lordonuthin
May 3, 12:21 PM
so running things like itunes and iphoto, and surfing the web, things are fine?
I also have the terminal going with 6 tabs, each running folding on another machine. I worried about iTunes because I had heard that it took quite a bit of cpu, but not for me it doesn't seem to have any effect on folding.
I also have the terminal going with 6 tabs, each running folding on another machine. I worried about iTunes because I had heard that it took quite a bit of cpu, but not for me it doesn't seem to have any effect on folding.
Unspeaked
Sep 1, 01:56 PM
i don't think this rumor will come out to be true because this might take a lot of people from getting Mac Pro, unless this iMac comes out to be north of $2500, at which point nobody will buy this.
Yeah, wouldn't that be terrible if Apple lost sales to - Apple!!!
Come on, people who need a Mac Pro are going to buy a Mac Pro.
People who need an iMac will buy an iMac.
The small overlap between these users isn't enough to justify or kill off a product. It's still going to be a duo (not quad), lack PCI, lack the number of RAM slots, etc, etc.
They're different markets.
Yeah, wouldn't that be terrible if Apple lost sales to - Apple!!!
Come on, people who need a Mac Pro are going to buy a Mac Pro.
People who need an iMac will buy an iMac.
The small overlap between these users isn't enough to justify or kill off a product. It's still going to be a duo (not quad), lack PCI, lack the number of RAM slots, etc, etc.
They're different markets.
leekohler
Mar 24, 01:01 PM
Oh FFS!!! :rolleyes:
How many times more are we going to have to argue this?
It is not a choice.
I no more chose to be gay than you chose to be straight.
Christ! Sometimes this forum reminds me of a Whack the Mole game� hit one on the head and another pops up.
Same stuff over and over�
And people wonder why I get frustrated and end up telling people off. That kind of BS gets old. I've been fighting that kind of ignorance for over 25 years now- others even longer. It gets very tiring, but we still can't stop fighting it.
How many times more are we going to have to argue this?
It is not a choice.
I no more chose to be gay than you chose to be straight.
Christ! Sometimes this forum reminds me of a Whack the Mole game� hit one on the head and another pops up.
Same stuff over and over�
And people wonder why I get frustrated and end up telling people off. That kind of BS gets old. I've been fighting that kind of ignorance for over 25 years now- others even longer. It gets very tiring, but we still can't stop fighting it.
eaweber1
Apr 3, 12:43 AM
It would be "magical" if Apple could make enough for everyone who wants to buy one....could!
Now Apple Fanboys....dont blame it on the tsunami....Apple knew they only had 17 of them to sell on launch day way before that happened.
Now Apple Fanboys....dont blame it on the tsunami....Apple knew they only had 17 of them to sell on launch day way before that happened.
CIA
Apr 12, 09:02 PM
http://www.tuaw.com/2010/10/22/timeline-tweak-returns-imovie-11-to-old-school/
That's actually pretty funny.
That's actually pretty funny.
Daveway
Jan 1, 07:01 PM
This year better be good!
I just saw this! OMG1!!1
Apple is putting the heat on for MWSF. I think they're releasing what everyone is expecting (applephone) plus many unexpected additions.
mmmm i love Apple
What does it mean!?! :)
I just saw this! OMG1!!1
Apple is putting the heat on for MWSF. I think they're releasing what everyone is expecting (applephone) plus many unexpected additions.
mmmm i love Apple
What does it mean!?! :)
Booga
Jul 18, 09:24 AM
In the music business, Apple has taken advantage of people's willingness to give up some sound quality (ie MP3 and AAC formats) in exchange for ease of use in buying and using the music. I don't expect the movie service to offer HD, at least not for most movies. I expect they'll do the same thing they did with music-- actually offer slightly LOWER resolution than DVD in exchange for a very convenient package.
That's how Apple got the music industry on-board, and it would offer a great story to the movie studios, who are constantly worried that the higher and higher quality formats mean they're "giving away their masters". Instead, people may be very willing to buy lower quality copies as long as it's extremely convenient.
That's how Apple got the music industry on-board, and it would offer a great story to the movie studios, who are constantly worried that the higher and higher quality formats mean they're "giving away their masters". Instead, people may be very willing to buy lower quality copies as long as it's extremely convenient.
syklee26
Sep 6, 02:15 PM
i know this is off topic but are they ever gonna do anything about the outrageous cost of .Mac subscription?
macAllen
Jun 22, 10:04 PM
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/80/211502142_db3000b150.jpg?v=0
digitalnicotine
Nov 27, 11:59 AM
It was my annual Black Friday "Buy a ton of video games" day today. Most of them on sale quite a lot, so it worked out nicely. I got 6 really awesome games for just over $100....
Nice! Don't forget to look out a window once in a while. ;)
Nice! Don't forget to look out a window once in a while. ;)
tingly
Jan 13, 02:58 PM
The only reason i can see it being called Air is because its all wireless....i.e. it connects to its Docking station wirelessly via Ultrawideband wireless USB (which would also connect the External Optical), Wi-Fi, Bluetooth etc
I still call BS though.
That's along the lines of what I was thinking, a macbook without ethernet or phone jacks, can only get on the net via airport, for thinnesseseseses sake.
I still call BS though.
That's along the lines of what I was thinking, a macbook without ethernet or phone jacks, can only get on the net via airport, for thinnesseseseses sake.
KnightWRX
Apr 11, 06:12 AM
double.
donfishinghocke
Jan 10, 12:11 PM
My 2010 Evo X. Soo fast, and so fun!
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4032/4711634981_96255bab85_b.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4032/4712302914_e3b47c2054_b.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4032/4711634981_96255bab85_b.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4032/4712302914_e3b47c2054_b.jpg
SeaFox
Dec 28, 12:38 AM
Your the one who said a TV wouldn�t even work as a monitor.
Uh, I said no such thing. Feel free to quote the sentence where I said that.
Back on post 127 (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=3185268&postcount=127) of this thread you said:
"Ok, I don�t know what a slingbox is� and I thought it was going to stream or operate like a TiVo, where it downloads while you are asleep, so it would need a harddrive."
The point is it is going to stream, but not over the internet, it's going to stream from your Macs on your home network (Airport or otherwise), and TiVo doesn't download anything while you sleep, except an interactive TV guide.
Here's the homepage (http://www.slingmedia.com/indexa.php) of Slingbox's makers. A Slingbox is made to transmit a signal from a digital cable or satellite receiver over the internet, and allow a person to control the receiver. This would allow you to watch your service anywhere conceivably.
then you said:
"Also, I�m not sure what you mean by TV? Do you mean a CRT with an aspect of 4:3? And, I would assume you don�t mean a flat panel LCD or Plasma, which now outsells tube tvs? A small HD plasma is 42�� and cost about $1000. I just got a Panny 9UK HD Plasma and it works quite will with a mac mini."
Why would you assume I don't mean a Plasma or LCD? They are types of TV's as well. I don't have n HDTV but if I did I would probably get a tube-based HDTV because of the lower cost and better picture (less image ghosting, better color). Plus you stated Plasma and LCD TV's outsell tube-based, which I don't believe. Sounds like a line the TV salesmen gave you.
You consistently rearrange some of my post where I�m just speculating. And at the same time you avoid my main points.
I don't rearrange anything. I separate your posts into separate thoughts. I did split ONE sentence on the last reply. Each portion of your replies appear in the same order they did in your original post. Yes, I have cut material out, but the purpose of quoting a previous post isn't to repeat it in it's entirety.
I also realize by streaming a movie we would just be renting it, but as a BluRay cost $1000, and if iTV is significantly less to watch the same movie in HD, this would be a reasonable solution. You also said you were waiting for the battle to be settled and that�s consistent to what I was pointing out that HD iTV would have a niche.
Except Apple doesn't offer movies in HD. HD is still a niche itself until there is wider adoption of HD sets. It's a chicken and the egg problem. There's no rush to buy an HD set untill there is lots of exclusive programming for HDTV owners. But there will be little if any programming available in HD that is not available in SD as well untill more people buy HD sets, because advertisers want their message getting in front of as many eyes as possible. There's a reason cablecos only offer a dozen or so stations of HD out of the 250+ channels they offer.
The price of HD-DVD and BluRay players both will fall soon. Just as the price of HDTV's is going to fall through the floor in the U.S. after analog broadcasting gets pulled in 2009. Digital TV (and by extension, HD) will no longer be a luxury service for the wealthy.
You could also buy a PS3, a BluRay player for as low as $600. :D
Uh, I said no such thing. Feel free to quote the sentence where I said that.
Back on post 127 (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=3185268&postcount=127) of this thread you said:
"Ok, I don�t know what a slingbox is� and I thought it was going to stream or operate like a TiVo, where it downloads while you are asleep, so it would need a harddrive."
The point is it is going to stream, but not over the internet, it's going to stream from your Macs on your home network (Airport or otherwise), and TiVo doesn't download anything while you sleep, except an interactive TV guide.
Here's the homepage (http://www.slingmedia.com/indexa.php) of Slingbox's makers. A Slingbox is made to transmit a signal from a digital cable or satellite receiver over the internet, and allow a person to control the receiver. This would allow you to watch your service anywhere conceivably.
then you said:
"Also, I�m not sure what you mean by TV? Do you mean a CRT with an aspect of 4:3? And, I would assume you don�t mean a flat panel LCD or Plasma, which now outsells tube tvs? A small HD plasma is 42�� and cost about $1000. I just got a Panny 9UK HD Plasma and it works quite will with a mac mini."
Why would you assume I don't mean a Plasma or LCD? They are types of TV's as well. I don't have n HDTV but if I did I would probably get a tube-based HDTV because of the lower cost and better picture (less image ghosting, better color). Plus you stated Plasma and LCD TV's outsell tube-based, which I don't believe. Sounds like a line the TV salesmen gave you.
You consistently rearrange some of my post where I�m just speculating. And at the same time you avoid my main points.
I don't rearrange anything. I separate your posts into separate thoughts. I did split ONE sentence on the last reply. Each portion of your replies appear in the same order they did in your original post. Yes, I have cut material out, but the purpose of quoting a previous post isn't to repeat it in it's entirety.
I also realize by streaming a movie we would just be renting it, but as a BluRay cost $1000, and if iTV is significantly less to watch the same movie in HD, this would be a reasonable solution. You also said you were waiting for the battle to be settled and that�s consistent to what I was pointing out that HD iTV would have a niche.
Except Apple doesn't offer movies in HD. HD is still a niche itself until there is wider adoption of HD sets. It's a chicken and the egg problem. There's no rush to buy an HD set untill there is lots of exclusive programming for HDTV owners. But there will be little if any programming available in HD that is not available in SD as well untill more people buy HD sets, because advertisers want their message getting in front of as many eyes as possible. There's a reason cablecos only offer a dozen or so stations of HD out of the 250+ channels they offer.
The price of HD-DVD and BluRay players both will fall soon. Just as the price of HDTV's is going to fall through the floor in the U.S. after analog broadcasting gets pulled in 2009. Digital TV (and by extension, HD) will no longer be a luxury service for the wealthy.
You could also buy a PS3, a BluRay player for as low as $600. :D
maclaptop
Apr 9, 11:46 PM
I've never owned an automatic. I'm addicted to driving a sports car with a manual gearbox.
After owning several I simply cannot imagine anything else. I enjoy driving too much to drive an automatic sedan.
After owning several I simply cannot imagine anything else. I enjoy driving too much to drive an automatic sedan.
Tomorrow
Mar 1, 04:51 PM
That may be true of the huge American diesel truck engines, but go examine a new VW, BMW or Mercedes diesel and you'll see that this is just not the case anymore.
That could be true, but I can't verify it - simply because I don't really see any of those around here....
You can barely even smell the exhaust - if at all - even from the new truck engines with DPFs.
...This, on the other hand, has not been my experience at all.
I live out in the country (horse and cattle farms), and about half the pickups out here are 3/4 ton and 1 ton diesels, mostly Chevys and Fords. Following one down the highway it's hard to hear them, but if you're behind one you can damn sure smell it - and yes, I'm talking about the new ones, too.
Caveat - you specifically mentioned a Dodge, and I don't recall seeing (or smelling) any of those around here lately.
That could be true, but I can't verify it - simply because I don't really see any of those around here....
You can barely even smell the exhaust - if at all - even from the new truck engines with DPFs.
...This, on the other hand, has not been my experience at all.
I live out in the country (horse and cattle farms), and about half the pickups out here are 3/4 ton and 1 ton diesels, mostly Chevys and Fords. Following one down the highway it's hard to hear them, but if you're behind one you can damn sure smell it - and yes, I'm talking about the new ones, too.
Caveat - you specifically mentioned a Dodge, and I don't recall seeing (or smelling) any of those around here lately.
zwida
Sep 6, 07:52 PM
It's too bad that these Hollywood execs will not let Apple handle how movies will be distributed.
Apple will win them over, I suspect. Or rather, the dollar signs in their own eyes will win them over.
That is, if it works (which I guess I have to believe it will).
Apple will win them over, I suspect. Or rather, the dollar signs in their own eyes will win them over.
That is, if it works (which I guess I have to believe it will).
r.j.s
Apr 27, 10:00 AM
"App Store" is a trademarked name of a particular store. "appstore," or "app store" in generic terms and context is a description of a particular thing. How hard is it for these companies to understand that that's possible? Just the same as "Windows" vs. "windows." Actually, I think they do get it, but they don't want "App Store" associated only w/ Apple so they can jump on the bandwagon and (continue to try to) confuse consumers.
However, using the term app store to relate to any type of software market will lead to confusion between generic app stores and Apple's App Store - which makes it a trademark violation.
No one is going to confuse MS Windows with the windows in your house.
However, using the term app store to relate to any type of software market will lead to confusion between generic app stores and Apple's App Store - which makes it a trademark violation.
No one is going to confuse MS Windows with the windows in your house.
skiltrip
Oct 11, 08:37 PM
I just received the Belkin Grip Vue (Tint) from belkin.com. It's structurally exactly the same as the Grip Vue cases from Best Buy, without the extremely bright and obnoxious colors. The (Tint) is translucent, so you can see your iPod logo thru the back. But it's slightly frosted on the inside, so you get NO watermarking, and it makes the back look really nice. I got the black one, which is basically a really dark smoke color. Really subtle and nice case.
One very noticeable improvement over the Best Buy Grip Vues is that the volume buttons are way easier to press. I have been using my Best Buy Grip Vue for a week, and the buttons have broken in a little and have become easier. But the buttons on the Grip Vue (Tint) right out of the box are easier to press. Maybe the clearer material is just inherently a little bit softer.
One very noticeable improvement over the Best Buy Grip Vues is that the volume buttons are way easier to press. I have been using my Best Buy Grip Vue for a week, and the buttons have broken in a little and have become easier. But the buttons on the Grip Vue (Tint) right out of the box are easier to press. Maybe the clearer material is just inherently a little bit softer.
SciFrog
Nov 19, 06:16 AM
5 here at home, although the mac pro must use as much power as the four other combined...
CdnBook
Apr 12, 10:19 PM
Super stoked!! Very much looking forward to this!
Baseline
Nov 15, 08:41 AM
seriously though, how hard is it to get a program to multi-thread? (if thats the right term; being a complete programming novice, i've no idea)
That really depends on the program, on how "parallelizable" the application is.
The simplest way to think of it is like this: Let's say you have a program that first has to calculate A. Then, when it's done that, it uses the result of A to calculate B. Then, when it's done that, uses the result of B to calculate C, then C to D, and so on. That's a *serial* problem there. The calculation of B can't begin until A is done, so it doesn't matter how many processors you have running, all computation is held up on one spot.
On the other hand, let's say you have an application that needs to calculate A, B, C and D, but those four values are not dependent on each other at all. In that case, you can use four processors at the same time, to calculate all four values at the same time.
Think of it like baking a cake. You can't start putting on the icing until the cake is done baking. And you can't start baking the cake until the ingredients are all mixed together. But you can have people simultaneously getting out and measuring the ingredients.
So that problem is partially parallelizable, but the majority of its workload is a serial process.
Some software applications, just by their very nature, will never be able to do anything useful with multiple processors.
That really depends on the program, on how "parallelizable" the application is.
The simplest way to think of it is like this: Let's say you have a program that first has to calculate A. Then, when it's done that, it uses the result of A to calculate B. Then, when it's done that, uses the result of B to calculate C, then C to D, and so on. That's a *serial* problem there. The calculation of B can't begin until A is done, so it doesn't matter how many processors you have running, all computation is held up on one spot.
On the other hand, let's say you have an application that needs to calculate A, B, C and D, but those four values are not dependent on each other at all. In that case, you can use four processors at the same time, to calculate all four values at the same time.
Think of it like baking a cake. You can't start putting on the icing until the cake is done baking. And you can't start baking the cake until the ingredients are all mixed together. But you can have people simultaneously getting out and measuring the ingredients.
So that problem is partially parallelizable, but the majority of its workload is a serial process.
Some software applications, just by their very nature, will never be able to do anything useful with multiple processors.
LagunaSol
Apr 26, 08:58 PM
It's already been done.
OpenOffice
Nice try. How about a commercial, for-profit app?
Good luck with your search.
OpenOffice
Nice try. How about a commercial, for-profit app?
Good luck with your search.
rasmasyean
Mar 28, 11:29 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
You are very selective with your figures- both the French and Italians also have carriers in position, the US didn't send all but two of the missiles. The French sent the first planes in and as far as I know are the only nation to have engaged Libyan planes.
Like I said, about 50% of the planes involved are US. Which makes sense as the US has a bigger airforce than France/UK (and the rest of the coalition) which is what you would expect from a country with many more people!
Perhaps it us you that doesnt like the fact that the US isn't the only real player here? The US, France or UK could do this whole thing alone- it isn't that big an operation! Or perhaps, as firestarter points out, you don't like the idea of US working as NATO currently headed by a Canadian?
This is a true coalition with all sorts of countires involved, and we should be happy about that.
All I'm saying is that behind the scenes when you look at the facts, there's a different story and you can't take everything at face value...and you should know that about politicians too. I think some of you are "glad" that it's finally not purely lead by the US and this is like some "dream team" thing. But I'm just afraid that you are just in denial. :cool:
You are very selective with your figures- both the French and Italians also have carriers in position, the US didn't send all but two of the missiles. The French sent the first planes in and as far as I know are the only nation to have engaged Libyan planes.
Like I said, about 50% of the planes involved are US. Which makes sense as the US has a bigger airforce than France/UK (and the rest of the coalition) which is what you would expect from a country with many more people!
Perhaps it us you that doesnt like the fact that the US isn't the only real player here? The US, France or UK could do this whole thing alone- it isn't that big an operation! Or perhaps, as firestarter points out, you don't like the idea of US working as NATO currently headed by a Canadian?
This is a true coalition with all sorts of countires involved, and we should be happy about that.
All I'm saying is that behind the scenes when you look at the facts, there's a different story and you can't take everything at face value...and you should know that about politicians too. I think some of you are "glad" that it's finally not purely lead by the US and this is like some "dream team" thing. But I'm just afraid that you are just in denial. :cool:
No comments:
Post a Comment