Huhn
Mar 22, 02:53 PM
According to the hate, Apple Fanboys are giving those new competitors....it seems like it is the first real competition. Get out of your homes guys and girls and compare.... I own an iPhone 4 and a MBP, but came from and Android phone and guess what? The UI is way better than those ugly millions of square buttons that you see on the iPhone. I still prefer it...because of other reasons like battery and the built in ipod.
Samsung now has the thinnest Tablet with a dual core, plus still better camera and a much nicer UI. I would rather buy that one than the iPad, just because....uhm well i don�t have to send my files (all type of files) by email to myself to transfer them? and maybe i wanna exchange files with workmates without using an adapter the whole time. Maybe i really wanna use and work with that thing than playing games and watching movies or browsing (guess thats what 95% do with their iPad).
de Six Flags Over Georgia
Six Flags Blog
Rocky Mountain Construction
six flags Amusement
Six Flags Great Adventure just
Six Flags over Georgia
Krypton at Six Flags Magic
Six Flags Over Texas has sent
The transition to Six Flags
New Texas Giant @ Six Flags
Maps six are goliath dare When
asix flags construction on
Over the past year and a half,
Six Flags Over Texas has
at Six Flags Over Texas,
Six Flags Great Adventure made
à Six Flags Over Georgia:
![six flags over georgia dare devil dive construction. Flags Over Georgia] Dare](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_sI60nGFM2xoZOsKN1ovHCceHWsAfLuaknvkwjjJ0Q-ZUeSokOmxz-L_7msNfDV1tSGILxZuxYSr8wW1aG7h7TQq36pi7YXEs_pZ-sya2RZEwd1LAzkHcl3L5ElV2Dl_nlI9qq5kQHyaEqyxUgzkQtJ8SDSORElKr6Z6E5tItfNW2CiBtqvDjH5l0PIHg=s0-d "Flags Over Georgia] Dare")
Flags Over Georgia] Dare
Samsung now has the thinnest Tablet with a dual core, plus still better camera and a much nicer UI. I would rather buy that one than the iPad, just because....uhm well i don�t have to send my files (all type of files) by email to myself to transfer them? and maybe i wanna exchange files with workmates without using an adapter the whole time. Maybe i really wanna use and work with that thing than playing games and watching movies or browsing (guess thats what 95% do with their iPad).
stormj
Aug 11, 01:41 PM
Here are some of the issues with the iPod phone.
In order to make the biggest splash, it will have to be available in both GSM and CDMA versions so that all of the big 4 carriers can use it. GSM is the international standard, so I'm sure they will have that *at least*.
In order for it to matter, it will have to be able to access the music store over the air. Have you tried downloading an MP3 file, even on an EDGE connection? It sucks.
The delay here has more to do with the networks. Until the 3G networks are fully rolled out (EV-DO on Verizon, UTMS on GSM, etc. etc.) and available beyond a few cities, this phone will just frustrate people. (Verizon's rollout has gone much further, but I would think given that CDMA is rare outside of the US that that fails to compensate for the fact that the GSM 3G is still in just a few markets.)
The latest rumor is that wide-spread UTMS roll out will be in Q1 2007. When that happens, we'll see an iPod phone. It's not as if Apple couldn't have made an Apple-rific phone by now. The limitation isn't theirs, it's the networks'.
In the meantime, you can get an HTC Tytn that will use 3G world wide and will play MediaPlayer... if you're into M$.
In order to make the biggest splash, it will have to be available in both GSM and CDMA versions so that all of the big 4 carriers can use it. GSM is the international standard, so I'm sure they will have that *at least*.
In order for it to matter, it will have to be able to access the music store over the air. Have you tried downloading an MP3 file, even on an EDGE connection? It sucks.
The delay here has more to do with the networks. Until the 3G networks are fully rolled out (EV-DO on Verizon, UTMS on GSM, etc. etc.) and available beyond a few cities, this phone will just frustrate people. (Verizon's rollout has gone much further, but I would think given that CDMA is rare outside of the US that that fails to compensate for the fact that the GSM 3G is still in just a few markets.)
The latest rumor is that wide-spread UTMS roll out will be in Q1 2007. When that happens, we'll see an iPod phone. It's not as if Apple couldn't have made an Apple-rific phone by now. The limitation isn't theirs, it's the networks'.
In the meantime, you can get an HTC Tytn that will use 3G world wide and will play MediaPlayer... if you're into M$.
firestarter
Apr 12, 03:20 PM
Anyway, Takeshi Kitano rules. :D
THIS!
Just trying to spread the message! ;)
THIS!
Just trying to spread the message! ;)
Dr Kevorkian94
Apr 25, 01:48 PM
i love my country we sue everybody! some people are just idiots, they odiously think they can win or they wouldn't spend the legal fees. like others have said android does the same thing but then sends the info to google. and from what i heard its not your actual location just the coordinates of the cell tower you are connected to. i wonder if you turn location services off it will still do that, because there might be some terms and condition someone didn't read lol. but this is a little out of control the situation is generalized to the point where it is being betray like they are tracking you by GPS at every second. cant wait to see how this turns out.
nagromme
Mar 22, 01:01 PM
Widescreen is great for movie watching, and the spec-lover in me is all over that... but it’s not very flexible for portrait use. (Which is how you hold a tablet one-handed, and is how you see the most content on a web page or scrolling document.)
A 10.1” 1280x800 screen is actually almost exactly the same screen area as an iPad: the iPad is 45.2 sq. in., and the 10.1 is 45.8 sq. in.
Held in portrait mode, the 10.1 is .75” taller... but .5” narrower than an iPad. I don’t think I’d care for that. (But with 1280x800 you do gain 32 pixels of width, and 256 pixels of height. Still not great for portrait use.)
The 8.9 display, though—which seems to save a few bucks—is an interesting option for dropping the price floor on “real” tablets. (Not that I’d settle for Android’s failings. As pointed out: specs alone don’t make a good car, nor a good computer, nor a good tablet!)
I hope these catch on enough that I can actually buy an iPad.
Ha ha :D Good thinking!
A 10.1” 1280x800 screen is actually almost exactly the same screen area as an iPad: the iPad is 45.2 sq. in., and the 10.1 is 45.8 sq. in.
Held in portrait mode, the 10.1 is .75” taller... but .5” narrower than an iPad. I don’t think I’d care for that. (But with 1280x800 you do gain 32 pixels of width, and 256 pixels of height. Still not great for portrait use.)
The 8.9 display, though—which seems to save a few bucks—is an interesting option for dropping the price floor on “real” tablets. (Not that I’d settle for Android’s failings. As pointed out: specs alone don’t make a good car, nor a good computer, nor a good tablet!)
I hope these catch on enough that I can actually buy an iPad.
Ha ha :D Good thinking!
azzurri000
Sep 18, 11:32 PM
All I have to say is:
"what the hell is taking them so frigging long?"
This update better be bitchin!
"what the hell is taking them so frigging long?"
This update better be bitchin!
kcmac
Apr 27, 10:09 AM
I think that a lot of people forget that the first iPhone did not have GPS. It helped you find where you were by locating Wi-Fi hotspots and triangulating cell towers. Sometimes it would get you pretty close to where you were but sometimes the results could be fairly maddening. We always referred to this as fake GPS back then.
Now with the combination of real GPS and these other two methods, it is a very accurate system. And fast. I believe Apples description and only hope that the software update does not reduce speed or accuracy of what I have now come to expect.
Now with the combination of real GPS and these other two methods, it is a very accurate system. And fast. I believe Apples description and only hope that the software update does not reduce speed or accuracy of what I have now come to expect.
mcrain
Mar 22, 10:09 AM
The hypocrisy coming from the left in the media on this issue is palpable...
I was stewing about this, and went to the Google News page, more "liberal" sites like the Huffington Post or MSNBC, my local paper, FoxNews and in every case, there were stories that were either critical or were about the criticism or the reasons for the criticism of the Libya action. (Stories about Senator XYZ saying coalition has issues vs. a story about the issues with the coaltion). So, it's pretty obvious that the mainstream media are covering this story, and reporting both the white house story and providing analysis and criticism.
I'm confused by what you think is so hypocritical or who you think is being such.
Are you talking about hipocracy from "the left in the media" or the left?" Do you expect every story to be critical of President Obama and Libya? Do you think every story that came out during the GWB administration was critical of Afghanistan or Iraq? Especially in the first days? Do you think every story from certain media outlets is liberal? I mean, is a story automatically liberal because it comes from NPR, or say, MSNBC or Huffington Post? Someone critiqued your using Fox News as a source, but what you quoted was mainly just facts. I think Fox News often inserts more of their spin into stories than their competitors (and as a result, their news reporting often appears tainted or is assumed tainted), and they are always supportive of the GOP, but that doesn't mean that I think the facts they report are any less fact. Is critique of the President from MSNBC any less critique because its coming from MSNBC? Are you suspicious of their criticism? Do you think they are using kid gloves? Would you expect a hypothetical neutral news site (if it exists) to be more critical? Would it be as critical and partisan as Fox News?
On the other hand, are you talking about hipocracy by those on the left, in the media? I mean, you quoted the President and what he said. If so, it really hasn't got anything to do with the media, right? Also, doesn't it seem like President Obama got pushed into this conflict? There were allies and some organizations clamoring for involvement, unlike prior to Iraq. The President was making statements that indicated reluctance to get involved. The military was saying it would not be simple, would involve real attacks, and it may be too late. But, there was pushing by our allies, human rights groups, etc... Plus, aren't we on the hook to have our allies backs? I mean, isn't the US on the hook to pay back a lot of favors to the Iraq/Afghanistan coalitions?
Unlike Iraq where the President was actively trying to sell the public on a conflict he, and a small group of insiders, wanted. Using evidence that was weak at best, and we now know was false. This salesmanship initially received pretty positive reporting, which only turned really sour as the evidence of betrayal and lies started coming out.
I was stewing about this, and went to the Google News page, more "liberal" sites like the Huffington Post or MSNBC, my local paper, FoxNews and in every case, there were stories that were either critical or were about the criticism or the reasons for the criticism of the Libya action. (Stories about Senator XYZ saying coalition has issues vs. a story about the issues with the coaltion). So, it's pretty obvious that the mainstream media are covering this story, and reporting both the white house story and providing analysis and criticism.
I'm confused by what you think is so hypocritical or who you think is being such.
Are you talking about hipocracy from "the left in the media" or the left?" Do you expect every story to be critical of President Obama and Libya? Do you think every story that came out during the GWB administration was critical of Afghanistan or Iraq? Especially in the first days? Do you think every story from certain media outlets is liberal? I mean, is a story automatically liberal because it comes from NPR, or say, MSNBC or Huffington Post? Someone critiqued your using Fox News as a source, but what you quoted was mainly just facts. I think Fox News often inserts more of their spin into stories than their competitors (and as a result, their news reporting often appears tainted or is assumed tainted), and they are always supportive of the GOP, but that doesn't mean that I think the facts they report are any less fact. Is critique of the President from MSNBC any less critique because its coming from MSNBC? Are you suspicious of their criticism? Do you think they are using kid gloves? Would you expect a hypothetical neutral news site (if it exists) to be more critical? Would it be as critical and partisan as Fox News?
On the other hand, are you talking about hipocracy by those on the left, in the media? I mean, you quoted the President and what he said. If so, it really hasn't got anything to do with the media, right? Also, doesn't it seem like President Obama got pushed into this conflict? There were allies and some organizations clamoring for involvement, unlike prior to Iraq. The President was making statements that indicated reluctance to get involved. The military was saying it would not be simple, would involve real attacks, and it may be too late. But, there was pushing by our allies, human rights groups, etc... Plus, aren't we on the hook to have our allies backs? I mean, isn't the US on the hook to pay back a lot of favors to the Iraq/Afghanistan coalitions?
Unlike Iraq where the President was actively trying to sell the public on a conflict he, and a small group of insiders, wanted. Using evidence that was weak at best, and we now know was false. This salesmanship initially received pretty positive reporting, which only turned really sour as the evidence of betrayal and lies started coming out.
Folke Sonin
Jun 12, 09:55 PM
I went to my local radio shack tonight to find out about the pre order process. The store manager showed me their internal website where from June 24th to July 15th they were guaranteeing 100$ for any iPhone 3G in excellent condition and at least 200$ for any iPhone 3GS in excellent condition. As of today my iPhone 3G with 8 GB of flash was appraised for 118$. So on June 24th I might loose 18$ :-) You should go to Radio Shack and ask for the manager. She or he will be able to tell you what they can do.
Happy hunting
Folke Sonin
Happy hunting
Folke Sonin
addicted44
Mar 26, 01:19 AM
Full-screen apps along is just�why haven�t we been doing this all along?
The first time this thought crossed my mind was when I first used WriteRoom, to write a paper. Many seem to think (and Apple has intimated as much) that Full Screen Apps originated from iOS. I think this is wrong. I think Apple first thought about these with WriteRoom, which is why Pages was the first App to get the Full Screen treatment.
Combining it with the new form of spaces is a genius move though.
The first time this thought crossed my mind was when I first used WriteRoom, to write a paper. Many seem to think (and Apple has intimated as much) that Full Screen Apps originated from iOS. I think this is wrong. I think Apple first thought about these with WriteRoom, which is why Pages was the first App to get the Full Screen treatment.
Combining it with the new form of spaces is a genius move though.
mkrishnan
Aug 7, 04:35 PM
Well, do you think it's a copy of "Previous versions", which someone posted a link to in this thread?
It's very similar. I'm saying, who cares? It's a simple basic concept and Apple has a nice implementation going. :) And I actually believe that Apple's version will not have glaring security holes. :eek: :p Ahem...I installed Trillian on managed Win2k and XP machines as a standard user, and other users had access to my IM accounts without logging in!!!! :rolleyes:
Anyway, though, a Wiki Server in Leopard Server...mmmm... If only we lived in an Apple world. :D
That guy who made the angry video said it best... using a Mac is not so much using a computer but participating in the Apple experience. :D
It's very similar. I'm saying, who cares? It's a simple basic concept and Apple has a nice implementation going. :) And I actually believe that Apple's version will not have glaring security holes. :eek: :p Ahem...I installed Trillian on managed Win2k and XP machines as a standard user, and other users had access to my IM accounts without logging in!!!! :rolleyes:
Anyway, though, a Wiki Server in Leopard Server...mmmm... If only we lived in an Apple world. :D
That guy who made the angry video said it best... using a Mac is not so much using a computer but participating in the Apple experience. :D
cgc
Jul 15, 05:24 PM
...Putting the PSU at the top, oh dang the computer will tip over with 1 inch of less travel...
...Really people most of the agurments people are using against putting the PSU at the top are stupid and weak at best...
...It WILL NOT make the computer top heavy. The base on computer is wide enough to keep it stable any how...
I was not arguing for or against PSUs at top or bottom, I was simply trying to throw one simple point out: that a 300W PSU which weighs between 2 and 4 lbs would bring the top weight up slightly. I'm not saying it will make Macs tip. I'm sure Apple has considered distributing the weight to ensure their towers are stable, especially since they have one of the largest towers on the market in the G5.
BTW, no need to be so sarcastic and have such a bad attitude.
...Really people most of the agurments people are using against putting the PSU at the top are stupid and weak at best...
...It WILL NOT make the computer top heavy. The base on computer is wide enough to keep it stable any how...
I was not arguing for or against PSUs at top or bottom, I was simply trying to throw one simple point out: that a 300W PSU which weighs between 2 and 4 lbs would bring the top weight up slightly. I'm not saying it will make Macs tip. I'm sure Apple has considered distributing the weight to ensure their towers are stable, especially since they have one of the largest towers on the market in the G5.
BTW, no need to be so sarcastic and have such a bad attitude.
BoyBach
Nov 29, 06:20 AM
My initial reservations about this story (the Zune/Universal payment) was much like eveybody's elses on these forums - very bad for us and screw 'em. But now that I've had time to think it through I actually think it's a fantastic idea.
Fantastic for the consumer and the artist, and potentially catastrophic for Universal Music.
Allow me to explain! Somebody buys a Zune or iPod that has had the 'Universal Tax' applied to it and then fills it with 30GB of stolen Universal music. It goes to court and the 'Pirate' successfully argues that he/she has already compensated UMG by buying the iPod/Zune. The judge agrees and piracy of Universal music becomes legal so long as it's for the 'UMG taxed' iPod or Zune. UMG collapses overnight and the artists get to release music on their terms and get more of the money that they deserve, not the faceless corporations and shareholders.
Why is this good for us? Because every entertainment company would become very wary of labelling us all 'pirates' and might actually realise that digital distribution at a fair price is their future.
D'oh somebody has already written something to this effect whilst I was typing!!
Fantastic for the consumer and the artist, and potentially catastrophic for Universal Music.
Allow me to explain! Somebody buys a Zune or iPod that has had the 'Universal Tax' applied to it and then fills it with 30GB of stolen Universal music. It goes to court and the 'Pirate' successfully argues that he/she has already compensated UMG by buying the iPod/Zune. The judge agrees and piracy of Universal music becomes legal so long as it's for the 'UMG taxed' iPod or Zune. UMG collapses overnight and the artists get to release music on their terms and get more of the money that they deserve, not the faceless corporations and shareholders.
Why is this good for us? Because every entertainment company would become very wary of labelling us all 'pirates' and might actually realise that digital distribution at a fair price is their future.
D'oh somebody has already written something to this effect whilst I was typing!!
Blue Velvet
Apr 27, 02:22 PM
1. You opened it in Illustrator, not InDesign.
2. After I opened it in Illustrator like you did it did reveal some interesting things. It seems that fields #20 and #22 are on individual layers.
They're not. The proper file is flat. I downloaded and opened the PDF from the White House. Flat in both Illustrator and Photoshop, just one group on one layer... and no security on the PDF. No embedded fonts.
This is a fraud.
2. After I opened it in Illustrator like you did it did reveal some interesting things. It seems that fields #20 and #22 are on individual layers.
They're not. The proper file is flat. I downloaded and opened the PDF from the White House. Flat in both Illustrator and Photoshop, just one group on one layer... and no security on the PDF. No embedded fonts.
This is a fraud.
Chupa Chupa
Apr 10, 07:41 PM
There is a part of me that hopes Apple screws up and dumbs down FCS. This is the only remaining software that keeps me buying expensive Macs. If they turn FCS into a glorified iApp, then I'm dumping my Mac's and moving on to a build your own PC where I can run Linux and all of the industry standard professional apps.
I think that with this new release of FinalCut, Apple is going to shove a dagger into it's professional line. In the last keynote, Jobs mentioned the "transition from a post-PC" business model. The only way that Apple can devote itself exclusively to iStuff is to wean the professional's away from using their products. Once FCS becomes a new video editing program aimed more for the masses running on iPads, Apple will be able to say that they don't have a need for the pro line of computers anymore. Say goodbye to MacPro anything.
Whatever Apple announces Tuesday is going to be a strong indicator for the future of the professional line. If they announce an amazing FCS 4 for professionals, then we will know they are committed to the long run. However, if they turn FinalCut into some kind of cheesy video editing app for the mass consumer, then you better start rethinking your professional future with Apple - unless you make your money from making crappy youtube videos.
So munch elitism there it's dripping off my screen. Your post is funny b/c when FCP 1.0 was announced the many of "pro" editors of the time gasped b/c it, well, "dumbed down" editing, similar to how Pagemaker 1.0 dumbed down publishing.
What Apple does best, what it's always done best, is define new paradigms. It sounds like that is what may happen on Tues. Clearly, for all your snobbery, you are a horse and buggy driver and not a buyer into the Model T thing. Enjoy your Linux, but physical media is still dying, nonetheless. Editing for the web needs a new set of editing tools. YouTube has a lot of professionally edited material. It's not all cell phone clips.
I think that with this new release of FinalCut, Apple is going to shove a dagger into it's professional line. In the last keynote, Jobs mentioned the "transition from a post-PC" business model. The only way that Apple can devote itself exclusively to iStuff is to wean the professional's away from using their products. Once FCS becomes a new video editing program aimed more for the masses running on iPads, Apple will be able to say that they don't have a need for the pro line of computers anymore. Say goodbye to MacPro anything.
Whatever Apple announces Tuesday is going to be a strong indicator for the future of the professional line. If they announce an amazing FCS 4 for professionals, then we will know they are committed to the long run. However, if they turn FinalCut into some kind of cheesy video editing app for the mass consumer, then you better start rethinking your professional future with Apple - unless you make your money from making crappy youtube videos.
So munch elitism there it's dripping off my screen. Your post is funny b/c when FCP 1.0 was announced the many of "pro" editors of the time gasped b/c it, well, "dumbed down" editing, similar to how Pagemaker 1.0 dumbed down publishing.
What Apple does best, what it's always done best, is define new paradigms. It sounds like that is what may happen on Tues. Clearly, for all your snobbery, you are a horse and buggy driver and not a buyer into the Model T thing. Enjoy your Linux, but physical media is still dying, nonetheless. Editing for the web needs a new set of editing tools. YouTube has a lot of professionally edited material. It's not all cell phone clips.
CplBadboy
Apr 5, 04:44 PM
Hopefully there will be new iMacs to go with it. Refresh please!
shamino
Jul 20, 09:32 AM
Is having more cores more energy efficient than having one big fat ass 24Ghz processor? Maybe thats a factor in the increasing core count.
Actually, this is well documented.
There are serious electrical and physical problems with jacking up clock speeds much further than they are now. Intel managed to push their chips to 3.4GHz, but the power consumed was tremendous.
When you can't ramp up the clock speed, your next best alternative is to go for as much parallelism as you can - increase the number of instructions you can execute in a single clock.
Chip makers achieve this in a wide variety of ways, including multiple CPU packages on a motherboard, multiple cores per CPU package, multiple threads per core, and multiple functional units per thread.
And yes, a single CPU at 3GHz can easily consume more power than two CPUs (or two cores) at 1.5GHz.
As for your theoretical 24GHz processor, such a thing is simply not possible with today's technology. (Well, there were some university experiments that hit insanely fast speeds, but don't expect commercial products any time soon.) Given the heat/power curves of today's chips, I wouldn't want to think about the cooling requirements of a 24GHz chip if you could somehow manage to build one.
Of course, breakthroughs do happen, and higher clock speeds might become practical in the future. But multi-core tech isn't going away - we'll simply end up with multiple cores at higher clock speeds.
Actually, this is well documented.
There are serious electrical and physical problems with jacking up clock speeds much further than they are now. Intel managed to push their chips to 3.4GHz, but the power consumed was tremendous.
When you can't ramp up the clock speed, your next best alternative is to go for as much parallelism as you can - increase the number of instructions you can execute in a single clock.
Chip makers achieve this in a wide variety of ways, including multiple CPU packages on a motherboard, multiple cores per CPU package, multiple threads per core, and multiple functional units per thread.
And yes, a single CPU at 3GHz can easily consume more power than two CPUs (or two cores) at 1.5GHz.
As for your theoretical 24GHz processor, such a thing is simply not possible with today's technology. (Well, there were some university experiments that hit insanely fast speeds, but don't expect commercial products any time soon.) Given the heat/power curves of today's chips, I wouldn't want to think about the cooling requirements of a 24GHz chip if you could somehow manage to build one.
Of course, breakthroughs do happen, and higher clock speeds might become practical in the future. But multi-core tech isn't going away - we'll simply end up with multiple cores at higher clock speeds.
Silentwave
Jul 14, 05:34 PM
It's worth noting that Intel has shipped P4-series chips at 3.4GHz. But the new chips (Woodcrest and Conroe) aren't being sold at speeds above 3GHz.
Pay attention. The answer is "sooner than you think".
Quarter 4 this year will see the X6900 conroe extreme at 3.2GHz.
So when will we start seeing 8 chips in a computer? Perhaps this will become the new measurement...not processor speeds, but the number of processors (or cores).
There have already been technology briefings from Intel that talk about 4-core chips in early and 32-core chips by 2010. Similar offerings are expected from AMD.
And the Xeon-MP series processors (which will, of course, eventually get all this tech) are designed with 8-way SMP in mind. A theoretical Xeon-MP based on this 32-core tech would produce a system with 256 cores. Of course, it is doubtful that anything other than a large server would be able to take proper advantage of this, so I wouldn't ever expect to find one on a desktop.
8 core should be out sometime between end of 2006 and beginning of 2007 with the quad core Clovertown processors (based on woodcrest) available in dual chip configurations. And it'll only get better from there.
Which reminds me, though slightly OT... this is a good reason why iMac may well get Conroe now or perhaps get Merom now but transition to a desktop chip by the time Santa Rosa comes out. The new chipset/socket means new logic board, and by the time that comes out the Kenstfield quad core chips on the consumer desktop end will start arriving. I don't yet know how far kentsfield will be scaling either up or down as far as clock speed/heat, but if quad core starts moving into the consumer dekstop market, they will need a very powerful processor: either Conroe or Kentsfield.
Pay attention. The answer is "sooner than you think".
Quarter 4 this year will see the X6900 conroe extreme at 3.2GHz.
So when will we start seeing 8 chips in a computer? Perhaps this will become the new measurement...not processor speeds, but the number of processors (or cores).
There have already been technology briefings from Intel that talk about 4-core chips in early and 32-core chips by 2010. Similar offerings are expected from AMD.
And the Xeon-MP series processors (which will, of course, eventually get all this tech) are designed with 8-way SMP in mind. A theoretical Xeon-MP based on this 32-core tech would produce a system with 256 cores. Of course, it is doubtful that anything other than a large server would be able to take proper advantage of this, so I wouldn't ever expect to find one on a desktop.
8 core should be out sometime between end of 2006 and beginning of 2007 with the quad core Clovertown processors (based on woodcrest) available in dual chip configurations. And it'll only get better from there.
Which reminds me, though slightly OT... this is a good reason why iMac may well get Conroe now or perhaps get Merom now but transition to a desktop chip by the time Santa Rosa comes out. The new chipset/socket means new logic board, and by the time that comes out the Kenstfield quad core chips on the consumer desktop end will start arriving. I don't yet know how far kentsfield will be scaling either up or down as far as clock speed/heat, but if quad core starts moving into the consumer dekstop market, they will need a very powerful processor: either Conroe or Kentsfield.
Eduardo1971
Apr 6, 01:43 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
Does this mean I should cancel my order on the 11" Mac Book Air 1.4GZ, I got it with 4GB ram and it's a refurb so I saved some cash. Should I wait until June.
Thanks in advance for your advise!!
Some at MR asking for hearfelt advice?
My advice: sure; why not wait.
:D
Does this mean I should cancel my order on the 11" Mac Book Air 1.4GZ, I got it with 4GB ram and it's a refurb so I saved some cash. Should I wait until June.
Thanks in advance for your advise!!
Some at MR asking for hearfelt advice?
My advice: sure; why not wait.
:D
zelet
Aug 25, 04:57 PM
Just out of curiosity... what kind of problems could you possibly have with .mac? I mean, I've never had any email problems, Setting it up in Mail is as simple as possible... the online interface is simple...
I dunno... hearing people complain about customer service regarding .mac seems funny to me. What types of problems have you had with it?
Well, recently there have been problems with people having their mail bounced back to them because somehow the dotMac smtp servers were blacklisted by spamcop and a few other services. They have been having pretty bad, though geographically localized, service disruptions. Friends of mine have also complained that mail they send to me are sometimes bounced back with a "This account doesn't exist" error message even though they have sent me mail before and after the event (yes, they verified the email address).
So, in summary, there are a lot of problems that shouldn't occur with a $100 a year service. DotMac should be at least a 99% uptime service for that kind of money.
I dunno... hearing people complain about customer service regarding .mac seems funny to me. What types of problems have you had with it?
Well, recently there have been problems with people having their mail bounced back to them because somehow the dotMac smtp servers were blacklisted by spamcop and a few other services. They have been having pretty bad, though geographically localized, service disruptions. Friends of mine have also complained that mail they send to me are sometimes bounced back with a "This account doesn't exist" error message even though they have sent me mail before and after the event (yes, they verified the email address).
So, in summary, there are a lot of problems that shouldn't occur with a $100 a year service. DotMac should be at least a 99% uptime service for that kind of money.
amols
Aug 27, 02:02 AM
The next major upgrade to Intel's notebook design isn't expected until early 2007 with a new notebook platform named "Santa Rosa". Santa Rosa will combine the Core 2 Duo processors with new supporting chips as well as Intel's AMT (http://www.intel.com/technology/manage/iamt/) (Active Management Technology) and Robson technology.
I still pity those guys expecting "Major" MBP performance gain by moving to Merom without Santa Rosa. They are as ignorant as those people expecting G5s with their two pound heat sinks to go in powerbooks. I'm just looking forward to see Conroe iMac and better battery life for MBPs. And iPod update off course ;)
I still pity those guys expecting "Major" MBP performance gain by moving to Merom without Santa Rosa. They are as ignorant as those people expecting G5s with their two pound heat sinks to go in powerbooks. I'm just looking forward to see Conroe iMac and better battery life for MBPs. And iPod update off course ;)
heisetax
Jul 14, 08:24 PM
Doh! Well, again IMHO, it is my preference to have only one optical drive built in. I could always add an external later.
Why do the rest of us have to settle for your preference?
I know people that have their systems running that could get by with a 5-10 GB hard drive. Does that mean that we should feel that all systems should only have a 5-10 GB hard drive, maybe a CD drive & since we all will have the same small needs a floppy drive. A DVD writer could make a complete backup in most ccases. Why would we need one of them. So why have more than one external 5 1/4" slot.
I may only run probrams that I can download on the internet, why then even one external drive slot?
Sounds a little far out. But what is really far out? Everybody has different needs & wants. Many Windows systems have the ability to have at least 4 internally mounted external 5 1/4" drives 2-4 or more 3.5" external drives, several internal 3.5" drives, 10-in-1 flash card reader/writers & many more things. My old Mac Clones had space for 4 5 1/4" external & 2 3 1/2" external drives, with either 2 or 4 internal 3.5" drives.
There are people that need to run many different drives at once. They don't all want to have more external drives with all of those many, many cords than they absolutely have to. Right now I have 3 external drives hooked to my 17" PowerBook. Then there is usually a flash drive or 2 hook up to this system.
Remember that everyone does their computing different. That means that only a certain group would be happy with what you think is all that needs to be in a system. Others will think that you have too much.
My wife & me each have MDD PowerMac G4's for our desktop units. They both have DVD burne & CD burner drives. I miss the other slots that I have on myy Clones. I may have up to 6 internal 3.5" drives mounted. Usually a couple of SCSI drives, a couple PATA drives, & a couple SATA drives.s I still have 3-6 drives attached externally plus a NAS drive. Most external drives are FW800, with a couple FW400 drives & a 3 CF drives tower by Lexar.
What is the correct amount of drives? To me it is whatever it takes to properly get your computer job down. So to you, it will always be, why more than 1 internal 5 1/4" drive.
Bill the TaxMan
Why do the rest of us have to settle for your preference?
I know people that have their systems running that could get by with a 5-10 GB hard drive. Does that mean that we should feel that all systems should only have a 5-10 GB hard drive, maybe a CD drive & since we all will have the same small needs a floppy drive. A DVD writer could make a complete backup in most ccases. Why would we need one of them. So why have more than one external 5 1/4" slot.
I may only run probrams that I can download on the internet, why then even one external drive slot?
Sounds a little far out. But what is really far out? Everybody has different needs & wants. Many Windows systems have the ability to have at least 4 internally mounted external 5 1/4" drives 2-4 or more 3.5" external drives, several internal 3.5" drives, 10-in-1 flash card reader/writers & many more things. My old Mac Clones had space for 4 5 1/4" external & 2 3 1/2" external drives, with either 2 or 4 internal 3.5" drives.
There are people that need to run many different drives at once. They don't all want to have more external drives with all of those many, many cords than they absolutely have to. Right now I have 3 external drives hooked to my 17" PowerBook. Then there is usually a flash drive or 2 hook up to this system.
Remember that everyone does their computing different. That means that only a certain group would be happy with what you think is all that needs to be in a system. Others will think that you have too much.
My wife & me each have MDD PowerMac G4's for our desktop units. They both have DVD burne & CD burner drives. I miss the other slots that I have on myy Clones. I may have up to 6 internal 3.5" drives mounted. Usually a couple of SCSI drives, a couple PATA drives, & a couple SATA drives.s I still have 3-6 drives attached externally plus a NAS drive. Most external drives are FW800, with a couple FW400 drives & a 3 CF drives tower by Lexar.
What is the correct amount of drives? To me it is whatever it takes to properly get your computer job down. So to you, it will always be, why more than 1 internal 5 1/4" drive.
Bill the TaxMan
wolfie37
Apr 25, 01:48 PM
I haven't read this lawsuit, so I don't know if they're claiming things that aren't true... but I really do not like the fact that the iPhone has a breadcrumbs database of my travels for the last 3 years!
This type of thing should not happen without users' knowledge... and it was. Or else this file would not be news!
It isn't news, it has been discussed before, its isn't without the user's knowledge you are asked about location services. Also the database is on your iPhone, not being given to or sent to anyone, so it's your information, you know where you have been so it isn't "news".
Your travels are also tracked by mobile phones companies as your phone shakes hands with their masts on your travels, this happens to all phones not just smart phones. Why aren't these people sueing them?? Oh that's right, doesn't give you as much self-publicity.
This type of thing should not happen without users' knowledge... and it was. Or else this file would not be news!
It isn't news, it has been discussed before, its isn't without the user's knowledge you are asked about location services. Also the database is on your iPhone, not being given to or sent to anyone, so it's your information, you know where you have been so it isn't "news".
Your travels are also tracked by mobile phones companies as your phone shakes hands with their masts on your travels, this happens to all phones not just smart phones. Why aren't these people sueing them?? Oh that's right, doesn't give you as much self-publicity.
ZoomZoomZoom
Sep 19, 10:02 AM
You should thouroughly read a post before you quote and attempt to disprove it, or in this case, call the poster a name like fanboy...
The poster before you mentioned how these "sub-$1000" laptops are JUST starting to ship THIS WEEK, not a month ago as you claim. If Apple were to release new MBP on Monday and announce them as "shipping today," then Apple would only mere days behind, not a month.
P.S. If you skipped to the end of this post again and are about to reply angrily, please go back and read the post as you will better understand what I am trying to say...
I found information on another forum and read it a bit incorrectly.
Nonetheless, even after re-reading sources (which a quick google of "shipping merom laptop" will bring up), Apple is at minimum a week and a half behind, assuming that shipping in blindingly fast. And seeing as they didn't update MBPs today - and (assuming rumors are correct) they might update next week, this puts Apple a solid two and a half weeks behind.
And that's on sub-$1000 notebooks.
The poster before you mentioned how these "sub-$1000" laptops are JUST starting to ship THIS WEEK, not a month ago as you claim. If Apple were to release new MBP on Monday and announce them as "shipping today," then Apple would only mere days behind, not a month.
P.S. If you skipped to the end of this post again and are about to reply angrily, please go back and read the post as you will better understand what I am trying to say...
I found information on another forum and read it a bit incorrectly.
Nonetheless, even after re-reading sources (which a quick google of "shipping merom laptop" will bring up), Apple is at minimum a week and a half behind, assuming that shipping in blindingly fast. And seeing as they didn't update MBPs today - and (assuming rumors are correct) they might update next week, this puts Apple a solid two and a half weeks behind.
And that's on sub-$1000 notebooks.
