bobbleheadbob
Apr 2, 09:17 PM
Keep up that attitude and continue wondering why no one talks with you as you type on your laptop in the middle of the coffee shop across from De Anza college. Sure, you may have helped get DB2 started and you still work in a DOS window but don't blame your wife for leaving you as you worked late at night too long. How much of the money from the IPO went to family attorney and court fees?
De Anza college? Is that anywhere near Faber College, Flounder? :cool:
De Anza college? Is that anywhere near Faber College, Flounder? :cool:
Charlie Sheen
Mar 24, 01:13 PM
*Children Screaming in background
Im no snob against AMD GPUS...but their CPU's are nearly 2 generations behind intel. I dont think Bulldozer is going to match the 1155 SB, much less the upcoming 2011 socket chips.
What I want to see is a 27inch iMac with an HD 6970 2GB...Whoa whoa wee wow:eek:
i also prefer intel over amd but i think the cheaper models may run on amd in some time
Im no snob against AMD GPUS...but their CPU's are nearly 2 generations behind intel. I dont think Bulldozer is going to match the 1155 SB, much less the upcoming 2011 socket chips.
What I want to see is a 27inch iMac with an HD 6970 2GB...Whoa whoa wee wow:eek:
i also prefer intel over amd but i think the cheaper models may run on amd in some time
Manic Mouse
Aug 26, 05:57 AM
Oh I can be sure that a Conroe placed in an iMac will run into the volume constraints and effective heat dissipation of the heat sink when compared to a full blown BTX tower.
The original G5 and the Rev. B (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9d/IMacG5guts.png) stuck with the wonderful heat channel. The 17" models ran a lot hotter then the 20" due to the internal design and volume.
The Rev. C (http://www.xlr8yourmac.com/systems/imac_isight_internals/imac_g5_isight_inside.html) and Intel use similar internal layouts with the CPU and power supply toward the top of the machine.
Here (http://www.flickr.com/photos/inju/88928219/) is a good comparison.
Watch the WWDC keynote and note that the xserves now use Woodcrest which has a higher TDP than Conroe (95W compared to 65W). Also note what they say about Woodcrest having a better thermal environment that the G5's they were using before which were the same G5's (non-dual core) that the iMac used I believe. Conroe has better thermal characteristics than G5's, the Mac Pro and xserve prove that.
iMac will get Conroe. 2.4Ghz and 2.66Ghz. Conroe is the best value for performance processor that Intel are offering, so they need to use it SOMEWHERE in their lineup.
The original G5 and the Rev. B (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9d/IMacG5guts.png) stuck with the wonderful heat channel. The 17" models ran a lot hotter then the 20" due to the internal design and volume.
The Rev. C (http://www.xlr8yourmac.com/systems/imac_isight_internals/imac_g5_isight_inside.html) and Intel use similar internal layouts with the CPU and power supply toward the top of the machine.
Here (http://www.flickr.com/photos/inju/88928219/) is a good comparison.
Watch the WWDC keynote and note that the xserves now use Woodcrest which has a higher TDP than Conroe (95W compared to 65W). Also note what they say about Woodcrest having a better thermal environment that the G5's they were using before which were the same G5's (non-dual core) that the iMac used I believe. Conroe has better thermal characteristics than G5's, the Mac Pro and xserve prove that.
iMac will get Conroe. 2.4Ghz and 2.66Ghz. Conroe is the best value for performance processor that Intel are offering, so they need to use it SOMEWHERE in their lineup.
steelfist
Nov 27, 11:48 PM
no 19 inch?:(
Kaibelf
Apr 21, 11:41 AM
What about Apple? Why don't they go after them for tracking every little thing you do with their services. If you want to talk about a company that violates & then documents our privacy go after Apple.
Don't be a fool.
You sign up for that when you agree to their TOS and buy their products. I don't recall a single person signing off on having their wi-fi sniffed and recorded by Google's mapping cars. :eek:
Don't be a fool.
You sign up for that when you agree to their TOS and buy their products. I don't recall a single person signing off on having their wi-fi sniffed and recorded by Google's mapping cars. :eek:
appleguy123
Apr 12, 09:04 PM
[img]http://s3.amazonaws.com/twitpic/photos/large/275779449.jpg?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAJF3XCCKACR3QDMOA&Expires=1302661120&Signature=nuq9DTy9AX2iOGRh%2Fy1XWUXDzaA%3D[/mg]
well, in cast there was any doubt.
Yes!
well, in cast there was any doubt.
Yes!
lordonuthin
Mar 5, 06:22 PM
this is for F@H right? im keen to start up with my numerous amounts of computers.
where do i start? everything is all console based :(
oh wait its an installer thingo.. it wants a key hekp1
You can start here (http://folding.stanford.edu/), ask questions if you need any help or faster - google your question. It's a learning process but most people don't have any problems. AND thanks for joining the team (3446) that is.
Remember to set the machines so they don't sleep ... :p
where do i start? everything is all console based :(
oh wait its an installer thingo.. it wants a key hekp1
You can start here (http://folding.stanford.edu/), ask questions if you need any help or faster - google your question. It's a learning process but most people don't have any problems. AND thanks for joining the team (3446) that is.
Remember to set the machines so they don't sleep ... :p
Rodimus Prime
Apr 20, 10:33 PM
sorry, but wherever you got your information, it is not correct. fwiw, my last car, a vw passat, i sold with 312k miles on it. i bought it new at the dealer. still had the original clutch. your 100k replacement claim is bogus.
highway mileage is different due to gear ratios, not "physically locked". automatics use different ratios than manuals, even with same engine. shift speed is irrelevant for mileage.
and lastly, manuals do not cost more. every car i've ever owned, new or old, including my 2007 porsche 911, have come standard with a manual transmission. if you want automatic, that's an option you pay extra for, several $thousand in some cases. i've never owned an American car, so maybe the domestics are different, but your blanket statement is still wrong.
on my wife's mercedes, it needs automatic fluid change every 30k miles. dealer charges ~$300 for this. That's $1000 in service in 90k miles assuming nothing breaks. My manual transmission requires no service or fluid changes for 100k miles. $1000 in maintenance vs $0 in maintenance. automatic is far more expensive from a maintenance standpoint.
Umm porsche not exactly a valid argument of a car and that falls in the sports car catigory. Complete different field.
As for the clutchs 300k on a original clutch is pretty far unless you do heavy high way miles there.
Going heavy city lets see I had to replace the clutch in my old car at around 95k. My dad replaced the clutch in is Honda at 110k. Numbers I have been reading off the net about my current car clutches are going at 90-120k range. Now it does depend on driving. You are not going to find mean 300k on a original clutch. 100k is more the norm. Big time with city miles on it.
Also my car manual cost me more about 1000 bucks more but at it is a higher model as the model right below it is auto only. Manuals are being mostly reduced to sporter car lines/models now days leaving autos for everything else.
Yes they have different gear ratios comparing the 2 but for MPG sorry Manuals are losing out. They can not compete with CVS, computer controlled shifting and now adding in extra gears. Those factors are just adding up against Manuals and they can not keep up. Manuals are limited to human timing which losses to computer timing. And the shifting timing is not the speed the shift is done but at what RPM are at the given load. Computers can adjust to getting best MPG at a given load demand far better than a human which means they have better MPG.
highway mileage is different due to gear ratios, not "physically locked". automatics use different ratios than manuals, even with same engine. shift speed is irrelevant for mileage.
and lastly, manuals do not cost more. every car i've ever owned, new or old, including my 2007 porsche 911, have come standard with a manual transmission. if you want automatic, that's an option you pay extra for, several $thousand in some cases. i've never owned an American car, so maybe the domestics are different, but your blanket statement is still wrong.
on my wife's mercedes, it needs automatic fluid change every 30k miles. dealer charges ~$300 for this. That's $1000 in service in 90k miles assuming nothing breaks. My manual transmission requires no service or fluid changes for 100k miles. $1000 in maintenance vs $0 in maintenance. automatic is far more expensive from a maintenance standpoint.
Umm porsche not exactly a valid argument of a car and that falls in the sports car catigory. Complete different field.
As for the clutchs 300k on a original clutch is pretty far unless you do heavy high way miles there.
Going heavy city lets see I had to replace the clutch in my old car at around 95k. My dad replaced the clutch in is Honda at 110k. Numbers I have been reading off the net about my current car clutches are going at 90-120k range. Now it does depend on driving. You are not going to find mean 300k on a original clutch. 100k is more the norm. Big time with city miles on it.
Also my car manual cost me more about 1000 bucks more but at it is a higher model as the model right below it is auto only. Manuals are being mostly reduced to sporter car lines/models now days leaving autos for everything else.
Yes they have different gear ratios comparing the 2 but for MPG sorry Manuals are losing out. They can not compete with CVS, computer controlled shifting and now adding in extra gears. Those factors are just adding up against Manuals and they can not keep up. Manuals are limited to human timing which losses to computer timing. And the shifting timing is not the speed the shift is done but at what RPM are at the given load. Computers can adjust to getting best MPG at a given load demand far better than a human which means they have better MPG.
7even
Sep 18, 03:18 AM
Got the Griffin Outfit Gloss at Best Buy.. it's not bad. Hate how the buttons are uncovered and the bottom isn't well-protected, but otherwise it isn't too bad.
Spongebobk
Apr 19, 12:18 PM
desktops are slowly but surely dying out. Notebooks are becoming more and more powerful and even moreso portable so what will an iMac offer that MacBooks won't have? Larger screen?
You can't beat the real estate that the iMac offers!:)
You can't beat the real estate that the iMac offers!:)
MacRumors
Sep 6, 08:40 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Apple has updated the Mac Mini to include all Core Duo models. Other than the processor upgrade, there does not appear to be any differences between the previous Mac Mini and today's release. The Mac Mini is available in two offerings:
1.66 GHz Mac Mini
60 GB 5400-rpm SATA Hard Drive
Combo Drive
1.83 GHz Mac Mini
80 GB 5400-rpm SATA Hard Drive
Superdrive
Both models feature:
-2MB Shared L2 Cache
-512 MB 667 MHz DDR2 RAM standard (up to 2 GB supported)
-GMA 950 Integrated graphics
-1 Firewire 400, 4 USB 2.0
-Optical Digital/Analog Audio In/Out
-Gigabit ethernet
-Airport Extreme and Bluetooth 2.0+EDR standard
Of note, the Mac Mini still uses Core Duo (Yonah), not the more advanced Core 2 Duo "Merom" chip found in today's iMac announcements (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060906091309.shtml).
Apple has updated the Mac Mini to include all Core Duo models. Other than the processor upgrade, there does not appear to be any differences between the previous Mac Mini and today's release. The Mac Mini is available in two offerings:
1.66 GHz Mac Mini
60 GB 5400-rpm SATA Hard Drive
Combo Drive
1.83 GHz Mac Mini
80 GB 5400-rpm SATA Hard Drive
Superdrive
Both models feature:
-2MB Shared L2 Cache
-512 MB 667 MHz DDR2 RAM standard (up to 2 GB supported)
-GMA 950 Integrated graphics
-1 Firewire 400, 4 USB 2.0
-Optical Digital/Analog Audio In/Out
-Gigabit ethernet
-Airport Extreme and Bluetooth 2.0+EDR standard
Of note, the Mac Mini still uses Core Duo (Yonah), not the more advanced Core 2 Duo "Merom" chip found in today's iMac announcements (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060906091309.shtml).
triceretops
Apr 12, 10:18 PM
Is there anybody actually filming this? From what the tweets are describing, the audience are loving it, i'd like to see this keynote.
Everybody there is an editor. They don't know how to use a camera.:p
Everybody there is an editor. They don't know how to use a camera.:p
islanders
Dec 27, 10:33 PM
I'm waiting for one format or the other to win, and I don't have an HD set anyway.
You're comparing apples to oranges now. A cable box is a tuner and a self-contained unit. As far as we know, iTV will not have a tuner. Its only known function at this time is to stream content from a Mac, so that makes iTV like a Slingbox, not a cableco DVR. And Slingboxes don't have hard drives.
I wouldn't hold my breath on the word processing and web surfing. WebTV showed surfing the internet on a TV sucked because trying to read normal-sized text from six feet away was hard, and bumping the text size up would goof up the page layout generally. Same reason word processing would be silly.
I'm predicting a price around $400, but I'm also expecting a streaming device.
What bandwidth? The stuff you watch is downloaded to your Mac first, or even the iTV itself. They don't stream it every time you want to watch it. The iTunes Store is open for business for movies. The bandwidth problem has already been addressed.
That's lack of competition caused by effects of previous government sanctioned monopolies. And some "cooperation" by the different players in the industry. Kinda like how airline tickets and auto insurance are all pretty much the same.
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.
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.
And when you download from the iTunes store this does go to a harddrive? So you think I�m going to buy both a new computer and the iTV, and pay $20 to download a few movies?
I already know I�m an idiot, thanks, but this still doesn�t make sense to me.
My point about price fixing was a wild hope that Apple might step in with iDish and offer a service without all the commercials, but I also said that I think this will be a HD movie download service, and web serfer, video server... like a mac mini, TiVo with streaming abilities from iTV.
The bandwidth limitation will be an issue if iTV wants to go past a download service.
You're comparing apples to oranges now. A cable box is a tuner and a self-contained unit. As far as we know, iTV will not have a tuner. Its only known function at this time is to stream content from a Mac, so that makes iTV like a Slingbox, not a cableco DVR. And Slingboxes don't have hard drives.
I wouldn't hold my breath on the word processing and web surfing. WebTV showed surfing the internet on a TV sucked because trying to read normal-sized text from six feet away was hard, and bumping the text size up would goof up the page layout generally. Same reason word processing would be silly.
I'm predicting a price around $400, but I'm also expecting a streaming device.
What bandwidth? The stuff you watch is downloaded to your Mac first, or even the iTV itself. They don't stream it every time you want to watch it. The iTunes Store is open for business for movies. The bandwidth problem has already been addressed.
That's lack of competition caused by effects of previous government sanctioned monopolies. And some "cooperation" by the different players in the industry. Kinda like how airline tickets and auto insurance are all pretty much the same.
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.
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.
And when you download from the iTunes store this does go to a harddrive? So you think I�m going to buy both a new computer and the iTV, and pay $20 to download a few movies?
I already know I�m an idiot, thanks, but this still doesn�t make sense to me.
My point about price fixing was a wild hope that Apple might step in with iDish and offer a service without all the commercials, but I also said that I think this will be a HD movie download service, and web serfer, video server... like a mac mini, TiVo with streaming abilities from iTV.
The bandwidth limitation will be an issue if iTV wants to go past a download service.
AidenShaw
Nov 18, 08:50 PM
When Intel multicore processors are used (as in the Mac Pro) which support hardware virtualization, you can run software (such as Parrallels Desktop) that lets your run additional operating systems (such as Windows, Solaris, and Linux) concurrently with OSX at near full native speeds since one or more cores are used for OSX and one is used for each of the virtual operating systems.
The virtualization example is the same as your multiple application example.
Cores are not dedicated to virtual machines - each virtual machine is an application that needs to use CPU power from time to time.
With multi-core, there are more CPUs so that the VM applications can be scheduled at the same time. Just like more standard applications (or application threads) can be scheduled simultaneously.
Assigning processors to specific applications is almost always a bad idea. It is better to let the operating system schedule any thread that needs CPU on any idle CPU in a multi-CPU (multi-core) system.
The virtualization example is the same as your multiple application example.
Cores are not dedicated to virtual machines - each virtual machine is an application that needs to use CPU power from time to time.
With multi-core, there are more CPUs so that the VM applications can be scheduled at the same time. Just like more standard applications (or application threads) can be scheduled simultaneously.
Assigning processors to specific applications is almost always a bad idea. It is better to let the operating system schedule any thread that needs CPU on any idle CPU in a multi-CPU (multi-core) system.
imac_japan
Mar 18, 08:41 AM
Please sign it !! For our sakes
http://www.petitiononline.com/rumi04/petition.html
Thanks
http://www.petitiononline.com/rumi04/petition.html
Thanks
GregA
Aug 24, 09:41 PM
I suspect we'll see slight case redesigns for Santa Rosa-based Macs. Santa Rosa will be the real Core 2 platform. This year's Meroms are a stopgap.Isn't everything a stop gap, in that sense? Just with sweet spots along the way :)
as well as include new WiFi and the "Robson" flash technology for fast-booting.I'll have to look up Robson... I imagine Boot Camp will work quite well if it only takes 10 seconds to switch from an active Mac to an active Windows machine...
as well as include new WiFi and the "Robson" flash technology for fast-booting.I'll have to look up Robson... I imagine Boot Camp will work quite well if it only takes 10 seconds to switch from an active Mac to an active Windows machine...
igazza
Sep 15, 06:59 AM
5 days 19 hours of talking on my iphone 4 :cool:
2 dropped calls i can remember
2 dropped calls i can remember
TangoCharlie
Sep 1, 12:03 PM
I guess they plan to put the 2.93GHz Core 2 Extreme or 2.66GHz processor in it. IF they make the display height adjustable...i might consider it. Otherwise the MacPro remains the slated candidate for my desktop needs
No. They plan to stick in the 2, 2.16 and 2.33 GHz Merom CPU's in it.
But I agree... it does need a height adjustable stand.
No. They plan to stick in the 2, 2.16 and 2.33 GHz Merom CPU's in it.
But I agree... it does need a height adjustable stand.
Lurchdubious
Nov 26, 01:15 AM
Comp-tac Minotaur holster. (not my pic)
http://www.restrainedfreedom.com/wp-content/uploads/guns/IMG_4193.jpg
http://www.restrainedfreedom.com/wp-content/uploads/guns/IMG_4193.jpg
mcarnes
Jul 18, 01:44 AM
If I'm going to spend all that time downloading a movie, I should at least be able to keep it. Bah.
pimjai
Sep 18, 03:36 AM
are there any sleeves yet?
CommodityFetish
May 4, 12:36 PM
Yep, another example of Apple coercing developers (and users) into using their app store. "The choice is yours, either:
1. use our app store and your app is a first-class citizen of OS X!
2. don't use our app store and your app is a second-class app that will not be able to work like first-class apps -- now they can't even be deleted in the same way..."
Will it be any surprise that eventually the second-class apps will be eliminated and the only option will be apple's app store. Classic proprietary monopoly tactics.
But this will become confusing to some. Some will ask why can I delete some apps this way and others I have to move manually to the trash?
My girlfriend complained the other day that installing new programs is a bit of a pain. I showed her the app store and her response was but what if the programs I want is not in the app store? In this case VLC.
1. use our app store and your app is a first-class citizen of OS X!
2. don't use our app store and your app is a second-class app that will not be able to work like first-class apps -- now they can't even be deleted in the same way..."
Will it be any surprise that eventually the second-class apps will be eliminated and the only option will be apple's app store. Classic proprietary monopoly tactics.
But this will become confusing to some. Some will ask why can I delete some apps this way and others I have to move manually to the trash?
My girlfriend complained the other day that installing new programs is a bit of a pain. I showed her the app store and her response was but what if the programs I want is not in the app store? In this case VLC.
wordoflife
Feb 17, 09:51 PM
Wow those are some really big speakers you have there! :eek:
hunkaburningluv
Mar 26, 08:28 AM
If someone had come out with a console allowing for full-color 1024x768 touchscreen controllers the other consoles would be scrambling to catch up. Even if that controller cost $499.
While there are some nits here (30fps isn't exactly ideal performance, the dongle connection seems too flimsy for real gameplay, etc) I think this is a huge step forward in gaming.
Nintendo and Microsoft should be shaking in their boots right now.
As a rather casual gamer, I'd love to see the bastard love-child of this and kinect.
you think? I think no none would buy the $499 controller as it's too expensive for a controller.
Ninty and M$ have nothing to worry about anything that apple does in relation to games will supplement the market as it is.
Not really. Properly designed controls on touch screen will be just fine... You will see...
Anyone who thinks that the long-term viability of the IOS ecosystem as a significant home game player because of the lack of hard controls is just missing the picture.
I can't figure out why some people think you have to look at the screen of a touchscreen device to use it to manipulate things in a game world. Between rotation and movement of the device itself with properly placed buttons you can do a lot with it, none of it requiring looking at the touch screen.
I suspect most people could distinguish between the lower left corner of their device and the upper right corner, for instance, without looking at the screen.
There is still a vast difference in the tactility (sp) and force feed back that hardcore gamers won't take too - as much as I don't like modern warfare, but I doubt the metric crapload of players would prefer to play with touch controls
but when you remove the need for look at a touch screen, then why need it? A simple touch pad would suffice. By removing the need to look at the screen, you remove the point of it.
Hardcore gaming will never change to the extent it doesn't need a controller and as such the market isn't going to change. Sure I can't wait until I play starcraft or the like on an ipad, but I won't be ditching any of my consoles.
While there are some nits here (30fps isn't exactly ideal performance, the dongle connection seems too flimsy for real gameplay, etc) I think this is a huge step forward in gaming.
Nintendo and Microsoft should be shaking in their boots right now.
As a rather casual gamer, I'd love to see the bastard love-child of this and kinect.
you think? I think no none would buy the $499 controller as it's too expensive for a controller.
Ninty and M$ have nothing to worry about anything that apple does in relation to games will supplement the market as it is.
Not really. Properly designed controls on touch screen will be just fine... You will see...
Anyone who thinks that the long-term viability of the IOS ecosystem as a significant home game player because of the lack of hard controls is just missing the picture.
I can't figure out why some people think you have to look at the screen of a touchscreen device to use it to manipulate things in a game world. Between rotation and movement of the device itself with properly placed buttons you can do a lot with it, none of it requiring looking at the touch screen.
I suspect most people could distinguish between the lower left corner of their device and the upper right corner, for instance, without looking at the screen.
There is still a vast difference in the tactility (sp) and force feed back that hardcore gamers won't take too - as much as I don't like modern warfare, but I doubt the metric crapload of players would prefer to play with touch controls
but when you remove the need for look at a touch screen, then why need it? A simple touch pad would suffice. By removing the need to look at the screen, you remove the point of it.
Hardcore gaming will never change to the extent it doesn't need a controller and as such the market isn't going to change. Sure I can't wait until I play starcraft or the like on an ipad, but I won't be ditching any of my consoles.
