bdkennedy1
Aug 7, 04:09 PM
heh... they give MS so much crap for photocopying, but if anything, this is more or less taking a page out of MS's book with System Restore. Granted, it looks like it will be better, but still, MS had this kind of thing first.
I wouldn't say this was copying. A way to backup and restore your files is just common sense. Even if Microsoft didn't have a restore feature, Apple would have come up with it anyway.
I wouldn't say this was copying. A way to backup and restore your files is just common sense. Even if Microsoft didn't have a restore feature, Apple would have come up with it anyway.
Mr Fusion
Mar 26, 01:33 AM
http://dissociatedpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/facebook-meh-button-500.png
Yet another unimpressive "major" update to an O/S that's showing it's age and irrelevance. (Hell it's already to most consumers nothing more than "That thing you gotta hook your iPad up to to make it work.) Compared to the iDevice world, the computer side of Apple has ground to a halt. Is it intentional I wonder...? ;)
Enough!! Combine MacOS and iOS already!!! The transition is so painfully slow, would someone else in tech get off their lazy ass and prod these guys to move a LITTLE quicker?!?
:rolleyes:
Yet another unimpressive "major" update to an O/S that's showing it's age and irrelevance. (Hell it's already to most consumers nothing more than "That thing you gotta hook your iPad up to to make it work.) Compared to the iDevice world, the computer side of Apple has ground to a halt. Is it intentional I wonder...? ;)
Enough!! Combine MacOS and iOS already!!! The transition is so painfully slow, would someone else in tech get off their lazy ass and prod these guys to move a LITTLE quicker?!?
:rolleyes:
citizenzen
Mar 22, 12:23 PM
Funny also that we heard a DAMN THING from the media regarding the fact that ONLY CONGRESS can declare war.
It's funny too how a GOP controlled House of Representatives found it so important to spend time debating whether to defund NPR, but couldn't find the time to debate the value of using the military in Libya.
Though, for what it's worth, I'd much rather we returned to the constitutional practice of getting approval from congress before committing ourselves to military intervention.
It's funny too how a GOP controlled House of Representatives found it so important to spend time debating whether to defund NPR, but couldn't find the time to debate the value of using the military in Libya.
Though, for what it's worth, I'd much rather we returned to the constitutional practice of getting approval from congress before committing ourselves to military intervention.
samcraig
Apr 27, 09:59 AM
This was my point. If you don't agree, no need to get your panties in a bunch, just don't comment. You gots some demons in you chil'...
I find your statement back to him a bit hypocritical and quite judgmental. Why are his panties in a twist but not yours?
Your initial reply to him was harsh to begin with and he replied logically. Agree to disagree. Leave it at that.
I find your statement back to him a bit hypocritical and quite judgmental. Why are his panties in a twist but not yours?
Your initial reply to him was harsh to begin with and he replied logically. Agree to disagree. Leave it at that.
mcrain
Apr 27, 01:49 PM
Does anyone know what would have actually happened if President Obama was disqualified to be president? I suspect that all this effort by the crazy nuts in the birther movement would have done nothing but remove the Vice from Vice President Biden.
I doubt the election would have been given to the losing party/candidates. The election was, after all, for both President Obama and Vice President Biden.
I doubt the election would have been given to the losing party/candidates. The election was, after all, for both President Obama and Vice President Biden.
zero2dash
Sep 18, 01:44 PM
Plenty of people ran NT on their desktops.
Admission of your mistakes is a good step in becoming a better person.
Key word being DESKTOPS.
MP machines were server based long before they were included in desktops. I'd like to see where people had dual Xeon based DESKTOPS 'cause I've never seen it. It's not impossible but it's also not a good cost-based answer either. :p
The server/desktop division with Windows - as with OS X - is one of marketing, not software. Windows "Workstation" and Windows "Server" use the same codebase.
I never said otherwise.
The hardware they run on is where it differentiates.
Most people/corporations run server-based OS on servers and workstation-based OS on desktops (or "workstations" in the business world). It's not impossible to run a server OS on a desktop or a workstation OS on a server but it is incredibly stupid.
Well, if you can't find evidence of Windows running on well on machine with >2 processors, or of the significant low-level changes Microsoft have made to ensure it does, you aren't looking very hard.
Bad dual core support? Citations please. I think this is a case where a Mac fan is simply speaking out of ignorance of their "enemy" platform.
I erronously bundled in "dual core" with "sketchy 64-bit support". Don't know why. From what I hear, 64-bit support in XP64 is sketchy because of device driver issues (and drivers not being natively 64-bit). I don't have any true 'dual core' systems myself but my P4 3.0C HT works fine in XP Pro. I apologize for lumping in "dual core" in.
Similarly, if you're one of the "Vista is just XP with a fancy skin" crowd, you've obviously not done much research. The changes in Vista are on par with the scale of changes Apple made to NeXT to get OS X.
User Account Protection is a big change. I've seen the list of "new features" and it doesn't do anything for me. UAP is nice...it's just really late. I'm sure there's changes "under the hood" like the ones implemented in XP sp2 to prevent buffer/stack overflows, etc. and I'm sure that's what you're referring to.
I think people who say stuff like that are exhibiting a syndrome common to Mac folk who've never spent any time in the PC world -- they take negative comments they remember regarding versions of Windows or the PC experience from about 5 years back and assume they apply to today. XP, for example, really was for the most part a window-dressing of Windows 2000, but that is not the case for Vista. You see similar statements regarding "blue screens of death", overall system stability, etc, which suggest they haven't seen or used a PC since the late 90s/early 00's.
So - are you inferring that Windows 2000 or Windows XP never blue screen? Because (if you are) that's a load of crap. I've seen blue screens in both OS's. Granted it's usually tied to hardware only, but it still happens. I've had an external USB drive blue screen in XP every time I turned it on, tried on 3 XP computers. Hardware fault, no doubt. Lately my HP Laptop dvd drive has been causing XP Pro to blue screen every other time I insert a dvd-r. Again - hardware fault.
Otherwise are both OS's stable? Damn straight. But problems do occur and I hope you're not suggesting otherwise. No OS is without its flaws.
Admission of your mistakes is a good step in becoming a better person.
Key word being DESKTOPS.
MP machines were server based long before they were included in desktops. I'd like to see where people had dual Xeon based DESKTOPS 'cause I've never seen it. It's not impossible but it's also not a good cost-based answer either. :p
The server/desktop division with Windows - as with OS X - is one of marketing, not software. Windows "Workstation" and Windows "Server" use the same codebase.
I never said otherwise.
The hardware they run on is where it differentiates.
Most people/corporations run server-based OS on servers and workstation-based OS on desktops (or "workstations" in the business world). It's not impossible to run a server OS on a desktop or a workstation OS on a server but it is incredibly stupid.
Well, if you can't find evidence of Windows running on well on machine with >2 processors, or of the significant low-level changes Microsoft have made to ensure it does, you aren't looking very hard.
Bad dual core support? Citations please. I think this is a case where a Mac fan is simply speaking out of ignorance of their "enemy" platform.
I erronously bundled in "dual core" with "sketchy 64-bit support". Don't know why. From what I hear, 64-bit support in XP64 is sketchy because of device driver issues (and drivers not being natively 64-bit). I don't have any true 'dual core' systems myself but my P4 3.0C HT works fine in XP Pro. I apologize for lumping in "dual core" in.
Similarly, if you're one of the "Vista is just XP with a fancy skin" crowd, you've obviously not done much research. The changes in Vista are on par with the scale of changes Apple made to NeXT to get OS X.
User Account Protection is a big change. I've seen the list of "new features" and it doesn't do anything for me. UAP is nice...it's just really late. I'm sure there's changes "under the hood" like the ones implemented in XP sp2 to prevent buffer/stack overflows, etc. and I'm sure that's what you're referring to.
I think people who say stuff like that are exhibiting a syndrome common to Mac folk who've never spent any time in the PC world -- they take negative comments they remember regarding versions of Windows or the PC experience from about 5 years back and assume they apply to today. XP, for example, really was for the most part a window-dressing of Windows 2000, but that is not the case for Vista. You see similar statements regarding "blue screens of death", overall system stability, etc, which suggest they haven't seen or used a PC since the late 90s/early 00's.
So - are you inferring that Windows 2000 or Windows XP never blue screen? Because (if you are) that's a load of crap. I've seen blue screens in both OS's. Granted it's usually tied to hardware only, but it still happens. I've had an external USB drive blue screen in XP every time I turned it on, tried on 3 XP computers. Hardware fault, no doubt. Lately my HP Laptop dvd drive has been causing XP Pro to blue screen every other time I insert a dvd-r. Again - hardware fault.
Otherwise are both OS's stable? Damn straight. But problems do occur and I hope you're not suggesting otherwise. No OS is without its flaws.
AppleKrate
Sep 19, 08:58 AM
It's not quite 0700 Cupertino time - so maybe? :)
Rice-a-roni, you're right! I just checked my widget clock set to San Francisco time... here's hopin' :)
Rice-a-roni, you're right! I just checked my widget clock set to San Francisco time... here's hopin' :)
mkruck
Apr 6, 04:02 PM
To each his one, yes; but exactly what does Android offer as a platform than iOS doesn't--and I don't mean multiple download sources. What "... more or different things..." are you doing on Android that can't be done on iOS?
The first couple if things that I appreciate on Andriod vs iOS:
1. Having a user accessible file system. I need the ability to store documents, images, etc., in a central location that's available to any app that can open it, without having to sync via iTunes or store in a cloud environment, which is a non-starter for me. I work in a classified environment. Cloud is a no-no. Syncing docs and images via iTunes specific to the app that generated them is a PITA.
2. I want my homescreen to look like my homescreen, as opposed to the 4x6 row of squares that iOS presents. If I want thumbnails of my wife and kids on my homescreen, I can do that. If I want stock updates, weather, twitter feeds, facebook nonsense, etc., etc., etc., displayed, I can do that.
3. Having a notification system that interrupts what I'm currently working on makes me crazy. I don't need a popup that demand user interaction to close.
There's three quick ones. I'm sure I can think of more given some time, but quite honestly, it's not my job to sell Xooms or Android devices.
The first couple if things that I appreciate on Andriod vs iOS:
1. Having a user accessible file system. I need the ability to store documents, images, etc., in a central location that's available to any app that can open it, without having to sync via iTunes or store in a cloud environment, which is a non-starter for me. I work in a classified environment. Cloud is a no-no. Syncing docs and images via iTunes specific to the app that generated them is a PITA.
2. I want my homescreen to look like my homescreen, as opposed to the 4x6 row of squares that iOS presents. If I want thumbnails of my wife and kids on my homescreen, I can do that. If I want stock updates, weather, twitter feeds, facebook nonsense, etc., etc., etc., displayed, I can do that.
3. Having a notification system that interrupts what I'm currently working on makes me crazy. I don't need a popup that demand user interaction to close.
There's three quick ones. I'm sure I can think of more given some time, but quite honestly, it's not my job to sell Xooms or Android devices.
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$.
In order to make the biggest splash, it will have to be available in both GSM and CDMA versions so that all of the big 4 carriers can use it. GSM is the international standard, so I'm sure they will have that *at least*.
In order for it to matter, it will have to be able to access the music store over the air. Have you tried downloading an MP3 file, even on an EDGE connection? It sucks.
The delay here has more to do with the networks. Until the 3G networks are fully rolled out (EV-DO on Verizon, UTMS on GSM, etc. etc.) and available beyond a few cities, this phone will just frustrate people. (Verizon's rollout has gone much further, but I would think given that CDMA is rare outside of the US that that fails to compensate for the fact that the GSM 3G is still in just a few markets.)
The latest rumor is that wide-spread UTMS roll out will be in Q1 2007. When that happens, we'll see an iPod phone. It's not as if Apple couldn't have made an Apple-rific phone by now. The limitation isn't theirs, it's the networks'.
In the meantime, you can get an HTC Tytn that will use 3G world wide and will play MediaPlayer... if you're into M$.
Rt&Dzine
Apr 29, 10:23 AM
The name-calling is childish, too. In fact, you usually hear it from left-wingers.
Here we go again. Broad generalizations. Go to the responses to blogs and articles on the internet and you'll see this isn't true.
Here we go again. Broad generalizations. Go to the responses to blogs and articles on the internet and you'll see this isn't true.
GFLPraxis
Jul 20, 12:01 PM
Back to reality: Apple wil use Xeon 51xx (5150 and 5160) in the MacPro, and Core 2 Duo (Merom) in the iMac and MBP to be announced at the WWDC. The top iMac config will get a boost to 2.33GHz. In addition, Apple will use the price-drops for the Yonah to upgrade the Core Solo mini to Core Duo.
I disagree. I think Apple will use Core 2 Duo (Conroe) in the iMac, and Merom in the MBP. The iMac could hold a G5, why not Conroe?
On top of that, you'll notice that a 2.16 GHz Conroe costs $70 less than the 1.83 GHz Yonah that's in the iMac now, $70 less than a 2 GHz Merom, and $200 less than a 2.16 GHz Merom, increasing Apple's profit margins on the iMac considerably or allowing a price drop- plus they can advertise it as a desktop processor.
In fact, even if Conroe was too hot (which I highly doubt, since the iMac had a G5), a 2.16 GHz Conroe underclocked to 2 GHz still saves $70 over a 2 GHz Merom.
I disagree. I think Apple will use Core 2 Duo (Conroe) in the iMac, and Merom in the MBP. The iMac could hold a G5, why not Conroe?
On top of that, you'll notice that a 2.16 GHz Conroe costs $70 less than the 1.83 GHz Yonah that's in the iMac now, $70 less than a 2 GHz Merom, and $200 less than a 2.16 GHz Merom, increasing Apple's profit margins on the iMac considerably or allowing a price drop- plus they can advertise it as a desktop processor.
In fact, even if Conroe was too hot (which I highly doubt, since the iMac had a G5), a 2.16 GHz Conroe underclocked to 2 GHz still saves $70 over a 2 GHz Merom.
Digitaljim
Nov 28, 08:05 PM
So Universal Music Group must have received something in the region of $112 so far from Zune sales.
QCassidy352
Jul 20, 03:53 PM
I hate to burst everyone's bubble, but Kentsfield will not be appearing in any of the Pro machines for some time.
Apple will be using them exclusively in the Xserves, at for the most part of 2007. This will finally give Apple another way to distinguish their server line from their pro line.
What? Apple*differentiates the XServes by having them 1U thick and rackmountable. One buys a rackmount server not because it's faster but because it's smaller and fits in a rack.
yeah, what he said. Apple does not have to distinguish powermacs from servers with processor speeds. People (businesses) who need servers are not going to buy powermacs to do the job even if they are a little bit faster or cheaper; they are going to buy real rack-mounted servers.
Apple will be using them exclusively in the Xserves, at for the most part of 2007. This will finally give Apple another way to distinguish their server line from their pro line.
What? Apple*differentiates the XServes by having them 1U thick and rackmountable. One buys a rackmount server not because it's faster but because it's smaller and fits in a rack.
yeah, what he said. Apple does not have to distinguish powermacs from servers with processor speeds. People (businesses) who need servers are not going to buy powermacs to do the job even if they are a little bit faster or cheaper; they are going to buy real rack-mounted servers.
lorductape
Nov 28, 06:39 PM
I suspect the main reason that Microsoft agreed to pay money in the first place is that they needed to get the music labels on board to boost the Zune Music Store, Microsoft was in the weaker position here and I believe the labels exploited that weakness.
I believe, correct me if I'm wrong, that microsoft suggested it in the first place to universal.
I believe, correct me if I'm wrong, that microsoft suggested it in the first place to universal.
Scruff
Aug 11, 11:28 AM
This is probably the rumored Apple product I look forward to the most. Could really use a new phone, :p.
kingconsulting
Nov 28, 07:39 PM
Actually, they do. They also got paid on every blank tape sold when cassettes were big. I think it is crazy for everyone to think that the music industry is greedy when it getting squeezed out of all of their revenue streams. So, Apple makes hundreds of millions off of their back on the itunes site, and a billion off of iPod sales, and they cannot share in the wealth?
It doesn't cost the consumer any more, why wouldn't you want the people who actually make the music you are listening to get compensated?
This debate is stale. People want something for nothing.
What your saying is totally obsurd. Who's fault is it the record companies are getting "squeezed"? Apple makes computers that can play the music also. Maybe they record companies should get a cut of that also?
The record companies are the ones who want something for nothing!
It doesn't cost the consumer any more, why wouldn't you want the people who actually make the music you are listening to get compensated?
This debate is stale. People want something for nothing.
What your saying is totally obsurd. Who's fault is it the record companies are getting "squeezed"? Apple makes computers that can play the music also. Maybe they record companies should get a cut of that also?
The record companies are the ones who want something for nothing!
littleman23408
Nov 30, 09:54 PM
Its tough, but i did it. Unless you are going to hit someone you really dont need to slow down for many turns. The buses dont go fast enough for it to be a problem. You can get to 11th at the first turn but cutting in very close to the cone (dont hit it!) and downshifting to slide a little. Sneak into 11th and start drafting the bus in front of you. Theres an easy left where you can pass on the inside and take one more place, then get as close to the tires on the right as possible and you'll be able to grab a few more spots before you hit the 2nd straight.
The next turn is a hard left into an easy 180� right. Be careful on the left as its easy to hit a cone, then cut close to the inside of the right. When you get out of that turn you should be directly behind the blue and teal buses. You wont be able to pass them for a while so draft as best as you can until you get to the hard left at the complete other end of the track. Take that turn really wide and stay to the inside as you exit. You should be able to stay at speed and sneak right by if you are careful enough to not bump into them. If you are too close just back off a little, as long as you pass the blue buses at this turn you are doing great. Just be careful.
The next is a hard left that takes you back to the starting line. If you got ahead of the blue and teal bus there will be a bit of congestion there. Stay close to the inside but be careful you dont hit the grass too much. You should be able to get 5th or 6th before the 2nd lap starts. Follow the same lines as before and watch your corners for a chance to pass on the inside. I got to 1st at the last long straight, but the dark green bus in front is a little violent, so screw the line and do whatever it takes to stay away from him. Take both last lefts carefully and you'll grab first.
Its tough, but possible when you learn the track. I havent tried the Lotus challenge yet because i've been working on licenses, but i assume its roughly the same process just much faster.
Cool thanks. I will give this a try. Anything to get this bus done. I hate the tasks where whatever it is you are driving is real slow!
The next turn is a hard left into an easy 180� right. Be careful on the left as its easy to hit a cone, then cut close to the inside of the right. When you get out of that turn you should be directly behind the blue and teal buses. You wont be able to pass them for a while so draft as best as you can until you get to the hard left at the complete other end of the track. Take that turn really wide and stay to the inside as you exit. You should be able to stay at speed and sneak right by if you are careful enough to not bump into them. If you are too close just back off a little, as long as you pass the blue buses at this turn you are doing great. Just be careful.
The next is a hard left that takes you back to the starting line. If you got ahead of the blue and teal bus there will be a bit of congestion there. Stay close to the inside but be careful you dont hit the grass too much. You should be able to get 5th or 6th before the 2nd lap starts. Follow the same lines as before and watch your corners for a chance to pass on the inside. I got to 1st at the last long straight, but the dark green bus in front is a little violent, so screw the line and do whatever it takes to stay away from him. Take both last lefts carefully and you'll grab first.
Its tough, but possible when you learn the track. I havent tried the Lotus challenge yet because i've been working on licenses, but i assume its roughly the same process just much faster.
Cool thanks. I will give this a try. Anything to get this bus done. I hate the tasks where whatever it is you are driving is real slow!
bigmc6000
Jul 14, 03:17 PM
Some of this makes sense, some of it not.
I think AppleInsider is right about the case. With the exception of the MacBook, whose design has been rumoured for years and clearly was something Apple would have done even had this been the "iBook G5", Apple has made it a point with all of their Intelizations to use the same case as the predecessor, as if to say "It's business as usual, all we've changed is the processor." So from that point of view, the PowerMac G5 case being, more or less, the Mac Pro case, makes a lot of sense.
Two optical drives? No, sorry, not seeing the reasoning. The reasons given so far don't add up:
- copying DVDs - you can't legally copy 99% of DVDs anyway, if there was no need for twin CD drives, why would there suddenly be for DVDs?
- burning two at once - few people need this, and it's a great sales opportunity for a Firewire external burner anyway. Hell, why stop at TWO?
- Blu-ray - not unless they're really screwed up BR and drives with BR will be incompatible with existing media or something.
As per ownership rights listed by the US copyright office you're allowed to make backup copies of all personally owned material. Now DVD makers would like to make that impossible as it supports the subsequent illegal activity however, strictly legal speaking there is absolutely nothing illegal about making a copy of your DVD's (selling/distributing is where you cross the legal/illegal line)
I think AppleInsider is right about the case. With the exception of the MacBook, whose design has been rumoured for years and clearly was something Apple would have done even had this been the "iBook G5", Apple has made it a point with all of their Intelizations to use the same case as the predecessor, as if to say "It's business as usual, all we've changed is the processor." So from that point of view, the PowerMac G5 case being, more or less, the Mac Pro case, makes a lot of sense.
Two optical drives? No, sorry, not seeing the reasoning. The reasons given so far don't add up:
- copying DVDs - you can't legally copy 99% of DVDs anyway, if there was no need for twin CD drives, why would there suddenly be for DVDs?
- burning two at once - few people need this, and it's a great sales opportunity for a Firewire external burner anyway. Hell, why stop at TWO?
- Blu-ray - not unless they're really screwed up BR and drives with BR will be incompatible with existing media or something.
As per ownership rights listed by the US copyright office you're allowed to make backup copies of all personally owned material. Now DVD makers would like to make that impossible as it supports the subsequent illegal activity however, strictly legal speaking there is absolutely nothing illegal about making a copy of your DVD's (selling/distributing is where you cross the legal/illegal line)
kallisti
Mar 22, 05:52 PM
I'm not american, perhaps you should be utilising the 'proper' English that was invented here.
And you're last sentence makes you look rather condescending and quite frankly a bit of a pretentious moron.
And I'm sorry to say, I've never been to the states, but of course you make an unfounded and ignorant assertion that I have never travelled. Really, you're not doing yourself much good with that mentality you have.
Glad that you're just showcasing your pitiful character to the rest of us.
Just stop already. You made a couple of stupid and incorrect statements. You got called on them. Suck it up and admit you were wrong. It happens to the best of us :)
And you're last sentence makes you look rather condescending and quite frankly a bit of a pretentious moron.
And I'm sorry to say, I've never been to the states, but of course you make an unfounded and ignorant assertion that I have never travelled. Really, you're not doing yourself much good with that mentality you have.
Glad that you're just showcasing your pitiful character to the rest of us.
Just stop already. You made a couple of stupid and incorrect statements. You got called on them. Suck it up and admit you were wrong. It happens to the best of us :)
Multimedia
Jul 21, 11:43 AM
hi,
i've just sold my dual g5 because
i plan to buy a new macpro in august.
But seems that it will be already obsolate after 3 months.
Please can you tell me if the socket of woodcrest
will make the macpro upgradable one day,
or these new type of processors need differet socket?
Thanks.Woodcrest socket may accept a cloverton Quad Core twice. But we just don't know yet because silicon may need to be added to manage 8 cores instead of 4.
Your best value would to buy a refurb Quad G5 for $2799. How much did you get for what model?
i've just sold my dual g5 because
i plan to buy a new macpro in august.
But seems that it will be already obsolate after 3 months.
Please can you tell me if the socket of woodcrest
will make the macpro upgradable one day,
or these new type of processors need differet socket?
Thanks.Woodcrest socket may accept a cloverton Quad Core twice. But we just don't know yet because silicon may need to be added to manage 8 cores instead of 4.
Your best value would to buy a refurb Quad G5 for $2799. How much did you get for what model?
greenstork
Jul 31, 12:17 PM
I've built a gaming PC around the Core 2 Duo E6700. I'd like to be able to install OS X on it, because the only reason why I'd ever use Windows is for the latest games. Here are the spec's, think this would run OS X nicely? ;-)
Intel 975XBX Motherboard
Intel Core 2 Duo E6700 (should overclock to around 3.2 to 3.5 GHz with my Zalman CNPS9500 AT air cooler)
ATI Crossfire x1900 (crossfire master card)
Sapphire ATI x1900xt (in crossfire)
1GB Crucial Ballistix DDR2 800 Memory
2 x 320GB Seagate Perpendicular Recording SATA2 HD's in RAID 1
Antec Trupower II 550 watt power supply
Antec P180 case in black
... keep in mind I am a diehard Mac fan, but I've always wanted to build a gaming rig since I'm a hardcore gamer. After all, I'm writing this entry on my MacBook Pro. Mmmmm.
You should have waited for a Mac Pro. By hacking OS X to run on your custom built machine, you're constantly going to have to deal with a buggy Mac OS. There's no doubt that with every OS update, Apple will try to disable your hacked copy, if not fry your OS X installation. Make sure you partition...
I'm a gamer too and I'm just sitting on my hands waiting for a Mac Pro. Sure, it may be more expensive than a custom-built Intel machine, but it will run OS X like a charm, and that's ultimately the most important factor in my computer purchase. But access to Windows games and Mac OS X, that's a dream come true for this mac fanatic. I'm just keeping my fingers crossed that virtualization makes big enough strides that I never have to leave OS X to play Windows-based games.
Intel 975XBX Motherboard
Intel Core 2 Duo E6700 (should overclock to around 3.2 to 3.5 GHz with my Zalman CNPS9500 AT air cooler)
ATI Crossfire x1900 (crossfire master card)
Sapphire ATI x1900xt (in crossfire)
1GB Crucial Ballistix DDR2 800 Memory
2 x 320GB Seagate Perpendicular Recording SATA2 HD's in RAID 1
Antec Trupower II 550 watt power supply
Antec P180 case in black
... keep in mind I am a diehard Mac fan, but I've always wanted to build a gaming rig since I'm a hardcore gamer. After all, I'm writing this entry on my MacBook Pro. Mmmmm.
You should have waited for a Mac Pro. By hacking OS X to run on your custom built machine, you're constantly going to have to deal with a buggy Mac OS. There's no doubt that with every OS update, Apple will try to disable your hacked copy, if not fry your OS X installation. Make sure you partition...
I'm a gamer too and I'm just sitting on my hands waiting for a Mac Pro. Sure, it may be more expensive than a custom-built Intel machine, but it will run OS X like a charm, and that's ultimately the most important factor in my computer purchase. But access to Windows games and Mac OS X, that's a dream come true for this mac fanatic. I'm just keeping my fingers crossed that virtualization makes big enough strides that I never have to leave OS X to play Windows-based games.
WildCowboy
Aug 15, 01:04 PM
has adobe dropped any hints as to when CS3 will be available
In March they were saying (http://www.forbes.com/2006/03/23/adobe-chizen-earnings_cz_dal_0324adobe.html?partner=links) the second quarter of next year.
In March they were saying (http://www.forbes.com/2006/03/23/adobe-chizen-earnings_cz_dal_0324adobe.html?partner=links) the second quarter of next year.
shelterpaw
Aug 17, 01:05 AM
You're right. I'm extremely unimpressed that the fastest xeon only days old is actually slower mhz for mhz than a G5 that is pushing 4 year old technology. Really sad.
However it's bizarre that AE was actually faster under rosetta. I gotta think these tests were'nt very accurrate. Don't forget that these aps were recently ported to the Intel platform. we may see optimizations and speed improvements over time. Also, they only ran one test in FCP, they should have run many more.
However it's bizarre that AE was actually faster under rosetta. I gotta think these tests were'nt very accurrate. Don't forget that these aps were recently ported to the Intel platform. we may see optimizations and speed improvements over time. Also, they only ran one test in FCP, they should have run many more.
lgutie20
Apr 11, 11:57 AM
I don't see why people understand from the WWDC invitation that there will be no iPhone 5 during the event and that they will only talk about software!
WWDC is the biggest event and the only adequate platform to present the most popular Apple product! I don't see them changing their formula any time soon even if a software revolution is to take over WWDC.
WWDC is the biggest event and the only adequate platform to present the most popular Apple product! I don't see them changing their formula any time soon even if a software revolution is to take over WWDC.
