limo
Aug 28, 10:35 AM
I have always had great support by Apple until my most recent incident. I needed a new LCD installed in a MacBook Pro. Their repair facility had my computer 20 days before the repair was completed. The CSR's kept telling me it should be ready in a day or two. Never an explanation why a part would take that long to get or anything. Just the same response every time.:mad:
ChrisA
Sep 13, 10:54 AM
Arrays of cheap RAM on a PCIe card?
The RAM companies don't seem interested in making wodges of slow cheap hi-cap ram, only in bumping up the speed and upping the capacity. For the last 10 years, a stick of decent RAM has always been about �100/ $100 no matter what the capacity / flavour of the moment is.
Even slow RAM is still orders of magnitude faster than a HD, hence my point. There's various historical and technical factors as to why we have the current situation.
I've also looked at RAID implementations (I run a RAID5) but each RAID level has its own problems.
I've recently seen that single-user RAID3 might be one way forward for the desktop, but don't really know enough about it yet.
The reason for the RAM improvoments in speed and size are that RAM (not CPU) is the main bottle neck in preformance. A CPU can only execute instructions as fast as they can be pulled out of RAM. Now you go and put multiple cores inthe box and the demand on RAM doubles.
As for RAID. I think the way forward is Sun's "ZFS" file system. There was talk of that moving into Mac OSX and we know it is being ported to BSD Unix and Linux. Basically ZFS makes the RAID layer just go away
Read more here...
http://www.sun.com/2004-0914/feature/index.html
Sun has released this as Open Source. so it will get ported around to other OSes. I hear Sun's Dtrace is already in Leopard
The RAM companies don't seem interested in making wodges of slow cheap hi-cap ram, only in bumping up the speed and upping the capacity. For the last 10 years, a stick of decent RAM has always been about �100/ $100 no matter what the capacity / flavour of the moment is.
Even slow RAM is still orders of magnitude faster than a HD, hence my point. There's various historical and technical factors as to why we have the current situation.
I've also looked at RAID implementations (I run a RAID5) but each RAID level has its own problems.
I've recently seen that single-user RAID3 might be one way forward for the desktop, but don't really know enough about it yet.
The reason for the RAM improvoments in speed and size are that RAM (not CPU) is the main bottle neck in preformance. A CPU can only execute instructions as fast as they can be pulled out of RAM. Now you go and put multiple cores inthe box and the demand on RAM doubles.
As for RAID. I think the way forward is Sun's "ZFS" file system. There was talk of that moving into Mac OSX and we know it is being ported to BSD Unix and Linux. Basically ZFS makes the RAID layer just go away
Read more here...
http://www.sun.com/2004-0914/feature/index.html
Sun has released this as Open Source. so it will get ported around to other OSes. I hear Sun's Dtrace is already in Leopard
skunk
Apr 27, 01:17 PM
(insert here where some smart-A responds with "slavery?" or something equally inapplicable)Me first! I'll do it!
Silentwave
Aug 17, 10:27 PM
I'll just wait until the 4GHZ Mac Pro. I wonder what that bad boy can do.:rolleyes:
I wonder if they'll even bother to go to 4GHz anytime soon. the roadmap is for more cores. We have on the roadmap DP and MP (>2 chips) capable Quad-core chips starting to come out by the end of this year/early next year. The next step is 8+ core chips. The next Xeon is Clovertown, which is just Woodcrest scaled to 4 cores with a few changes in clock and FSB etc. Tigerton comes next, also 4 cores but MP capable (3+ chips possible) and with a possibility of increased FSB speed, bigger L2 cache and so on. Its successor, Dunnington, will be a 45nm chip with between 4 and 32 cores depending on who you believe.
I wonder if they'll even bother to go to 4GHz anytime soon. the roadmap is for more cores. We have on the roadmap DP and MP (>2 chips) capable Quad-core chips starting to come out by the end of this year/early next year. The next step is 8+ core chips. The next Xeon is Clovertown, which is just Woodcrest scaled to 4 cores with a few changes in clock and FSB etc. Tigerton comes next, also 4 cores but MP capable (3+ chips possible) and with a possibility of increased FSB speed, bigger L2 cache and so on. Its successor, Dunnington, will be a 45nm chip with between 4 and 32 cores depending on who you believe.
mc68k
Dec 9, 01:06 AM
well turns out you win the delorean s2 in part of the game. so much for that epic purchase :(
one cool thing about this game is since im in front of screen a lot ive been listening to some good new music while playing. been getting back in the old zone. a lot of the old tracks are coming back to me. i can hit a lot of the corners from memory
the required oil change for all used cars sucks. i put in the code for my free car from pre order. got the nascar and the mclaren stealth. that car is even better than my fully tricked out F40! i tried it on a practice track and it felt much smoother.i almost feel liek its cheating with the SS racing tires. oh well it's still fun and if you miss a corner badly it's still your fault and you lose, so theres till some challenge there.
edit: looks like i cant sell the delorean. anyone want to trade?
one cool thing about this game is since im in front of screen a lot ive been listening to some good new music while playing. been getting back in the old zone. a lot of the old tracks are coming back to me. i can hit a lot of the corners from memory
the required oil change for all used cars sucks. i put in the code for my free car from pre order. got the nascar and the mclaren stealth. that car is even better than my fully tricked out F40! i tried it on a practice track and it felt much smoother.i almost feel liek its cheating with the SS racing tires. oh well it's still fun and if you miss a corner badly it's still your fault and you lose, so theres till some challenge there.
edit: looks like i cant sell the delorean. anyone want to trade?
davidcmc
Mar 22, 03:45 PM
Says the man who doesn't even own one.
I can assure that doubling the 256MB of the first iPad is not enough for people that need a lot of multitask, like me.
I don't need to own an iPad 2.
The competitors have 1GB RAM, iPad 2 has 512MB.
It's simple: Apple is always behind hardware-wise because they like to priorize esthetics and appearance (besides the "so wonderful OS" ad). It's been this way for Macs, it seems to be the same way for iPads.
Android phones are selling more than iPhone.
iPhone has started a market, competitors are improving it.
iPad has started a market, competitors are improving it.
If you just can't recognize how multitask works better with 1GB RAM and true background apps (QNX, Honeycomb), then you deserve to use a limited thing like an iPad.
I've only bought the first iPad because there were no competitors at that time (and I hate netbooks), but now things are different. To be honest, A LOT different.
People said that the iPhone was going to be the best phone out there, but the market is showing something different.
People say the iPad is the best tablet out there, but it seems that the market is going to show something different.
There are 2 sides: Apple fanboys and realistic people.
I like products, not brands.
I can assure that doubling the 256MB of the first iPad is not enough for people that need a lot of multitask, like me.
I don't need to own an iPad 2.
The competitors have 1GB RAM, iPad 2 has 512MB.
It's simple: Apple is always behind hardware-wise because they like to priorize esthetics and appearance (besides the "so wonderful OS" ad). It's been this way for Macs, it seems to be the same way for iPads.
Android phones are selling more than iPhone.
iPhone has started a market, competitors are improving it.
iPad has started a market, competitors are improving it.
If you just can't recognize how multitask works better with 1GB RAM and true background apps (QNX, Honeycomb), then you deserve to use a limited thing like an iPad.
I've only bought the first iPad because there were no competitors at that time (and I hate netbooks), but now things are different. To be honest, A LOT different.
People said that the iPhone was going to be the best phone out there, but the market is showing something different.
People say the iPad is the best tablet out there, but it seems that the market is going to show something different.
There are 2 sides: Apple fanboys and realistic people.
I like products, not brands.
iPhysicist
Apr 27, 08:48 AM
This is a lie
Keeping a database of our general location is logging our location. :mad: Does Apple really think this double talk, where they say they keep a database of location but don't log the location is going to fly?
At least our overlord will now, I hope, stop collecting location data when location services are turned off. It's a disgrace that it took a media storm to shame them into action.
Apple knows where you live ;) They go straight for your door if they want to deliver the "facepalm award" for stupid big-brother talk.
I really would like to know if you are just fooling me with a sort of sarcasm I can't understand since I am no native speaker...
...but then again I want my phone to know where it is actually - makes calls much easier and just possible.
:rolleyes:
Everyone knows how not lose his/her purse, so learn how you not lose your phone and your location is secure - until the surveillance cameras get you. But again there is help - just remember not to look into the cameras. Comes in handy during armed robberies too.
:rolleyes:
Keeping a database of our general location is logging our location. :mad: Does Apple really think this double talk, where they say they keep a database of location but don't log the location is going to fly?
At least our overlord will now, I hope, stop collecting location data when location services are turned off. It's a disgrace that it took a media storm to shame them into action.
Apple knows where you live ;) They go straight for your door if they want to deliver the "facepalm award" for stupid big-brother talk.
I really would like to know if you are just fooling me with a sort of sarcasm I can't understand since I am no native speaker...
...but then again I want my phone to know where it is actually - makes calls much easier and just possible.
:rolleyes:
Everyone knows how not lose his/her purse, so learn how you not lose your phone and your location is secure - until the surveillance cameras get you. But again there is help - just remember not to look into the cameras. Comes in handy during armed robberies too.
:rolleyes:
Blue Velvet
Mar 22, 11:40 PM
Right, because there can't be any other reason why Blue Velvet, or myself, might support military intervention in Libya, but not Iraq. They are exactly the same situation after all.
Although I backed the implementation of a no-fly zone a few weeks ago, I wouldn't describe my position as one of wholehearted support. More a queasy half-hearted recognition that something had to be done and that all alternatives lead to rabbit holes of some degree or another. When all is said and done, my usual fallback position is an intense weariness at the evil that men do.
For the record, I actually supported (if silence is considered consent) both Gulf wars at the start; I believed in the fictional WMD, I believed it when Colin Powell held his little vial up at the UN... but I, like many was tied down with work and other concerns and was only paying cursory attention to the news at the time. Like Obama, I also initially supported the war in Afghanistan, or at least the idea of it, initiated by a Republican president, but since then it seems to have become a fiasco of Catch-22 proportions.
Slowly discovering the real agenda and true ineptness of the Bush administration was a pivotal point in my reawakening political understanding of US current affairs after reading Hunter Thompson for so many years. Disgusted and appalled at the casual way in which we all were lied to, I'm quite happy to hold my hands up and say 'I was wrong'.
Thing is about Obama, I never had any starry-eyed notion about him being a peace-maker. He's an American president, the incentives are cemented into the role as one of using power and protecting wealth. Not that many conservatives were paying attention at the time, but he stood up in front of the Nobel academy when accepting his Nobel Peace Prize and laid out a justification for war.
Since the second Gulf War, the entire circus has been one of my occasional interests, because I've never seen a political process elsewhere riddled with so many bald-faced liars, grotesque characters and half-baked casual hate speech. What power or the sniff of it does to people, twisting them out of shape, is infinitely more interesting and has more impact on us than any other endeavour, except for possibly the parallel development of technology.
George W. Bush is responsible for another calamity: me posting in PRSI, one of my many occasional weaknesses.
Although I backed the implementation of a no-fly zone a few weeks ago, I wouldn't describe my position as one of wholehearted support. More a queasy half-hearted recognition that something had to be done and that all alternatives lead to rabbit holes of some degree or another. When all is said and done, my usual fallback position is an intense weariness at the evil that men do.
For the record, I actually supported (if silence is considered consent) both Gulf wars at the start; I believed in the fictional WMD, I believed it when Colin Powell held his little vial up at the UN... but I, like many was tied down with work and other concerns and was only paying cursory attention to the news at the time. Like Obama, I also initially supported the war in Afghanistan, or at least the idea of it, initiated by a Republican president, but since then it seems to have become a fiasco of Catch-22 proportions.
Slowly discovering the real agenda and true ineptness of the Bush administration was a pivotal point in my reawakening political understanding of US current affairs after reading Hunter Thompson for so many years. Disgusted and appalled at the casual way in which we all were lied to, I'm quite happy to hold my hands up and say 'I was wrong'.
Thing is about Obama, I never had any starry-eyed notion about him being a peace-maker. He's an American president, the incentives are cemented into the role as one of using power and protecting wealth. Not that many conservatives were paying attention at the time, but he stood up in front of the Nobel academy when accepting his Nobel Peace Prize and laid out a justification for war.
Since the second Gulf War, the entire circus has been one of my occasional interests, because I've never seen a political process elsewhere riddled with so many bald-faced liars, grotesque characters and half-baked casual hate speech. What power or the sniff of it does to people, twisting them out of shape, is infinitely more interesting and has more impact on us than any other endeavour, except for possibly the parallel development of technology.
George W. Bush is responsible for another calamity: me posting in PRSI, one of my many occasional weaknesses.
ergle2
Sep 19, 12:14 PM
so... after reading here for a while i got a question, its kinda stupid, i'm good at that,
first off, i was doubting between the 24" and the macpro so i disided that for my needs i should realy go with a macpro, but know that i'm hearing things about this 8 core macpro, i'm realy doubting about ordering my quad macpro this month,
has anybody got an idea of how long it would be before apple launches " a macpro octo " :confused:
thx for your time :)
It's Apple. No-one has any idea when they'll do anything. :)
It could be as soon as January, could be a lot later -- but I seriously doubt it'd be at the same price as a quad is now. I'd figure on a fairly major premium. It wouldn't surprise me if the OEM price of processors was in the $1200-1500 range alone (current 3.0GHz 5160's are around $900) for a lower clock-speed version.
Which is fastest will very much depend upon how well your specific applications scale -- fewer, faster cores can often bear more slower cores, and scaling isn't linear -- traditional thought on SMP was that the first extra core you add adds 80-90% to the speed (for fully-threaded apps, obv.), the second adds about 60-70%, the third about 40%, and so-on... diminishing returns. This will be more so because each chip has a finite amount of bandwidth that is shared between all the cores -- more cores = more contention for the available bandwidth.
Of course, the Mac Pro CPUs are socketed, so you can always go Octo at a later date if you so choose...
first off, i was doubting between the 24" and the macpro so i disided that for my needs i should realy go with a macpro, but know that i'm hearing things about this 8 core macpro, i'm realy doubting about ordering my quad macpro this month,
has anybody got an idea of how long it would be before apple launches " a macpro octo " :confused:
thx for your time :)
It's Apple. No-one has any idea when they'll do anything. :)
It could be as soon as January, could be a lot later -- but I seriously doubt it'd be at the same price as a quad is now. I'd figure on a fairly major premium. It wouldn't surprise me if the OEM price of processors was in the $1200-1500 range alone (current 3.0GHz 5160's are around $900) for a lower clock-speed version.
Which is fastest will very much depend upon how well your specific applications scale -- fewer, faster cores can often bear more slower cores, and scaling isn't linear -- traditional thought on SMP was that the first extra core you add adds 80-90% to the speed (for fully-threaded apps, obv.), the second adds about 60-70%, the third about 40%, and so-on... diminishing returns. This will be more so because each chip has a finite amount of bandwidth that is shared between all the cores -- more cores = more contention for the available bandwidth.
Of course, the Mac Pro CPUs are socketed, so you can always go Octo at a later date if you so choose...
FriarNurgle
Apr 27, 08:17 AM
for all the tin foil hatters out there, what will happen to the phone performance when the location services are turned off?
Popeye206
Apr 25, 02:58 PM
This...
You are explicitly asked if you want Google to collect this information.
You can say NO. It does reduce the accuracy of some programs when you opt out, but YOU have the choice.
You do have the option to enable this feature at any time if you feel you need too.
Same on the iPhone... this is not what we're talking about here. Application tracking has always been opt in or out.
This is just a database of cell tower pings. That's all. it's shared with NO ONE and goes nowhere except on your phone. It's like your web browser cache.
You are explicitly asked if you want Google to collect this information.
You can say NO. It does reduce the accuracy of some programs when you opt out, but YOU have the choice.
You do have the option to enable this feature at any time if you feel you need too.
Same on the iPhone... this is not what we're talking about here. Application tracking has always been opt in or out.
This is just a database of cell tower pings. That's all. it's shared with NO ONE and goes nowhere except on your phone. It's like your web browser cache.
RUAerospace
Aug 17, 11:28 AM
Lots of stuff on Anandtech about the poor memory performance on the Intel chipset.
Looks like the Xeons got killed by the G5 in Word in their tests.
Might be an interesting machine when/if the motherboard chipset/ memory performance issue is looked in to.
I think part 3 of their review will be telling, paring the machine up to XP machines in a variety of tests.
Also from the Anandtech review (the reviewers conclusion actually):
The Mac Pro is pretty much everything the PowerMac G5 should have been. It's cooler, quieter, faster, has more expansion and it gives you more for your value than the older systems ever could.
William and Kate Official
Looks like the Xeons got killed by the G5 in Word in their tests.
Might be an interesting machine when/if the motherboard chipset/ memory performance issue is looked in to.
I think part 3 of their review will be telling, paring the machine up to XP machines in a variety of tests.
Also from the Anandtech review (the reviewers conclusion actually):
The Mac Pro is pretty much everything the PowerMac G5 should have been. It's cooler, quieter, faster, has more expansion and it gives you more for your value than the older systems ever could.
Peace
Aug 6, 01:51 PM
As Apple applied for the trademark, it will not be approved.
It is up to Apple how they want to proceed. A fight that can't win, no matter how much money they have.
Mac Pro has been the premier Mac dealer in the same county as Apple since 1988. Out of all the names for this new line of computers, why choose one that they know they cannot have.
We are already getting countless support calls for the macbook pro. It seems they assume we made them When we can't help them, they seem to get very upset.
Mac Pro is in a position to file for a court order not to release any computer that bears our name.
So get ready WWDC, we will be watching.
Mike Ajlouny
President
MAC-PRO.com
Domain Name: MAC-PRO.COM
william and kate engagement.
prince william kate engagement
William amp; Kate Engagement
Prince William and Kate
William And Kate Engagement
william and kate engagement
It is up to Apple how they want to proceed. A fight that can't win, no matter how much money they have.
Mac Pro has been the premier Mac dealer in the same county as Apple since 1988. Out of all the names for this new line of computers, why choose one that they know they cannot have.
We are already getting countless support calls for the macbook pro. It seems they assume we made them When we can't help them, they seem to get very upset.
Mac Pro is in a position to file for a court order not to release any computer that bears our name.
So get ready WWDC, we will be watching.
Mike Ajlouny
President
MAC-PRO.com
Domain Name: MAC-PRO.COM
Laird Knox
Mar 31, 04:16 PM
Ya got to love this guy.... Mr Gloom and doom!
Glad to see the hot selling iPad 2 only has "one" advantage against the non-selling Android tablets. :rolleyes:
So that advantage is that people actually buy them? ;)
Glad to see the hot selling iPad 2 only has "one" advantage against the non-selling Android tablets. :rolleyes:
So that advantage is that people actually buy them? ;)
ruutiveijari
Oct 15, 01:06 PM
Why would Apple show their Clovertown workstations after HP and not simultaneusly with HP?
Because HP is a much bigger company with much bigger sales volume and probably gets all the new processors before Apple does.
Because HP is a much bigger company with much bigger sales volume and probably gets all the new processors before Apple does.
Lone Deranger
Mar 31, 05:30 PM
To put it in Nelson's words:
Reach
Sep 19, 09:44 AM
I find your tone very condescending and doesn't encourage open and accepting dialogue between ppl here. I don't understand why you would participate then... If you need to be the oldest forum member (you win) or 100% right (you can win that too).... but I want to engage with ppl here in a friendly and warm atmosphere.
Agreed, he suddenly jump into the thread and started bashing everyone for making time pass until the machine we wait for arrives, quite unnecessary.
And to imply that chances for a RevB being more refined than a RevA is not higher is just plain stupid. Take evolution, things improve, bad stuff gets pulled out! ;)
Well, there are friendly people here, just some dicks needing to vent or something we could do without..
Agreed, he suddenly jump into the thread and started bashing everyone for making time pass until the machine we wait for arrives, quite unnecessary.
And to imply that chances for a RevB being more refined than a RevA is not higher is just plain stupid. Take evolution, things improve, bad stuff gets pulled out! ;)
Well, there are friendly people here, just some dicks needing to vent or something we could do without..
janstett
Oct 23, 11:44 AM
Unfortunately not many multithreaded apps - yet. For a long time most of the multi-threaded apps were just a select few pro level things. 3D/Visualization software, CAD, database systems, etc.. Those of us who had multiprocessor systems bought them because we had a specific software in mind or group of software applications that could take advantage of multiple processors. As current CPU manufacturing processes started hitting a wall right around the 3GHz mark, chip makers started to transition to multiple CPU cores to boost power - makes sense. Software developers have been lazy for years, just riding the wave of ever-increasing MHz. Now the multi-core CPUs are here and the software is behind as many applications need to have serious re-writes done in order to take advantage of multiple processors. Intel tried to get a jump on this with their HT (Hyper Threading) implementation that essentially simulated dual-cores on a CPU by way of two virtual CPUs. Software developers didn't exactly jump on this and warm up to it. But I also don't think the software industry truly believed that CPUs would go multi-core on a mass scale so fast... Intel and AMD both said they would, don't know why the software industry doubted. Intel and AMD are uncommonly good about telling the truth about upcoming products. Both will be shipping quad-core CPU offerings by year's end.
What you're saying isn't entirely true and may give some people the wrong idea.
First, a multicore system is helpful when running multiple CPU-intensive single-threaded applications on a proper multitasking operating system. For example, right now I'm ripping CDs on iTunes. One processor gets used a lot and the other three are idle. I could be using this CPU power for another app.
The reality is that to take advantage of multiple cores, you had to take advantage of threads. Now, I was doing this in my programs with OS/2 back in 1992. I've been writing multithreaded apps my entire career. But writing a threaded application requires thought and work, so naturally many programmers are lazy and avoid threads. Plus it is harder to debug and synchronize a multithreaded application. Windows and Linux people have been doing this since the stone age, and Windows/Linux have had usable multiprocessor systems for more than a decade (it didn't start with Hyperthreading). I had a dual-processor 486 running NT 3.5 circa 1995. It's just been more of an optional "cool trick" to write threaded applications that the timid programmer avoids. Also it's worth noting that it's possible to go overboard with excessive threading and that leads to problems (context switching, thrashing, synchronization, etc).
Now, on the Mac side, OS 9 and below couldn't properly support SMP and it required a hacked version of the OS and a special version of the application. So the history of the Mac world has been, until recently with OSX, to avoid threading and multiprocessing unless specially called for and then at great pain to do so.
So it goes back to getting developers to write threaded applications. Now that we're getting to 4 and 8 core systems, it also presents a problem.
The classic reason to create a thread is to prevent the GUI from locking up while processing. Let's say I write a GUI program that has a calculation that takes 20 seconds. If I do it the lazy way, the GUI will lock up for 20 seconds because it can't process window messages during that time. If I write a thread, the calculation can take place there and leave the GUI thread able to process messages and keep the application alive, and then signal the other thread when it's done.
But now with more than 4 or 8 cores, the problem is how do you break up the work? 9 women can't have a baby in a month. So if your process is still serialized, you still have to wait with 1 processor doing all the work and the others sitting idle. For example, if you encode a video, it is a very serialized process. I hear some work has been done to simultaneously encode macroblocks in parallel, but getting 8 processors to chew on a single video is an interesting problem.
What you're saying isn't entirely true and may give some people the wrong idea.
First, a multicore system is helpful when running multiple CPU-intensive single-threaded applications on a proper multitasking operating system. For example, right now I'm ripping CDs on iTunes. One processor gets used a lot and the other three are idle. I could be using this CPU power for another app.
The reality is that to take advantage of multiple cores, you had to take advantage of threads. Now, I was doing this in my programs with OS/2 back in 1992. I've been writing multithreaded apps my entire career. But writing a threaded application requires thought and work, so naturally many programmers are lazy and avoid threads. Plus it is harder to debug and synchronize a multithreaded application. Windows and Linux people have been doing this since the stone age, and Windows/Linux have had usable multiprocessor systems for more than a decade (it didn't start with Hyperthreading). I had a dual-processor 486 running NT 3.5 circa 1995. It's just been more of an optional "cool trick" to write threaded applications that the timid programmer avoids. Also it's worth noting that it's possible to go overboard with excessive threading and that leads to problems (context switching, thrashing, synchronization, etc).
Now, on the Mac side, OS 9 and below couldn't properly support SMP and it required a hacked version of the OS and a special version of the application. So the history of the Mac world has been, until recently with OSX, to avoid threading and multiprocessing unless specially called for and then at great pain to do so.
So it goes back to getting developers to write threaded applications. Now that we're getting to 4 and 8 core systems, it also presents a problem.
The classic reason to create a thread is to prevent the GUI from locking up while processing. Let's say I write a GUI program that has a calculation that takes 20 seconds. If I do it the lazy way, the GUI will lock up for 20 seconds because it can't process window messages during that time. If I write a thread, the calculation can take place there and leave the GUI thread able to process messages and keep the application alive, and then signal the other thread when it's done.
But now with more than 4 or 8 cores, the problem is how do you break up the work? 9 women can't have a baby in a month. So if your process is still serialized, you still have to wait with 1 processor doing all the work and the others sitting idle. For example, if you encode a video, it is a very serialized process. I hear some work has been done to simultaneously encode macroblocks in parallel, but getting 8 processors to chew on a single video is an interesting problem.
Rodimus Prime
Feb 27, 09:39 PM
assume what the guy says is true it looks like he has some pretty strong grounds for a wrongful termination law suit.
bedifferent
Apr 12, 10:02 AM
Difinitely not. I won't say where I'd agree and disagree with for the rest of it, but that last sentence isn't right. Thousands implies a rather low number. Not nearly enough revenue for Apple to keep working on FCS. ;)
Ha ;) I love, too true. Those "thousands" could become a larger number, and not just editors but professionals in general as well as high end consumers who would strongly benefit and pony up for a mid range Pro tower as well as the prosumer grade programs.
Slightly off topic, I always wondered about Apple's initial venture into the mobile market, especially given Apple's failed attempt in partnering with Motorola for the "ROKR" (anyone recall the 2005 TV ads with Madonna shamelessly promoting her "Confessions on a Dance Floor" for a cool $5 million?).
Two years later came the iPhone. Makes you wonder why Apple "tested" the mobile market with the ROKR knowing the iPhone wasn't far away.
Ha ;) I love, too true. Those "thousands" could become a larger number, and not just editors but professionals in general as well as high end consumers who would strongly benefit and pony up for a mid range Pro tower as well as the prosumer grade programs.
Slightly off topic, I always wondered about Apple's initial venture into the mobile market, especially given Apple's failed attempt in partnering with Motorola for the "ROKR" (anyone recall the 2005 TV ads with Madonna shamelessly promoting her "Confessions on a Dance Floor" for a cool $5 million?).
Two years later came the iPhone. Makes you wonder why Apple "tested" the mobile market with the ROKR knowing the iPhone wasn't far away.
JAT
Mar 22, 02:30 PM
Display playbook = 7"
Display iPad = 9.7"
That's not half the size.
And before calling out irony, "your maths" has an 's' at the end. Thanks for playing.
LOL!!
Way to not understand "numbers". BTW, "maths" is British, "math" is American English.
Display iPad = 9.7"
That's not half the size.
And before calling out irony, "your maths" has an 's' at the end. Thanks for playing.
LOL!!
Way to not understand "numbers". BTW, "maths" is British, "math" is American English.
BJNY
Aug 23, 11:05 AM
If you're willing, you could start up from the Hardware Test disc, and run the test which makes the fans go non-stop except for the rearmost fans.
Temp widget http://www.apple.com/downloads/dashboard/status/istatnano.html
Temp widget http://www.apple.com/downloads/dashboard/status/istatnano.html
Blue Velvet
Mar 22, 08:15 AM
How many of those in the first list have the capability of fielding an airforce?
Precisely. The UN mandate is to enforce a no-fly zone, amongst other things, tasks that are particularly suited for certain nations. I'm no gung-ho supporter of this action in Libya, but it strikes me as similar to Bosnia, with the real political pressure coming particularly from France for very real reasons.
Expect the overt US involvement to rapidly scale back soon.
Funny also that we heard a DAMN THING from the media regarding the fact that ONLY CONGRESS can declare war.
Did Ronald Reagan get a go-ahead from Congress in 1986 for attacking Libya?
Precisely. The UN mandate is to enforce a no-fly zone, amongst other things, tasks that are particularly suited for certain nations. I'm no gung-ho supporter of this action in Libya, but it strikes me as similar to Bosnia, with the real political pressure coming particularly from France for very real reasons.
Expect the overt US involvement to rapidly scale back soon.
Funny also that we heard a DAMN THING from the media regarding the fact that ONLY CONGRESS can declare war.
Did Ronald Reagan get a go-ahead from Congress in 1986 for attacking Libya?
fsck-y dingo
Apr 27, 08:53 AM
for all the tin foil hatters out there, what will happen to the phone performance when the location services are turned off?
Improved battery life. :)
I only activate Locations Services when I feel it's needed. Maps, Star Walk and MLB at Bat are about the only ones that come to mind. I don't keep Location Services turned on all of the time. I switch it on before using one of these. For The Weather Channel and other apps that require a location to function I manually enter it.
I've got the Cydia tweak Untrackerd installed and haven't noticed a slow down with any apps regarding location. I run Speed Test without Location Services and it's quick to choose a nearby server using cell tower info. This is why I don't think the record of previously used towers is needed as much as Apple says. Things work well, and fast enough, without these stored lists.
Improved battery life. :)
I only activate Locations Services when I feel it's needed. Maps, Star Walk and MLB at Bat are about the only ones that come to mind. I don't keep Location Services turned on all of the time. I switch it on before using one of these. For The Weather Channel and other apps that require a location to function I manually enter it.
I've got the Cydia tweak Untrackerd installed and haven't noticed a slow down with any apps regarding location. I run Speed Test without Location Services and it's quick to choose a nearby server using cell tower info. This is why I don't think the record of previously used towers is needed as much as Apple says. Things work well, and fast enough, without these stored lists.