gugy
Nov 27, 01:49 PM
20" is the new 17", duh. :cool:
yeah, I agree.
17 is so small.
well if it costs $300, why not?
yeah, I agree.
17 is so small.
well if it costs $300, why not?
SMM
Nov 15, 12:48 PM
The negative for me is the tiny caveat at the bottom of the article. Apple releasing 8-core Mac Pros this month? Highly doubtful, in my opinion.
Also, negative sometimes just means you don't believe it (as in this case) not that it's a "negative" announcement.
Thanks for the clarification. Is there a written document on how rating criteria should be applied? If not, and each person decides what criteria they will use, then the rating really does not mean much. Maybe it does not anyway? I was thinking it was a non-scientific barometer of how people perceived the technology.
Also, negative sometimes just means you don't believe it (as in this case) not that it's a "negative" announcement.
Thanks for the clarification. Is there a written document on how rating criteria should be applied? If not, and each person decides what criteria they will use, then the rating really does not mean much. Maybe it does not anyway? I was thinking it was a non-scientific barometer of how people perceived the technology.
Blasphemic
Jan 7, 05:26 AM
Yes, it's a Vauxhall Corsa. Brilliant car to start in, never broken down either. Except I did brake the hand-break once :D Pulled it to hard I think, had to park the car in gear over night.
yea starts everytime =)
The electronics on the other hand is acting abit up so when i brake or use the indicators the fog lights come on in the dashboard, but its those little things that make it so special :P
yea starts everytime =)
The electronics on the other hand is acting abit up so when i brake or use the indicators the fog lights come on in the dashboard, but its those little things that make it so special :P
rasmasyean
Mar 19, 04:56 PM
(Jesus,BBC reporting septics have fired 110 Tomahawks already at $1 million each,Raytheon shares will be on the up soon).
Damn those bastards! That batch cost the Americans 35 cents each! (110/308)
Oh well, at least the rich ones can make it up at Ratheon's next dividend payout. :D
Damn those bastards! That batch cost the Americans 35 cents each! (110/308)
Oh well, at least the rich ones can make it up at Ratheon's next dividend payout. :D
adroit
Nov 15, 11:25 AM
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.
This is true, but there are still many many ways to optimize the multi-core processor that's not currently being use.
For example, I am waiting for a program to compile right now. Although I have a dual core on my computer, the compiler only compile one file at a time and usually takes about 10 min to do a full compile . If I have an 8 core computer with a multi-threaded compiler then I can cut the total time to jsut over a min + couple of seconds for linking time.
I think the main problem with muti-threading program is that it is difficult to implement, especially for coders who only knows high-level languages. Muti-threading in low-level program such as C is not easy but at least it is straight-forward. But trying to muti-thread high-level language such as VB or C# can get you into a big headace since everything is abstracted from the programmer. To do that, you need to get into unsafe code and call a bunch of DLLs, and it's easy to get memory leaks. Basically it can start to get very complicated, very quickly.
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.
This is true, but there are still many many ways to optimize the multi-core processor that's not currently being use.
For example, I am waiting for a program to compile right now. Although I have a dual core on my computer, the compiler only compile one file at a time and usually takes about 10 min to do a full compile . If I have an 8 core computer with a multi-threaded compiler then I can cut the total time to jsut over a min + couple of seconds for linking time.
I think the main problem with muti-threading program is that it is difficult to implement, especially for coders who only knows high-level languages. Muti-threading in low-level program such as C is not easy but at least it is straight-forward. But trying to muti-thread high-level language such as VB or C# can get you into a big headace since everything is abstracted from the programmer. To do that, you need to get into unsafe code and call a bunch of DLLs, and it's easy to get memory leaks. Basically it can start to get very complicated, very quickly.
iLucas
Apr 14, 09:12 AM
I have drove stick since i was 16. I had an automactic for 3 months after i got my license then bought a stick shift mitsubishi eclipse. Have drove it since. I am now 18 years old
ImAlwaysRight
Aug 29, 10:06 AM
... with Yonah they can make them cheaper again.Good observation. Would be nice to see the price point on the Mini come back down to starting at $499.
Why is everyone so hung up on Merom?
Perhaps they were daydreaming during economics class. :rolleyes:
READ MY LIPS: Merom will not appear in the MacBook or Mini during 2006.
Why is everyone so hung up on Merom?
Perhaps they were daydreaming during economics class. :rolleyes:
READ MY LIPS: Merom will not appear in the MacBook or Mini during 2006.
Fukui
Mar 26, 04:25 PM
Yes, Apple made this browser before M$ IE was pulled, but it was obvious that M$ would be pulling it long before they announced it. With the integratioin of IE into windows it was only a matter of time and if Apple had waited until the announcement they would have been so far behind that the mainstream would have suffered. Safari is just now getting up to speed on its accessability to most web pages- and I even still have major accessability problems with some financial pages and registering at some other types of pages. Most people don't know about the alternative browsers out there such as Mozilla, etc. so it would have proved devestating to Apple had they not been on the ball with Safari. They just know netscape, IE and now safari. I think iMac-Japan's comment on this particular issue is partly true as is your Calebj14.
I don't think MS dropping IE was because of Apple's market share.
Its more to do with longhorn and the mixing of web api's and desktop api's
(.NET) so that there is no distinction between an application that runs on the web (IE) or run from your desktop, thats why its canceled further development for Windows XP and lower.
In longhorn, the Api's that you use for displaying web pages (java say goodbye) are the same ones that are bolted ONLY TO LONGHORN. To continue MSIE development on mac wouldn't work because then mac has all the same Api's as Longhorn, and MS wouldn't want that...besides, MSIE was more of a gesture than anything else, since it never supported activeX wich was the only real major reason for needing IE6...
I don't think MS dropping IE was because of Apple's market share.
Its more to do with longhorn and the mixing of web api's and desktop api's
(.NET) so that there is no distinction between an application that runs on the web (IE) or run from your desktop, thats why its canceled further development for Windows XP and lower.
In longhorn, the Api's that you use for displaying web pages (java say goodbye) are the same ones that are bolted ONLY TO LONGHORN. To continue MSIE development on mac wouldn't work because then mac has all the same Api's as Longhorn, and MS wouldn't want that...besides, MSIE was more of a gesture than anything else, since it never supported activeX wich was the only real major reason for needing IE6...
bigmc6000
Jul 18, 08:02 AM
I think it'd be a good idea. What most people in here seem to forget about is that there are millions of people who don't have DVD burners, much less DL DVD burners. Also, if the quality gets much more than 480p we're talking about quite a few older computers not being able to play it back very well. I think my 1.5GHz Powerbook is technically (according to apple) limited at 480p so if there's any slow down or jerkiness to get it to 720p I'm not a big fan of that.
I think rental is a good idea - I've gone to blockbuster a few times and I've even watched some films from my cable company just because I didn't feel like going to blockbuster. But if they can make the price good (1.99 or 2.99 tops) it'd still be cheaper than either of the options I just listed and it'd be whole lot easier to do it.
I like download to buy for music but I'm with a lot of people on here in that if I want to own a movie I'll just go to target the day it's released and get it for $16.
One more thing - you don't want Steve to win this round because the studios would require an absurd pricing model. Look at the universal store - 29.99 for new releases?!?! If you want the DVD just go to Walmart or Target etc and get it way below MSRP otherwise the movie companies are going to make apple do what the retails do - take a loss on every single one sold and I really don't think Steve would be down with that...
I think rental is a good idea - I've gone to blockbuster a few times and I've even watched some films from my cable company just because I didn't feel like going to blockbuster. But if they can make the price good (1.99 or 2.99 tops) it'd still be cheaper than either of the options I just listed and it'd be whole lot easier to do it.
I like download to buy for music but I'm with a lot of people on here in that if I want to own a movie I'll just go to target the day it's released and get it for $16.
One more thing - you don't want Steve to win this round because the studios would require an absurd pricing model. Look at the universal store - 29.99 for new releases?!?! If you want the DVD just go to Walmart or Target etc and get it way below MSRP otherwise the movie companies are going to make apple do what the retails do - take a loss on every single one sold and I really don't think Steve would be down with that...
Changen
Feb 23, 05:35 PM
Yeah im working on the mess my gf kind of took over the office and ironicy is the messy one of the two of us. I got both of those imacs from my father when I bought the house both of them are filled with music but other than that they just sit.
netdog
Aug 25, 06:38 AM
I don't think we are going to see Core Duos in Apples for much longer, though it is possible that the base Mini will offer a Core Duo, and the better model a Core 2 Duo.
Still, I think it much more likely that with this revision, both Minis will sport Core 2 Duos, probably Meroms to keep them quiet and lower-powered, and will feature the 965 graphics chipset which frankly is a very nice and inexpenisve graphics solution.
What I am really hoping is that there will be an add-on base module in a similar form factor to turn any Mini into a full-blown HD/Audio media centre. Now that could really be exciting. While Tivos and Sky+ boxes are welcome in my home, we are just aching for someone to really rethink the entire home media experience. I'd love to see Apple take a shot at that.
Still, I think it much more likely that with this revision, both Minis will sport Core 2 Duos, probably Meroms to keep them quiet and lower-powered, and will feature the 965 graphics chipset which frankly is a very nice and inexpenisve graphics solution.
What I am really hoping is that there will be an add-on base module in a similar form factor to turn any Mini into a full-blown HD/Audio media centre. Now that could really be exciting. While Tivos and Sky+ boxes are welcome in my home, we are just aching for someone to really rethink the entire home media experience. I'd love to see Apple take a shot at that.
carmenodie
Apr 19, 11:15 AM
the 27 imac is a beast!!!!!
God I wish I had the money to get it.
God I wish I had the money to get it.
michaelrjohnson
Aug 6, 10:16 PM
Yeah, I'll be taking my lunch at noon (Central)... Maaaybe, just Maaaaybe I might be late getting back to work. ;)
On another note, I'm as excited about WWDC as the next member, but all these threads are starting to sound the same! :rolleyes::)
On another note, I'm as excited about WWDC as the next member, but all these threads are starting to sound the same! :rolleyes::)
Trauma1
Apr 21, 11:24 AM
The people who are truly concerned about their privacy, for whatever reason that may be, know that this issue pales in comparison to everything else.
apb3
Aug 18, 07:42 PM
I wish they would make wireless ipods soon. But I just dont think that it's gonna happen.
You can guess my feelings on this from the above discusssion but why do you want the wireless? I have seen one (maybe two) ideas that caught my eye; but not enough too change my opinion on the negative cost/benefit impact including wireless as envisioned by many here would have on my beloved device. I'm just curious as to your possible ideas or is it just cuz wireless is the latest buzzword - regardless whether it is actually useful, beneficial, effective, having a positive impact on the device in question?
So, why do you "...wish that they would make wireless iPods soon,"? What would you like to see in particular, why and how would it work technically?
I know I'm new here and I must seem a negative ass, but I just don't get why many of you would want this, let alone be frothing at the mouth. Do you not see the negatives (or, if not "negatives," at least the redundancy, bloat, PR Hype to get a few extra bucks out of you for something IMO not really worth it, etc? See my voluminous comments above). I really do love apple and it's all I really use when posible in my line of work (that must sound like the "I have black friends," line but it's true in this case). When I'm home, I won't even allow my wife's lab PC to sound the startup/shutdown chime. It's muted or it goes out the window...:D
I've even made inroads with one of the most resistant to change institutions as noted above and an SOB CO who at first laughed at apple then nearly shite himself when I presented a REAL analysis of apple's price/security/abilities/etc benefits vs the crap PCs we're forced to use backed up by my real world work product that he had praised to no end, had officially commmended me for in the past and had no clue the praise was due to the fact that I was skirting the current sec reqs by using my own machines and apps (apple) to blow him and others away at briefings.
Anyway, would you mind sharing why you want it so bad as I asked above?
You can guess my feelings on this from the above discusssion but why do you want the wireless? I have seen one (maybe two) ideas that caught my eye; but not enough too change my opinion on the negative cost/benefit impact including wireless as envisioned by many here would have on my beloved device. I'm just curious as to your possible ideas or is it just cuz wireless is the latest buzzword - regardless whether it is actually useful, beneficial, effective, having a positive impact on the device in question?
So, why do you "...wish that they would make wireless iPods soon,"? What would you like to see in particular, why and how would it work technically?
I know I'm new here and I must seem a negative ass, but I just don't get why many of you would want this, let alone be frothing at the mouth. Do you not see the negatives (or, if not "negatives," at least the redundancy, bloat, PR Hype to get a few extra bucks out of you for something IMO not really worth it, etc? See my voluminous comments above). I really do love apple and it's all I really use when posible in my line of work (that must sound like the "I have black friends," line but it's true in this case). When I'm home, I won't even allow my wife's lab PC to sound the startup/shutdown chime. It's muted or it goes out the window...:D
I've even made inroads with one of the most resistant to change institutions as noted above and an SOB CO who at first laughed at apple then nearly shite himself when I presented a REAL analysis of apple's price/security/abilities/etc benefits vs the crap PCs we're forced to use backed up by my real world work product that he had praised to no end, had officially commmended me for in the past and had no clue the praise was due to the fact that I was skirting the current sec reqs by using my own machines and apps (apple) to blow him and others away at briefings.
Anyway, would you mind sharing why you want it so bad as I asked above?
MacinDoc
Jan 12, 01:10 PM
Why do some posters have problems with a consumer notebook having an Alu finish? Is the iMac not a consumer product?
Michaelgtrusa
Mar 21, 10:54 PM
You should check out Alex Jones. http://www.youtube.com/user/TheAlexJonesChannel#p/u/0/aAabLYys72A
He's spot on.
He's spot on.
DavidLeblond
Sep 1, 12:55 PM
if this turns out to be true, here's my prediction on the pricing:
17" is stripped down and relegated to "emac" status and sells at a $999 price point
20" sells for $1299 or $1399
23" sells for $1699 or MAYBE $1799 at the most
Wishful thinking (both yours and mine).
Not gonna happen.
17" is stripped down and relegated to "emac" status and sells at a $999 price point
20" sells for $1299 or $1399
23" sells for $1699 or MAYBE $1799 at the most
Wishful thinking (both yours and mine).
Not gonna happen.
macidiot
Jul 19, 04:15 PM
Wait till next quarter when the MacPro line-up comes out and new iPods etc..
hob
Aug 6, 09:09 PM
Oh my
it's like christmas come early
infact it's better
christmas sucks, and it's cold
WWDC is my favourite holiday :p
it's like christmas come early
infact it's better
christmas sucks, and it's cold
WWDC is my favourite holiday :p
VyseTheLegend
Sep 14, 09:33 PM
NYC-- there are 6 of them I went to and each sells different cases. Some more than others. Yes, it is dark purple. ;)
Which store in NYC? I've been looking for that dark blue/dark purple one.
Which store in NYC? I've been looking for that dark blue/dark purple one.
dextertangocci
Jul 14, 02:20 AM
HD-DVD all the way.
Why? It has worse specs than Blu-ray...
Why? It has worse specs than Blu-ray...
BlizzardBomb
Aug 29, 09:11 AM
Why is everyone so hung up on Merom?
I never expected the mini to go that way this year. Remember, the entire point of the mini is to be LOW COST.
The switch to Intel caused the price of the mini to jump $100. I would much rather see its processor lag behind a little bit if they can get that price back to $499.
Same thing with the Macbook, I'd rather see a $999 Macbook with the current chips than a $1,099 Macbook that keeps up with the Macbook Pro's chips.
Of course, there's nothing saying Apple will lower the prices but IF they do then I would be very happy to see the "old" Intel chips stay in those machines another 6 months. The first core chips are still VERY fast chips, it's the rest of the system (video card) that's holding things up now. I wonder how much extra benefit you'd even get from a Merom chip in a mini.
To cut the price of the Mini by $100, Apple better hope Intel are doing a "Half Price" cut which is extremely unlikely. How much would it hurt Apple to just double the height of the Mini and put a 1.83 GHz Conroe (Allendale) in there and a 3.5" Hard Drive? I'm pretty sure no-one would be whining about that. It would also get the price back down to $499 easy!
I never expected the mini to go that way this year. Remember, the entire point of the mini is to be LOW COST.
The switch to Intel caused the price of the mini to jump $100. I would much rather see its processor lag behind a little bit if they can get that price back to $499.
Same thing with the Macbook, I'd rather see a $999 Macbook with the current chips than a $1,099 Macbook that keeps up with the Macbook Pro's chips.
Of course, there's nothing saying Apple will lower the prices but IF they do then I would be very happy to see the "old" Intel chips stay in those machines another 6 months. The first core chips are still VERY fast chips, it's the rest of the system (video card) that's holding things up now. I wonder how much extra benefit you'd even get from a Merom chip in a mini.
To cut the price of the Mini by $100, Apple better hope Intel are doing a "Half Price" cut which is extremely unlikely. How much would it hurt Apple to just double the height of the Mini and put a 1.83 GHz Conroe (Allendale) in there and a 3.5" Hard Drive? I'm pretty sure no-one would be whining about that. It would also get the price back down to $499 easy!
lilcosco08
Mar 26, 10:31 PM
that's awfully nice of you.
Methinks you need yo get your head out of the clouds when it comes to hardcore gaming.
I'll agree that the future of casual games may be going in this direction, but core gamers will use this to supplement their gaming.
Come back when you can play gears, modern warfare or Uncharted and have the same or better tactile experience and I'll gladly eat my own words. Until then it's all a pipe dream.
You need a real dose of reality.
Not exactly true:
PS3 games running in 1080p
Fifa Street 3 = 1920x1080 (no AA)
Full Auto 2 (demo) = 1920x1080 (4x AA)
GT5 Prologue (demo) = 1080p mode is 1280x1080 (2xAA) in-game while the garage/pit/showrooms are 1920x1080 with no AA. 720p mode is 1280x720 (4xAA)
Marvel: Ultimate Alliance = 1280x720 & 1920x1080 (no AA)
MLB09: The Show = 1280x720 (2xAA) or 1920x1080 (no AA)
NBA07 (demo) = 1920x1080 (no AA)
NBA08 (demo) = 1920x1080 (no AA)
NBA Street Home court (screenshot) = 1920x1080 (no AA
Ridge Racer 7 (demo) = 1920x1080 (no AA)
Sacred 2: Fallen Angel = 1280x720 when sub-HD output selected, 1920x1080 for any HD output (no AA)
Virtua Tennis 3 = 1920x1080 (2x AA)
World Series Of Poker 2008 = 1920x1080 (2xAA)
there's probably a few more for the 360 - BUT, IMO resolution isn't the be all and end all of visuals, take the uncharted series, it isn't 1080p, but it's spectacular looking where as Sacred 2 looks like crap.
If Kinect wasn't the run away success it was, then yeah, I would have expected some announcement this or next e3 for the 360, but it looks like the Wii 2 will probably be announced first.
The PS3 will probably have some legs actually, as people get more and more used to the developer tools (as they are now) then we'll see more and more impressive titles graphically.
you make a good point, but to really excel at gaming, you can't have a jack of all trades device - look at the PSP for instance- great wee machine, but it was far too spread, functionality wise to be a great success. For this device to appeal to the core gamer it needs to be designed specifically for core gaming, as it is the now (and there's nothing wrong with it this way) it's for casual gamers or 'pick up for 5 mins' kinda games
>modern warfare 2
>hardcore gamer
OH WOW
Methinks you need yo get your head out of the clouds when it comes to hardcore gaming.
I'll agree that the future of casual games may be going in this direction, but core gamers will use this to supplement their gaming.
Come back when you can play gears, modern warfare or Uncharted and have the same or better tactile experience and I'll gladly eat my own words. Until then it's all a pipe dream.
You need a real dose of reality.
Not exactly true:
PS3 games running in 1080p
Fifa Street 3 = 1920x1080 (no AA)
Full Auto 2 (demo) = 1920x1080 (4x AA)
GT5 Prologue (demo) = 1080p mode is 1280x1080 (2xAA) in-game while the garage/pit/showrooms are 1920x1080 with no AA. 720p mode is 1280x720 (4xAA)
Marvel: Ultimate Alliance = 1280x720 & 1920x1080 (no AA)
MLB09: The Show = 1280x720 (2xAA) or 1920x1080 (no AA)
NBA07 (demo) = 1920x1080 (no AA)
NBA08 (demo) = 1920x1080 (no AA)
NBA Street Home court (screenshot) = 1920x1080 (no AA
Ridge Racer 7 (demo) = 1920x1080 (no AA)
Sacred 2: Fallen Angel = 1280x720 when sub-HD output selected, 1920x1080 for any HD output (no AA)
Virtua Tennis 3 = 1920x1080 (2x AA)
World Series Of Poker 2008 = 1920x1080 (2xAA)
there's probably a few more for the 360 - BUT, IMO resolution isn't the be all and end all of visuals, take the uncharted series, it isn't 1080p, but it's spectacular looking where as Sacred 2 looks like crap.
If Kinect wasn't the run away success it was, then yeah, I would have expected some announcement this or next e3 for the 360, but it looks like the Wii 2 will probably be announced first.
The PS3 will probably have some legs actually, as people get more and more used to the developer tools (as they are now) then we'll see more and more impressive titles graphically.
you make a good point, but to really excel at gaming, you can't have a jack of all trades device - look at the PSP for instance- great wee machine, but it was far too spread, functionality wise to be a great success. For this device to appeal to the core gamer it needs to be designed specifically for core gaming, as it is the now (and there's nothing wrong with it this way) it's for casual gamers or 'pick up for 5 mins' kinda games
>modern warfare 2
>hardcore gamer
OH WOW
No comments:
Post a Comment