasing the number of cores (expect at least one to be more cores on a single die instead of two dice/package), etc.
Die shrinks are currently scheduled for "off" years, in order to stablize the process ready for the new micro-arch in the following year so Intel doesn't need to deal with both new process and new arch at the same time, and presumably in part to keep speed increases coming in "off" years
Of course, roadmaps can change quite rapidly -- it's not that long ago that Whitfield was expected to debut late 2006 with DCI (FSB replacement). Whitfield was replaced by Tigerton which is now due sometime in 2007...
One thing's for sure, Intel appears to have learnt a great deal from the Netburst fiasco -- how not to do things, if nothing else. Unfortunately, they still estimate ~50% of processors shipping in 1Q2007 will be netburst-based (mostly Pentium-D).
Intel's stated plans as I understand them are thus:
A new micro-arch every 2 years. I don't think they mean brand new so much as "significant changes/improvements". Whether this is akin to Yonah->Conroe or Netburst->Conroe remains to be seen, but more like the former (or perhaps Pentium-M -> Merom -- Core Duo was very much a stop-gap). Little has been released about Nehalem, but at one time it was slated as "based on Banias/Dothan", due in 2005 and expected to ramp to 9/10GHz.
"Off" years will recieve derivative versions (e.g. Merom->Penryn), which appears to be mostly stuff like L2 cache increases, faster FSB speeds (at least while we have FSBs - 2008 looks like the year for DCI, finally), die shrinks, increasing the number of cores (expect at least one to be more cores on a single die instead of two dice/package), etc.
Die shrinks are currently scheduled for "off" years, in order to stablize the process ready for the new micro-arch in the following year so Intel doesn't need to deal with both new process and new arch at the same time, and presumably in part to keep speed increases coming in "off" years
Of course, roadmaps can change quite rapidly -- it's not that long ago that Whitfield was expected to debut late 2006 with DCI (FSB replacement). Whitfield was replaced by Tigerton which is now due sometime in 2007...
One thing's for sure, Intel appears to have learnt a great deal from the Netburst fiasco -- how not to do things, if nothing else. Unfortunately, they still estimate ~50% of processors shipping in 1Q2007 will be netburst-based (mostly Pentium-D).
MacBoobsPro
Jul 20, 09:43 AM
As for your theoretical 24GHz processor, such a thing is simply not possible with today's technology.
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
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
Demoman
Sep 15, 10:52 PM
Uh, last time I checked, Windows can take advantage of multiple cores just fine. Do you think that multithreading is some Black Magic that only MacOS can do? Hell, standard Linux from kernel.org can use 512 cores as we speak!
Related to this: Maybe not 512-way SMP, but here (http://www.linux-mips.org/wiki/IP27_boot_messages) is what it looks like when Linux boots on 128-way SGI Origin supercomputer. Note, the kernel that is booting is 2.4.1, which was released in early 2001. Things have progressed A LOT since those day.
OS X works with quad core == "Ahead of technology curve"... puhleeze!
Windows works just fine with dual-core. It really does. To Wndows, dual-core is more or less similar to typical SMP, and Windows has supported SMP since Windows NT!
Any reason why it wouldn't work? And did you even read the Anandtech-article? They conducted their benchmarks in Windows XP! So it obviously DID work with four cores! And it DID show substantial improvement in performance in real-life apps! Sheesh! Dial tone that fanboysihness a bit, dude.
I think the same applies to you, Bill. You seem to be here to act as a Microsoft evangelist.
Related to this: Maybe not 512-way SMP, but here (http://www.linux-mips.org/wiki/IP27_boot_messages) is what it looks like when Linux boots on 128-way SGI Origin supercomputer. Note, the kernel that is booting is 2.4.1, which was released in early 2001. Things have progressed A LOT since those day.
OS X works with quad core == "Ahead of technology curve"... puhleeze!
Windows works just fine with dual-core. It really does. To Wndows, dual-core is more or less similar to typical SMP, and Windows has supported SMP since Windows NT!
Any reason why it wouldn't work? And did you even read the Anandtech-article? They conducted their benchmarks in Windows XP! So it obviously DID work with four cores! And it DID show substantial improvement in performance in real-life apps! Sheesh! Dial tone that fanboysihness a bit, dude.
I think the same applies to you, Bill. You seem to be here to act as a Microsoft evangelist.
Sped
Aug 7, 04:58 PM
Not a glimpse of the Finder...! :eek:
Here, here. I have been a very happy Mac fan for several years now, but the Finder is a POS. Although specifically mentioning a new Finder might be considered acknowledgment that it stinks, I think Steve could couch it in favorable language. Bottom line, Leopard better FTFF.
Here, here. I have been a very happy Mac fan for several years now, but the Finder is a POS. Although specifically mentioning a new Finder might be considered acknowledgment that it stinks, I think Steve could couch it in favorable language. Bottom line, Leopard better FTFF.
amin
Sep 14, 10:08 PM
AnandTech is putting a lot of emphasis on this FB-DIMM issue. Their Conroe vs Xeon comparisons are poor given that they maximize the FB-DIMM latency "problem" by using a Mac Pro with only two RAM slots occupied. Seems as though they have an agenda to exaggerate the importance of this technical issue.
Glideslope
Mar 31, 06:08 PM
John Gruber's take:
Can't say I disagree.
Exactly. Anyone who did not see this coming deserves what was planned years ago. Likeable, Trustworthy, Product. Google has none.
I laugh at all the Android users about to bend over. Enjoy :apple:
Can't say I disagree.
Exactly. Anyone who did not see this coming deserves what was planned years ago. Likeable, Trustworthy, Product. Google has none.
I laugh at all the Android users about to bend over. Enjoy :apple:
dscuber9000
Mar 1, 08:13 AM
Yet another case of straight people telling gay people how being gay works. I just don't get it.:rolleyes:
LondonCentral
Apr 11, 12:02 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
I dont want to wait :(
Tell me about it. I've just sold my iPhone 4. More fool me for expecting a Summer release.
Think I'll get a decent camera and update my Macbook for a MBA while I wait.
I dont want to wait :(
Tell me about it. I've just sold my iPhone 4. More fool me for expecting a Summer release.
Think I'll get a decent camera and update my Macbook for a MBA while I wait.
whooleytoo
Apr 27, 08:48 AM
I thought they said that there was not any concerns?
Because, despite how Apple excel at so many things, when it comes to handling user (quality or privacy) concerns like this, they suck.
Look at their responses to the iPhone 4 antenna issue:
"You're holding it wrong" - Blame the customer.
'Every phone has the same issue' - Our phone is bad, but no worse than anyone else's
'Let's change how the signal bars are displayed' - Let's hide the problem.
'Let's give a bumper case with the iPhone' - Let's offer a solution to some users, to get them off our back for a problem we used to deny even existed.
I'm not even saying the antenna issue was a serious problem, but Apple's dismissive attitude is only throwing fuel on the fire. If they had tackled it quicker, it would be never have been newsworthy.
It's great that Apple are addressing this (location) issue much quicker, but still it only is happening after they initially denied there was any issue, and waiting for the furore to grow before acting.
Because, despite how Apple excel at so many things, when it comes to handling user (quality or privacy) concerns like this, they suck.
Look at their responses to the iPhone 4 antenna issue:
"You're holding it wrong" - Blame the customer.
'Every phone has the same issue' - Our phone is bad, but no worse than anyone else's
'Let's change how the signal bars are displayed' - Let's hide the problem.
'Let's give a bumper case with the iPhone' - Let's offer a solution to some users, to get them off our back for a problem we used to deny even existed.
I'm not even saying the antenna issue was a serious problem, but Apple's dismissive attitude is only throwing fuel on the fire. If they had tackled it quicker, it would be never have been newsworthy.
It's great that Apple are addressing this (location) issue much quicker, but still it only is happening after they initially denied there was any issue, and waiting for the furore to grow before acting.
ZLurker
Aug 12, 02:05 AM
Mac OS Kitten.
LOL!!
Good one!
LOL!!
Good one!
0815
Mar 31, 05:28 PM
The problem that has always existed, not just with Android, is that the carriers customize the OS, release it with a phone, and you can forget about getting any updates for it. Maybe one update for the lifetime of the device, if you are lucky. My HTC TouchPro 2 has only seen in almost 2 years just one update to WM 6.5, and it was not even close to the most current revision at that time.
This just shows that carriers and manufacturers don't want to keep maintaining their phones. They want to sell and forget, and push a new model out the door.
Sad, but true... :(
Correct - and that is what Apple realized and didn't allow and got bashed for.
This just shows that carriers and manufacturers don't want to keep maintaining their phones. They want to sell and forget, and push a new model out the door.
Sad, but true... :(
Correct - and that is what Apple realized and didn't allow and got bashed for.
2IS
Apr 8, 08:24 PM
Intel forced nVidia out of the chipset business. :p Which is what led to this whole GPU downgrade for Sandy Bridge equipped Macs with IGPs.
Well then allow me to be the broken record...
Intel isn't forcing anything. Mac Book pro's are using Sandy Bridge AND have a separate graphics chipset. :rolleyes:
Well then allow me to be the broken record...
Intel isn't forcing anything. Mac Book pro's are using Sandy Bridge AND have a separate graphics chipset. :rolleyes:
iStudentUK
Mar 26, 06:16 AM
Can't wait. Hope it's awesome
Got to wait for the results from the beta testers who buy 10.7 on release. Learn the lessons of 10.6, I waited until 10.6.2 was out!
Wish my MB had a multitouch track pad though! :(
Got to wait for the results from the beta testers who buy 10.7 on release. Learn the lessons of 10.6, I waited until 10.6.2 was out!
Wish my MB had a multitouch track pad though! :(
addicted44
Mar 26, 01:19 AM
Full-screen apps along is just�why haven�t we been doing this all along?
The first time this thought crossed my mind was when I first used WriteRoom, to write a paper. Many seem to think (and Apple has intimated as much) that Full Screen Apps originated from iOS. I think this is wrong. I think Apple first thought about these with WriteRoom, which is why Pages was the first App to get the Full Screen treatment.
Combining it with the new form of spaces is a genius move though.
The first time this thought crossed my mind was when I first used WriteRoom, to write a paper. Many seem to think (and Apple has intimated as much) that Full Screen Apps originated from iOS. I think this is wrong. I think Apple first thought about these with WriteRoom, which is why Pages was the first App to get the Full Screen treatment.
Combining it with the new form of spaces is a genius move though.
err404
Apr 25, 03:05 PM
Do you know this for certain?
As far as I'm concerned, I am pretty sure apple does track this information. Why else force everyone that wants to use apples devices to agree to this in their TOU?
Of course I can't prove it, but I'm not the one making the claim of malicious intent. The burden is on you. I see a legitimate use for this data being cached locally on my device, and have seen no reason to suspect that it is being used for anything else.
Sorry, but thats b.s.
The i-devices query apple's db to match SID and geolocation, not the local dump... and apart from that, you wouldnt have to log SID's more than once and certainly not with include the timestamp each time.
I looked at the data on my phone, and the data for each spot is not logged more then once. As for the time stamp, they need some means of determining the freshness of the data.
given past vulnerabilities of iOS via the pdf rendering and major security flaws in safari, this scenario is far more likely than you make it sound.
I agree that it's an issue that needs to be addressed. However I would be far more worried about the flaw that allowed access then I would about my cell tower cache getting into the wild.
two wrongs dont make a right.
that said, the provider has no technical means to log more detailed location data than apple. they use the same methods if triangulation and unlike apple have no access to SID signal strength and GPS data.
The cell providers log each tower that you connect to. you iPhone only logs new towers (plus periodic updates). Due to this, the log on your phone is not very useful for analyzing trends in location or your whereabouts at a specific time.
As far as I'm concerned, I am pretty sure apple does track this information. Why else force everyone that wants to use apples devices to agree to this in their TOU?
Of course I can't prove it, but I'm not the one making the claim of malicious intent. The burden is on you. I see a legitimate use for this data being cached locally on my device, and have seen no reason to suspect that it is being used for anything else.
Sorry, but thats b.s.
The i-devices query apple's db to match SID and geolocation, not the local dump... and apart from that, you wouldnt have to log SID's more than once and certainly not with include the timestamp each time.
I looked at the data on my phone, and the data for each spot is not logged more then once. As for the time stamp, they need some means of determining the freshness of the data.
given past vulnerabilities of iOS via the pdf rendering and major security flaws in safari, this scenario is far more likely than you make it sound.
I agree that it's an issue that needs to be addressed. However I would be far more worried about the flaw that allowed access then I would about my cell tower cache getting into the wild.
two wrongs dont make a right.
that said, the provider has no technical means to log more detailed location data than apple. they use the same methods if triangulation and unlike apple have no access to SID signal strength and GPS data.
The cell providers log each tower that you connect to. you iPhone only logs new towers (plus periodic updates). Due to this, the log on your phone is not very useful for analyzing trends in location or your whereabouts at a specific time.
ready2switch
Sep 19, 09:32 AM
It gets annoying. Why? Because it's true and most people don't want to admit it.
In a few cases here and there, the extra processor power/speed is going to help. But for a majority of people buying a MacBook, they're not going to be burning home-made DVD's, doing intense Music compositions, or using it for hard-core gaming. They're going to SURF and WRITE.
As for the "resale" value, again, most people who are buying a used MacBook are NOT going to ask "is it a Merom?" They're going to ask how nice the case is, how much use it's gotten, and how much it is, and that's it.
Everybody likes to play "ooo, I'm the hard-core computing whiz and I need the BEST out there", but I bet you if you took an honest poll out there of everyone who's answered this thread, you'd find at least 75% these Apple fans have no need for for the extra speed, they just want it because it's "cool" and "fast" and it's the latest thing out there.
62% of all statistics are made up to add false weight to the speaker's argument.
:eek:
Unless you have conducted or can site a scientific study calculating exactly how mac users USE their apple machine, stop calling other people annoying and claiming to know exactly how overpowered these systems are for "most" of the users.
In a few cases here and there, the extra processor power/speed is going to help. But for a majority of people buying a MacBook, they're not going to be burning home-made DVD's, doing intense Music compositions, or using it for hard-core gaming. They're going to SURF and WRITE.
As for the "resale" value, again, most people who are buying a used MacBook are NOT going to ask "is it a Merom?" They're going to ask how nice the case is, how much use it's gotten, and how much it is, and that's it.
Everybody likes to play "ooo, I'm the hard-core computing whiz and I need the BEST out there", but I bet you if you took an honest poll out there of everyone who's answered this thread, you'd find at least 75% these Apple fans have no need for for the extra speed, they just want it because it's "cool" and "fast" and it's the latest thing out there.
62% of all statistics are made up to add false weight to the speaker's argument.
:eek:
Unless you have conducted or can site a scientific study calculating exactly how mac users USE their apple machine, stop calling other people annoying and claiming to know exactly how overpowered these systems are for "most" of the users.
ssamani
Sep 13, 07:28 PM
I have to say that I think a lot of people have missed the point around various software not using all the cores. There is a simple reason. Developing multi threaded apps is hard. And until recently (~1 yr since G5 Quad) developing for more than 2 simultaneous threads (cores or processors) was pretty pointless on a Mac and completely pointless on a PC. Why would a developer bother to develop for more than two thread unless they expect threads to get blocked easily or there to be more than two cores? That's why browsers are one of the few genuine multithreaded apps, rather than 2-4 threads, the threads block easily, so having multiple makes sense. In a lot of cases where there was the opportunity for parallelism using a vector processing unit often makes more sense than multiple threads. Why spend development and testing effort on a solution with no hardware to even test it on, let alone deliver and make use of?
The whole industry is taking a 90 degree turn and the tools for developing multithreaded applications are not up to scratch. Look at some of the commentary about XBox 360 and PS3 development.
The dev tools will come, the software will catch up with the hardware, in the meantime just be glad that you can play your stolen MP3's and browse your pr0n without interfering with each other and stop whinging.
The whole industry is taking a 90 degree turn and the tools for developing multithreaded applications are not up to scratch. Look at some of the commentary about XBox 360 and PS3 development.
The dev tools will come, the software will catch up with the hardware, in the meantime just be glad that you can play your stolen MP3's and browse your pr0n without interfering with each other and stop whinging.
MrCrowbar
Aug 27, 10:03 AM
This is what we NEED:
1. Computer with no fan. Quiet. Silent. CRITICAL.
2. Modular computer to add a gorgeous Apple Cinema Display.
3. At lesat two FireWire 800 ports.
Then all the rest (power, etc).
1. My iMac Core Duo 17" was very quiet. Never heard the fans except using photoshop under rosetta, playing 3D games under XP and during the hardware test. Those fans are powerful when required, make noise like a big hair dryer and you think the computer's gonna lift off and fly away. But on normal use all you hear is the hard drive. I had a desk that happened to resonnate at the frequency of the hard drive which was horrible, but when put on the corner of the desk it was fine. You could crack it open and replace the noisy Maxtor drive with a Seagate Barracuda if you want the absolute silent computer.
2. I hooked up a 20" Dell Screen to the iMac. Worked nicely. the iMac supports up to 23" in dual screen mode.
3. Only has a Firewire 400 Port. You won't get dual 800 on iMac... get a Mac Pro. You could put it in another room, make a hole in the wall for the screen cable and firewire cables and use wireless keyboards and mouses. ;)
1. Computer with no fan. Quiet. Silent. CRITICAL.
2. Modular computer to add a gorgeous Apple Cinema Display.
3. At lesat two FireWire 800 ports.
Then all the rest (power, etc).
1. My iMac Core Duo 17" was very quiet. Never heard the fans except using photoshop under rosetta, playing 3D games under XP and during the hardware test. Those fans are powerful when required, make noise like a big hair dryer and you think the computer's gonna lift off and fly away. But on normal use all you hear is the hard drive. I had a desk that happened to resonnate at the frequency of the hard drive which was horrible, but when put on the corner of the desk it was fine. You could crack it open and replace the noisy Maxtor drive with a Seagate Barracuda if you want the absolute silent computer.
2. I hooked up a 20" Dell Screen to the iMac. Worked nicely. the iMac supports up to 23" in dual screen mode.
3. Only has a Firewire 400 Port. You won't get dual 800 on iMac... get a Mac Pro. You could put it in another room, make a hole in the wall for the screen cable and firewire cables and use wireless keyboards and mouses. ;)
toddybody
Apr 6, 10:57 AM
Since you have no clue how the sandy bridge airs will perform, I'll take your statement as FUD.
Ehhh...youre missing his point (and being a bit rude). The IGP on SB is NOT as capable as nVidia's 320M. Certainly the SB architecture will yield great processing improvements to the MBA (over the C2D)...but graphics will most likely take a hit. That was his concern.
Ehhh...youre missing his point (and being a bit rude). The IGP on SB is NOT as capable as nVidia's 320M. Certainly the SB architecture will yield great processing improvements to the MBA (over the C2D)...but graphics will most likely take a hit. That was his concern.
deconai
Aug 11, 03:47 PM
Yes. EVERYONE. If you dont believe me, maybe you believe the economist:
http://www.economist.com/printedition/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID=4351974
Please note that the graph is about three years old. Nowadays a lot more of the countries are over 100%.
That is insane! It's interesting to note the number of people with multiple phones...
http://www.economist.com/printedition/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID=4351974
Please note that the graph is about three years old. Nowadays a lot more of the countries are over 100%.
That is insane! It's interesting to note the number of people with multiple phones...
~Shard~
Jul 15, 10:20 AM
BTW, how's life, ~Shard~? :D
Life's great, no complaints whatsoever. :)
I also wish Apple used standard ATX power supplies. That way, if you need a new power suply, you can get one from your local electronics store.
That would be nice as well. It would definitely increase the longevity of the Mac, since if you ever wanted to upgrade the P/S, or if it blew, it would be a lot easier to do so. Still possible the way it is of course, but this would probably result in less hassle.
Life's great, no complaints whatsoever. :)
I also wish Apple used standard ATX power supplies. That way, if you need a new power suply, you can get one from your local electronics store.
That would be nice as well. It would definitely increase the longevity of the Mac, since if you ever wanted to upgrade the P/S, or if it blew, it would be a lot easier to do so. Still possible the way it is of course, but this would probably result in less hassle.
No comments:
Post a Comment