JAT
Apr 20, 12:15 PM
Not at all. I'm only showing where Apple has done what they don't like being done to them. Only a die hard defends them at all cost.
No, only an irrational person defends them at all cost. A die hard is one who puts up with occasional mistakes in the products.
Did threads just get merged again? Because the last dozen posts are complete rehashes of earlier posts.
No, only an irrational person defends them at all cost. A die hard is one who puts up with occasional mistakes in the products.
Did threads just get merged again? Because the last dozen posts are complete rehashes of earlier posts.
fivepoint
Apr 28, 03:50 PM
I wonder what it would be like to go through life looking for racism around every corner? Constantly seeing the world in these glasses would have to be very tiresome and frustrating. Pretty sad really. People need to stop thinking about themselves and others as being members of groups, and start thinking of everyone as individuals. We're a society of individuals, we get our rights and our liberties as individuals, not because we're part of group A or group B.
If liberals would stop 'crying wolf' ('claiming racism') at every corner, we might actually take them seriously and help out when there's actual evidence.
If liberals would stop 'crying wolf' ('claiming racism') at every corner, we might actually take them seriously and help out when there's actual evidence.
iCrizzo
Mar 26, 10:55 AM
Bring on full screen!! :apple:
TeamMojo
Apr 7, 11:05 PM
Good for Apple. Best Buy is downright predatory. They often charge $30 for cables you can by elsewhere for $5 or less. And the whole new Fry's like winding checkout line is so lame. I do like to use Best Buy as an Amazon showroom.
QCassidy352
Aug 26, 07:20 PM
The only change is likely to be the cpu. The rest of the MBP will probably be kept the same and if you look at the yonah vs merom benchmarks at places like AnandTech, it probably isn't worth sending it back.
I'm sure the GPU will also be bumped, at the very least. The MBP will probably also see some things that the MB has like a user-removable hard drive and magnetic latch. The CPU and GPU alone make it worth getting the new one, IMO.
Also, I'll say it one last time (yea right) - the imac should not and will not get a mobile processor. It only got Yonah because there was no alternative. It had a real desktop processor when one was available on the PPC side (G5), and it will have a real desktop processor now that one is available on the intel side (Conroe). Leave merom for what it was meant for - laptops.
I'm sure the GPU will also be bumped, at the very least. The MBP will probably also see some things that the MB has like a user-removable hard drive and magnetic latch. The CPU and GPU alone make it worth getting the new one, IMO.
Also, I'll say it one last time (yea right) - the imac should not and will not get a mobile processor. It only got Yonah because there was no alternative. It had a real desktop processor when one was available on the PPC side (G5), and it will have a real desktop processor now that one is available on the intel side (Conroe). Leave merom for what it was meant for - laptops.
Chip NoVaMac
Apr 7, 11:05 PM
:mad:Best Buy told me today that they had them in but Apple would not let them sell them. I have been going for two weeks every other day and they finally tell me they have them and can't sell them. I hate this crap. I want my IPad 2.
Happened to my better half today as well... though not the part about Apple telling BB not to sell them... I thought it might be about commits, and he thought it might be stock piling for an ad... guess we might know the real reason....
Happened to my better half today as well... though not the part about Apple telling BB not to sell them... I thought it might be about commits, and he thought it might be stock piling for an ad... guess we might know the real reason....
stormj
Aug 11, 01:48 PM
What I gather would really make the iPhone something special:
Silver/Red iphone 4 Element
for iPhone 4g Bumper case
Buy for iphone 4 bumper,
6 kinds of colors umper case
Wholesale Soft case Bumper
For iphone 4 Pink plastic
iphone 4 Bumper pro series
Black/Red-iphone 4 Element
Black/Red-iphone 4 Element
Bumper Case For Apple iPhone 4
The Bumper is designed to
Silver/Pink-iphone 4 Aluminum
Magrathea
Apr 6, 11:23 PM
Close, but not quite right.
The Mercury Playback Engine is composed of 3 things:
1. 64 Bit Application
2. Multithreaded Application
3. Processing of some things using CUDA (an NVIDIA card)
If you don't have a CUDA based video card, you still have the Mercury Playback Engine (software) available. What you probably meant to say is that hardware acceleration for the Mercury Playback Engine is not available unless it's a CUDA card.
More info: http://blogs.adobe.com/premiereprotraining/2011/02/cuda-mercury-playback-engine-and-adobe-premiere-pro.html
Best,
Kevin
I can attest to mercury working on both my MBPs 2007 and mid 2008 (8gigs of ram) but add a fast color correction effect on AVCHD or 7D footage and you gotta render - machines grind to a halt, footage not playable at all. Transcode to Prores first and you're golden.
Of course most people will get newer quad core machines but laptop wise apple doesn't have a 1Gig CUDA card for any MBP right?
Also, I have seen tests for people with fancy Quattro 4300fx cards ($1500) NS 6 OR 8 core machines where they turn on and off the hardware acceleration and didn't see much of a difference not a 10x better / $1500 difference. Correct me if I'm wrong here.
The Mercury Playback Engine is composed of 3 things:
1. 64 Bit Application
2. Multithreaded Application
3. Processing of some things using CUDA (an NVIDIA card)
If you don't have a CUDA based video card, you still have the Mercury Playback Engine (software) available. What you probably meant to say is that hardware acceleration for the Mercury Playback Engine is not available unless it's a CUDA card.
More info: http://blogs.adobe.com/premiereprotraining/2011/02/cuda-mercury-playback-engine-and-adobe-premiere-pro.html
Best,
Kevin
I can attest to mercury working on both my MBPs 2007 and mid 2008 (8gigs of ram) but add a fast color correction effect on AVCHD or 7D footage and you gotta render - machines grind to a halt, footage not playable at all. Transcode to Prores first and you're golden.
Of course most people will get newer quad core machines but laptop wise apple doesn't have a 1Gig CUDA card for any MBP right?
Also, I have seen tests for people with fancy Quattro 4300fx cards ($1500) NS 6 OR 8 core machines where they turn on and off the hardware acceleration and didn't see much of a difference not a 10x better / $1500 difference. Correct me if I'm wrong here.
KnightWRX
Apr 6, 03:38 PM
Next Air will see a DRAMATIC speed improvement CPU wise and a minor decrease in GPU performance.
The GPU performance decrease is much more severe that you let on, and the improvement in CPU is rarely even used, as it sits in the idle loop most of the time as most applications are mostly i/o bound or simply sit there waiting for user input.
Also, let's not forget 2 other major points :
- VDA (Video Decode Acceleration) framework support : Intel 3000HD isn't supported, forget hardware accelerated decoding of Flash content in H.264. This has been a major lacking point on Apple's part since introducing the framework and getting rid of nVidia chipsets, they haven't yet announced any change to this framework which right now only supports the 9400m, the 9600m and the 320m.
- OpenCL. Big selling point for Snow Leopard, absent from most of their hardware line-up now. GG Apple.
The Air with the 320m right now supports both. The SB MBP 13" does not.
The main thing keeping me from wanting a MBA for software development is the 4GB RAM limit. If you're not running any virtual machines you'd probably do just fine with 4GB, but as soon as you need to run a Windows VM things will get painful (especially if you're running Visual Studio in it).
I run a Windows VM with 1 GB of dedicated memory and a Linux VM with 1.5 GB of dedicated memory. All while Xcode is open and doing something in every OS.
Seriously, software development is about the less ressource hungry task you can do on modern computers. Browsers use more system ressources nowadays than code editors/compilers/debuggers. :rolleyes:
The GPU performance decrease is much more severe that you let on, and the improvement in CPU is rarely even used, as it sits in the idle loop most of the time as most applications are mostly i/o bound or simply sit there waiting for user input.
Also, let's not forget 2 other major points :
- VDA (Video Decode Acceleration) framework support : Intel 3000HD isn't supported, forget hardware accelerated decoding of Flash content in H.264. This has been a major lacking point on Apple's part since introducing the framework and getting rid of nVidia chipsets, they haven't yet announced any change to this framework which right now only supports the 9400m, the 9600m and the 320m.
- OpenCL. Big selling point for Snow Leopard, absent from most of their hardware line-up now. GG Apple.
The Air with the 320m right now supports both. The SB MBP 13" does not.
The main thing keeping me from wanting a MBA for software development is the 4GB RAM limit. If you're not running any virtual machines you'd probably do just fine with 4GB, but as soon as you need to run a Windows VM things will get painful (especially if you're running Visual Studio in it).
I run a Windows VM with 1 GB of dedicated memory and a Linux VM with 1.5 GB of dedicated memory. All while Xcode is open and doing something in every OS.
Seriously, software development is about the less ressource hungry task you can do on modern computers. Browsers use more system ressources nowadays than code editors/compilers/debuggers. :rolleyes:
Hellhammer
Apr 6, 12:32 PM
I think most ppl here do not seem to realize the number 1 problem of MBA: overheating. I am the proud owner of a Rev. C MBA, which I would not exchange for anything else (especially the new models). The only problem I can complain abt is frequent overheating, which makes apps and the OS slow down consistently or (very rarely) even freeze.
I believe that the processor downgrading, as well as the elimination of backlit keys, are mostly in order to avoid such problem (as well as improve battery life). Otherwise, they would not make sense.
MBA is not MB Pro. If u want less weight/space, u must be willing to compromise.
Rev D. has no overheating issues. My CPU doesn't go over 70�C when watching 1080p Flash video in fullscreen. The fan sometimes kicks in but it's still very comfortable to use on your lap, since it's barely even warm. Older MBAs suffered from overheating, that is true.
I believe that the processor downgrading, as well as the elimination of backlit keys, are mostly in order to avoid such problem (as well as improve battery life). Otherwise, they would not make sense.
MBA is not MB Pro. If u want less weight/space, u must be willing to compromise.
Rev D. has no overheating issues. My CPU doesn't go over 70�C when watching 1080p Flash video in fullscreen. The fan sometimes kicks in but it's still very comfortable to use on your lap, since it's barely even warm. Older MBAs suffered from overheating, that is true.
epitaphic
Aug 18, 11:46 PM
So you think they put an extra processor in across the line just to be able to say they had a quad? Even the AnandTech article you used as a source showed here (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2816&p=18) that PS took advantage of quad cores in Rosetta
Yes under some specific results the quad was a bit faster than the dual. Though with the combo of Rosetta+Photoshop its unclear what is causing the difference. However, if you compare the vast majority of the benchmarks, there's negligible difference.
Concerning Photoshop specifically, as can be experienced on a quad G5, the performance increase is 15-20%. A future jump to 8-core would theoretically be in the 8% increase mark. Photoshop (CS2) simply cannot scale adequately beyond 2 cores, maybe that'll change in Spring 2007. Fingers crossed it does.
Your points about latency and FSB are not separate negatives as you have made them. They are redundant theoretical concerns with implications of unclear practical significance.
I beg to differ. If an app or game is memory intensive, faster memory access does matter. Barefeats (http://barefeats.com/quad09.html) has some benchmarks on dual channel vs quad channel on the Mac Pro. I'd personally like to see that benchmark with an added Conroe system. If dual to quad channel gave 16-25% improvement, imagine what 75% increase in actual bandwidth will do. Besides, I was merely addressing your statements that Woodcrest is faster because of its higher speed FSB and higher memory bus bandwidth.
I am not worried. Everything anyone has come up with on this issue are taken from that same AnandTech article. Until I see more real-world testing, I will not be convinced. Also, I expect that more pro apps such as PS will be able to utilize quad cores in the near future, if they aren't already doing so. Finally, even if Conroe is faster, Woodcrest is fast enough for me ;).
Anandtech, at the moment, is the only place with a quad xeon vs dual xeon benchmark. And yes, dual Woodcrest is fast enough, but is it cost effective compared to a single Woodcrest/Conroe? It seems that for the most part, Mac Pro users are paying for an extra chip but only really utilizing it when running several CPU intensive apps at the same time.
I think you misread that. They were comparing Core 2 Extreme (not Woodcrest) and Conroe to see whether the increased FSB of the former would make much difference.
You're absolutely right about that, its only measuring the improvement over increased FSB. If you take into account FB-DIMM's appalling efficiency, there should be no increase at all (if not decrease) for memory intensive apps.
One question I'd like to put out there, if Apple has had a quad core mac shipping for the past 8 months, why would it wait til intel quads to optimize the code for FCP? Surely they must have known for some time before that that they would release a quad core G5 so either optimizing FCP for quads is a real bastard or they've been sitting on it for no reason.
Yes under some specific results the quad was a bit faster than the dual. Though with the combo of Rosetta+Photoshop its unclear what is causing the difference. However, if you compare the vast majority of the benchmarks, there's negligible difference.
Concerning Photoshop specifically, as can be experienced on a quad G5, the performance increase is 15-20%. A future jump to 8-core would theoretically be in the 8% increase mark. Photoshop (CS2) simply cannot scale adequately beyond 2 cores, maybe that'll change in Spring 2007. Fingers crossed it does.
Your points about latency and FSB are not separate negatives as you have made them. They are redundant theoretical concerns with implications of unclear practical significance.
I beg to differ. If an app or game is memory intensive, faster memory access does matter. Barefeats (http://barefeats.com/quad09.html) has some benchmarks on dual channel vs quad channel on the Mac Pro. I'd personally like to see that benchmark with an added Conroe system. If dual to quad channel gave 16-25% improvement, imagine what 75% increase in actual bandwidth will do. Besides, I was merely addressing your statements that Woodcrest is faster because of its higher speed FSB and higher memory bus bandwidth.
I am not worried. Everything anyone has come up with on this issue are taken from that same AnandTech article. Until I see more real-world testing, I will not be convinced. Also, I expect that more pro apps such as PS will be able to utilize quad cores in the near future, if they aren't already doing so. Finally, even if Conroe is faster, Woodcrest is fast enough for me ;).
Anandtech, at the moment, is the only place with a quad xeon vs dual xeon benchmark. And yes, dual Woodcrest is fast enough, but is it cost effective compared to a single Woodcrest/Conroe? It seems that for the most part, Mac Pro users are paying for an extra chip but only really utilizing it when running several CPU intensive apps at the same time.
I think you misread that. They were comparing Core 2 Extreme (not Woodcrest) and Conroe to see whether the increased FSB of the former would make much difference.
You're absolutely right about that, its only measuring the improvement over increased FSB. If you take into account FB-DIMM's appalling efficiency, there should be no increase at all (if not decrease) for memory intensive apps.
One question I'd like to put out there, if Apple has had a quad core mac shipping for the past 8 months, why would it wait til intel quads to optimize the code for FCP? Surely they must have known for some time before that that they would release a quad core G5 so either optimizing FCP for quads is a real bastard or they've been sitting on it for no reason.
dukebound85
Aug 4, 10:17 PM
i thought this game was vaporware
~Shard~
Jul 14, 02:32 PM
My intention: to wait for 3Ghz+ Xeon, which sounds like it should only be a few months later. That's also time for a few little tweaks to be made if necessary, giving me something between a version A and version B machine.
That's a really good plan. Wait a few months, let the bugs get ironed out of the new Intel PowerMacs, and then buy something for the same price with better technology.
That's a really good plan. Wait a few months, let the bugs get ironed out of the new Intel PowerMacs, and then buy something for the same price with better technology.
ethana
Mar 22, 12:56 PM
Samsung.... good move. I think you are on the right track.
RIM. You're dead on arrival and loosing market share fast. Watch for an acquisition of these guys in the next 5 years.
RIM. You're dead on arrival and loosing market share fast. Watch for an acquisition of these guys in the next 5 years.
zacman
Apr 20, 03:46 AM
And the design was released after the iPhone was out.
No, it was shown at IFA 2006 for the first time but "officially presented" a few months later.
No, it was shown at IFA 2006 for the first time but "officially presented" a few months later.
mrholder
Apr 6, 04:37 PM
Was considering a Xoom, but purchased a brand new 1st gen iPad a couple of days ago through the Verizon sale. Couldn't resist the price. Plus, can't see spending money on new content for the Xoom when I have tons of content that I've purchased through itunes.
Durendal
Apr 5, 07:16 PM
YES!!! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eyqUj3PGHv4)
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhLHa5TgkdNVCOPQduxb9aFNJrt1pOwcUJR_add_uNLw1RIS89PYTCeIFXf6LDLc4LWwxPXZXZDKn9RZnaXJjib5V38OX1ja93fKeOamaGtzI4ruPU2pQ-922ciYLRDD3vx3GSTx0yV5i56/s400/wtf.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhLHa5TgkdNVCOPQduxb9aFNJrt1pOwcUJR_add_uNLw1RIS89PYTCeIFXf6LDLc4LWwxPXZXZDKn9RZnaXJjib5V38OX1ja93fKeOamaGtzI4ruPU2pQ-922ciYLRDD3vx3GSTx0yV5i56/s400/wtf.jpg
swingerofbirch
Aug 26, 07:39 PM
I hope they use Conroe in the iMac over Merom. Conroe is faster than Merom at cheaper prices. But it would mean more hardware tweaking that plopping a Merom in there.
iScott428
Mar 22, 01:37 PM
I would hardly consider any of these devices competition. The ecosystems that support these devices do not even come close to Apple's. Prices and specs are just trying to match the Ipad 2 but just like with any PC trying to match a Mac in performance or tech specs; you will not see the same or even close to the performance of the machine due to the software. Plus the Playbook has missed the train for businesses; show me a Corporate Executive with out an Ipad and I will show you an Executive on the way to retirement, bet they are the same person. :apple:
maelstromr
Apr 25, 03:18 PM
So an old post says apple is exploiting them and you imply I said that then? I said on numerous occasions clearly that this is not about Apple using this data. Interesting way to quote posts you have there:rolleyes:
Now I'm confused - YOU quote MY post replying to someone suggesting exactly that Apple is exploiting customers through this, and now I'm selectively quoting you?
Though I am skeptical, to say the least, of YOUR point as well, it's not nearly as ridiculous as the people who DO claim Apple is trying to get people.
Now I'm confused - YOU quote MY post replying to someone suggesting exactly that Apple is exploiting customers through this, and now I'm selectively quoting you?
Though I am skeptical, to say the least, of YOUR point as well, it's not nearly as ridiculous as the people who DO claim Apple is trying to get people.
rt_brained
Aug 11, 07:55 PM
Is Europe not a way bigger mobile phone market than the US anyway. I don't see why any technology company would alienate a huge sector of its market in this way. It will definitely be released in Europe too.
It will not be a flip phone, or a slide phone or any of those stupid ass gimmicky phones you use over there. It will be just a nano derivative I would say. It will be GSM, it will be quad band.
And coin-operated.
It will not be a flip phone, or a slide phone or any of those stupid ass gimmicky phones you use over there. It will be just a nano derivative I would say. It will be GSM, it will be quad band.
And coin-operated.
ccrandall77
Aug 11, 03:36 PM
You know as well as I do that has to do with the signal, not whether it is Code division or time division. If you claim differently, show me reputable references.
Uh, actually tower handoff has relatively little to do with signal... it's two totally different things.
Want a reference? Is the IEEE reputable enough for you?
http://www.ieee.or.com/Archive/diversity_in_3g/diversity_in_3g.pdf
Page 6: Why CDMA? Allows soft handoffs.
Enuff said.
Care to back up any of your assumptions with reputable references?
Uh, actually tower handoff has relatively little to do with signal... it's two totally different things.
Want a reference? Is the IEEE reputable enough for you?
http://www.ieee.or.com/Archive/diversity_in_3g/diversity_in_3g.pdf
Page 6: Why CDMA? Allows soft handoffs.
Enuff said.
Care to back up any of your assumptions with reputable references?
Lord Blackadder
Mar 22, 10:19 PM
The U.N. Security Council perhaps, but not the entire assembly. It would have been interesting to open that issue up to debate and seen how all the members would have voted.
The security council, not the general assembly, is the organ tasked with authorizing UN military action. The point of the security council is to enable the UN to make rapid strategic decisions without a general debate. It's an imperfect system to be sure, but I don't think requiring a full debate in the general assembly would be an efficient way to respond to this sort of situation.
What I always wonder is what diplomatic efforts were used to pressure Qaddafi? There were no (as far as I know) threats of economic embargoes, freezing of assets, or other less violent methods to coerce Qaddafi. We didn't need to convince him to step dow. We simply needed to convince him that he needed to tone down, defend himself against the armed insurrection, but not cast a wider and violent campaign against innocent civilians.
We could have responded simply with economic sanctions.
Based on Gaddafi's treatment of the initial protests (not to mention his tendencies over 40 years of autocratic rule), I strongly question whether economic sanctions are going to apply sufficient pressure to Gaddafi to relinquish power. Like Mubarak, he is a political strongman who is not easily cowed by threats.
I need a clearer demonstration that serious steps were taken before resorting to war. War should be used as the last resort and only when it's clear that all other options have failed.
I agree that war should be considered a last resort. I also think that the US government is generally too quick to undertake armed intervention. But in this case we took sides in a war that was already in progress. The UN's choices were either non-intervention, non-military intervention, or direct military intervention in some form.
I suppose the point at which "all other options have failed" is a debatable one, since everyone has different opinions on what constitutes a valid option. There are many questions without simple answers. How do we judge failure? Is the purpose of the intervention (military or otherwise) to aid the rebels? Or is it merely to prevent Gaddafi killing civilians? If the latter is the case, does allowing him to remain in power serve that cause? If not, what should we do about it?
At the bottom of all this though, the goal of current foreign intervention (military or otherwise) is clear to me - to remove Gaddafi from power and recognize the rebel transitional government as the legitimate government of Libya.
The security council, not the general assembly, is the organ tasked with authorizing UN military action. The point of the security council is to enable the UN to make rapid strategic decisions without a general debate. It's an imperfect system to be sure, but I don't think requiring a full debate in the general assembly would be an efficient way to respond to this sort of situation.
What I always wonder is what diplomatic efforts were used to pressure Qaddafi? There were no (as far as I know) threats of economic embargoes, freezing of assets, or other less violent methods to coerce Qaddafi. We didn't need to convince him to step dow. We simply needed to convince him that he needed to tone down, defend himself against the armed insurrection, but not cast a wider and violent campaign against innocent civilians.
We could have responded simply with economic sanctions.
Based on Gaddafi's treatment of the initial protests (not to mention his tendencies over 40 years of autocratic rule), I strongly question whether economic sanctions are going to apply sufficient pressure to Gaddafi to relinquish power. Like Mubarak, he is a political strongman who is not easily cowed by threats.
I need a clearer demonstration that serious steps were taken before resorting to war. War should be used as the last resort and only when it's clear that all other options have failed.
I agree that war should be considered a last resort. I also think that the US government is generally too quick to undertake armed intervention. But in this case we took sides in a war that was already in progress. The UN's choices were either non-intervention, non-military intervention, or direct military intervention in some form.
I suppose the point at which "all other options have failed" is a debatable one, since everyone has different opinions on what constitutes a valid option. There are many questions without simple answers. How do we judge failure? Is the purpose of the intervention (military or otherwise) to aid the rebels? Or is it merely to prevent Gaddafi killing civilians? If the latter is the case, does allowing him to remain in power serve that cause? If not, what should we do about it?
At the bottom of all this though, the goal of current foreign intervention (military or otherwise) is clear to me - to remove Gaddafi from power and recognize the rebel transitional government as the legitimate government of Libya.
~Shard~
Jul 14, 03:05 PM
Power Supply at the top is REALLY stupid.
I've never thought much of the relevance of its placement myself - why do you say that? Care to elaborate on why it is "REALLY stupid"?
I've never thought much of the relevance of its placement myself - why do you say that? Care to elaborate on why it is "REALLY stupid"?