Kwill
Mar 30, 12:01 PM
Here's a novel thought. Why doesn't Microsoft create something, you know, novel?
ergle2
Sep 11, 12:13 AM
I came to the opposite conclusion....
Running many compute-bound single-threaded benchmarks and apps - I saw how NT (pre Win2k) would balance across CPUs (that is, a "100%" compute-bound job would show each CPU running at 50%).
However, setting affinity so that one CPU was 100% and the other was 0% had no significant effect on the run times. (And by "significant" I mean statistically significant - I literally ran hundreds of runs in each configuration.)\\
By the way, with Win2k3 (and XP 64-bit, really the same system) you see much less "balancing" - a single-threaded app will stick to a CPU for much longer.
I suspect if any observable difference occurs depends upon the application, dataset, etc.
I'm guessing the 50% "balanced" method was done to try and keep a single CPU from heating up too much, and with the advent of multicore systems, it probably no longer matters which core is generating the heat due to them being in a single package.
It could also be MS found that certain circumstances (like mine) resulted in improvements in processing.
Interesting stuff.
Running many compute-bound single-threaded benchmarks and apps - I saw how NT (pre Win2k) would balance across CPUs (that is, a "100%" compute-bound job would show each CPU running at 50%).
However, setting affinity so that one CPU was 100% and the other was 0% had no significant effect on the run times. (And by "significant" I mean statistically significant - I literally ran hundreds of runs in each configuration.)\\
By the way, with Win2k3 (and XP 64-bit, really the same system) you see much less "balancing" - a single-threaded app will stick to a CPU for much longer.
I suspect if any observable difference occurs depends upon the application, dataset, etc.
I'm guessing the 50% "balanced" method was done to try and keep a single CPU from heating up too much, and with the advent of multicore systems, it probably no longer matters which core is generating the heat due to them being in a single package.
It could also be MS found that certain circumstances (like mine) resulted in improvements in processing.
Interesting stuff.
skunk
Apr 11, 01:15 PM
Because its **** as it doesn't have straightforward unit conversions and because everyone else in the world other than the US (and for a small number of things the UK) uses metric.I use metric feet.
cult hero
Apr 25, 04:42 PM
I bought a first gen unibody MacBook Pro and really liked it. However, in 2010 I sold it to replace it with the 13" MBP. For what I do that really is the perfect size. I've been toying with the idea of going to an MBA, but... no. The RAM is the biggest issue.
With that said, the resolution on the 13" MBA makes me jealous and I would have considered trading up if the latest generation had a resolution bump on the 13" models.
I'm quite curious about this upcoming generation of MacBook Pros though. Particularly if/what Apple will do to differentiate the 13" model as a "Pro" laptop. It would be really, really nice to see the optical drive go away and with that extra space increase the battery and/or bring back dedicated video to the 13" models.
Don't get me wrong, I love my little MBP. For work related purposes it does everything I need. However, it'd be nice to be able to play a few of the Steam games I have on it rather than my PC. Left 4 Dead 2 in particular, just because it'd be fun to take the machine over to a friend's place.
With that said, the resolution on the 13" MBA makes me jealous and I would have considered trading up if the latest generation had a resolution bump on the 13" models.
I'm quite curious about this upcoming generation of MacBook Pros though. Particularly if/what Apple will do to differentiate the 13" model as a "Pro" laptop. It would be really, really nice to see the optical drive go away and with that extra space increase the battery and/or bring back dedicated video to the 13" models.
Don't get me wrong, I love my little MBP. For work related purposes it does everything I need. However, it'd be nice to be able to play a few of the Steam games I have on it rather than my PC. Left 4 Dead 2 in particular, just because it'd be fun to take the machine over to a friend's place.
Detrius
Mar 16, 10:31 AM
I can just imagine that future Apple operating systems might very well include native protection that wold continue to thwart people wanting to sell anti-malware for Apple OS.
OS X Server ships with clamav for filtering viruses through the email server. Lion merges client and server. Therefore, there will be an antivirus program shipping with 10.7.
OS X Server ships with clamav for filtering viruses through the email server. Lion merges client and server. Therefore, there will be an antivirus program shipping with 10.7.
Dave00
Sep 12, 02:46 PM
Kind of a huge gap, don'cha think? For an extra $100 I can nearly TRIPLE the capacity? Why would I even consider a 30 GB model?
Considerably thinner, for one. It doesn't seem like much until you see 'em side by side. The double platter really eats more space.
Dave
Considerably thinner, for one. It doesn't seem like much until you see 'em side by side. The double platter really eats more space.
Dave
1984
Sep 14, 04:53 AM
I think that the phone interface won't have a click-wheel. Rather, it will be all screen with an on-screen wheel changing to an on-screen keypad. No slider action whatsoever. Maybe a hard switch for on/off, answer, and phonebook, but that's about all I'd put on the phone. It'll save on cost and hardware complexity too, not having to include a wheel.
That's what the recent Apple patents lead me to believe. Hopefully this iPod nano with the slide out keyboard is just an early concept. A very early concept.
That's what the recent Apple patents lead me to believe. Hopefully this iPod nano with the slide out keyboard is just an early concept. A very early concept.
Selax77
Sep 5, 03:09 PM
anyone think well see the 6g ipod or the real ipod video
tsadi
Mar 29, 11:11 AM
I shall come back to this prediction 4 years from now, and laugh at how dumb the prediction is.
aristotle
Nov 14, 12:00 AM
Wow. That's quite a diatribe. Historically inaccurate, too. English common law descends from the Roman system of laws that predates christianity (and which was not based on judaism) and from Saxon law, which also has nothing to do with judeo-christian ethics.
And juries are given instructions to follow the letter of the law as explained to them by the judge. Further, in the U.S. system, only matters at law, not equity, are subject to jury trial, and, in many cases, only if the defendant demands a jury trial.
You say:
"You are either deliberately infringing on the rights of others or you are not."
Ok. So when your third grader copies a few quotes from a book for his book report, he is infringing the copyright statute. But, of course, you complain that it's not the letter of the law that matters - it's the spirit. That's why judges came up with the fair use defense (later codified into the statute).
But what if the third grader copies 10 quotes? Still okay? A chapter? How about now? Where's the dividing line? What if instead of a third grader, it's another author who copies a few of the best quotes and competes with the first author? How about then? Gets more complicated, huh?
And that's why the fair use defense has evolved into a complicated legal test involving multiple factors. Among the factors:
the purpose and character of your use
the nature of the copyrighted work
the amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and
the effect of the use upon the potential market.
Let's look at these.
1) the purpose and character of your use
This is often called the transformative test. Am I creating something new and different and worthwhile to society, involving my own creativity? Many people say that the use in this case was pretty creative and useful, but let's assume no. So this factor weighs against fair use.
2) the nature of the copyrighted work
Published works, such as these icons, are entitled to less protection than unpublished. Also, factual or representative works, such as icons, are entitled to less protection than creative works like novels. So this factor weighs for fair use.
3) the amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and
A handful of icons out of an entire operating system? Seems small to me. Weighs for fair use.
4) the effect of the use upon the potential market.
By using these icons, is the "infringer" somehow preventing Apple from selling this sort of software, or preventing Apple from selling these icons? No. Again, weighs for fair use.
You simultaneously argue that things are black and white (you either infringe or you don't) and then you argue that the spirit of the law matters, not the letter. You argue for a bright line test, then for shades of gray.
Well, the answer is a little of both, but men and women far smarter than you have come up with the best tests they can to figure out how to deal with these fuzzy situations.
You can go to church and pray instead of going to court, if you'd like, but for those of us that believe in the legal system, we take solace in the fact that things really aren't black and white, and yet there is a framework in place that let's us try and figure these things out.
LOL. Please tell us which law firm you work for. That was quite funny. Are you a historian now too? Would the real cmaier please stand up?
So the arbitration system comes from the roman law as well? Do tell.
I'm not interested in what revisionist historians have come up with the justify this perversion of justice that you call "law". The roman empire fell a long time ago and while Roman law may have influenced much of our legal proceedings, including the structure of civil cases, I was talking about how civil disputes are generally dealt with. Lawyers arguing a case are supposed to be the last resort, not the first.
This process is based on Judeo-christian principles on how you settle disputes over land or labour. It has nothing to do with criminal law.
Here is how disputes were supposed to be dealt with.
1. You go to the person in question and try to talk it out.
2. If that does not work, you meet in front a mediator such as as priest, local official, magistrate or arbitrator.
3. If that does not work, you hire an advocate and make your case in front of the community.
4. If that does not work, you take your case before the court which would usually have been a king back in the day.
The bible frames it slightly different but that is the gist of how it appears in the bible.
To put in a modern context:
1. Go for coffee.
2. Arbitration.
3. Public Hearing.
4. Court case.
And juries are given instructions to follow the letter of the law as explained to them by the judge. Further, in the U.S. system, only matters at law, not equity, are subject to jury trial, and, in many cases, only if the defendant demands a jury trial.
You say:
"You are either deliberately infringing on the rights of others or you are not."
Ok. So when your third grader copies a few quotes from a book for his book report, he is infringing the copyright statute. But, of course, you complain that it's not the letter of the law that matters - it's the spirit. That's why judges came up with the fair use defense (later codified into the statute).
But what if the third grader copies 10 quotes? Still okay? A chapter? How about now? Where's the dividing line? What if instead of a third grader, it's another author who copies a few of the best quotes and competes with the first author? How about then? Gets more complicated, huh?
And that's why the fair use defense has evolved into a complicated legal test involving multiple factors. Among the factors:
the purpose and character of your use
the nature of the copyrighted work
the amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and
the effect of the use upon the potential market.
Let's look at these.
1) the purpose and character of your use
This is often called the transformative test. Am I creating something new and different and worthwhile to society, involving my own creativity? Many people say that the use in this case was pretty creative and useful, but let's assume no. So this factor weighs against fair use.
2) the nature of the copyrighted work
Published works, such as these icons, are entitled to less protection than unpublished. Also, factual or representative works, such as icons, are entitled to less protection than creative works like novels. So this factor weighs for fair use.
3) the amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and
A handful of icons out of an entire operating system? Seems small to me. Weighs for fair use.
4) the effect of the use upon the potential market.
By using these icons, is the "infringer" somehow preventing Apple from selling this sort of software, or preventing Apple from selling these icons? No. Again, weighs for fair use.
You simultaneously argue that things are black and white (you either infringe or you don't) and then you argue that the spirit of the law matters, not the letter. You argue for a bright line test, then for shades of gray.
Well, the answer is a little of both, but men and women far smarter than you have come up with the best tests they can to figure out how to deal with these fuzzy situations.
You can go to church and pray instead of going to court, if you'd like, but for those of us that believe in the legal system, we take solace in the fact that things really aren't black and white, and yet there is a framework in place that let's us try and figure these things out.
LOL. Please tell us which law firm you work for. That was quite funny. Are you a historian now too? Would the real cmaier please stand up?
So the arbitration system comes from the roman law as well? Do tell.
I'm not interested in what revisionist historians have come up with the justify this perversion of justice that you call "law". The roman empire fell a long time ago and while Roman law may have influenced much of our legal proceedings, including the structure of civil cases, I was talking about how civil disputes are generally dealt with. Lawyers arguing a case are supposed to be the last resort, not the first.
This process is based on Judeo-christian principles on how you settle disputes over land or labour. It has nothing to do with criminal law.
Here is how disputes were supposed to be dealt with.
1. You go to the person in question and try to talk it out.
2. If that does not work, you meet in front a mediator such as as priest, local official, magistrate or arbitrator.
3. If that does not work, you hire an advocate and make your case in front of the community.
4. If that does not work, you take your case before the court which would usually have been a king back in the day.
The bible frames it slightly different but that is the gist of how it appears in the bible.
To put in a modern context:
1. Go for coffee.
2. Arbitration.
3. Public Hearing.
4. Court case.
whenpaulsparks
Sep 15, 05:54 PM
as a proud owner of a SLVR L7, which i love to DEATH (greatest phone ever), i probably won't be buying one in 2007. maybe 2008? depends on what service it's on. if it's on cingular like the L7, then i'll get one without thinking twice.
Cameront9
Aug 23, 06:01 PM
That's quite a sum of money! A bit more than my Power Mac cost me, even with that extra RAM.
It's seems to me that it's unlikely that the cost of litigation could have exceeded the cost of a settlement, so does that show that Apple expected to be found liable for patent infringement as charged?
You seem to be unfamiliar with our court system. This case could have dragged on for YEARS, and cost Apple a TON of money--possibly far more than 100 Million.
It's seems to me that it's unlikely that the cost of litigation could have exceeded the cost of a settlement, so does that show that Apple expected to be found liable for patent infringement as charged?
You seem to be unfamiliar with our court system. This case could have dragged on for YEARS, and cost Apple a TON of money--possibly far more than 100 Million.
MacLawyer
Apr 4, 12:14 PM
Mac...a computer to die for.
Multimedia
Sep 10, 10:06 PM
Actually, look at the Dell Precision 490 Workstation - going from dual 3.0 (Intel 5160) down to a dual 2.66 (Intel 5150) is $410/processor, or an $820 difference in price. Not Apple pushing that one.
I'm guessing any 8-core machine will initially be a top-entry (ala "fastest") if it is introduced too soon, and not affect the whole lineup. Otherwise I will have more trouble convincing myself to buy the dual 3.0 now :). That Mac + iPod promo ends this week!I agree. It will probably cost about $4k. And I think it's conservative to guess it won't be here before Leopard since Leopard will probably be able to deal with all those cores a lot better than Tiger ever will. So unless you are prepared for another 6-8 month wait, you should go ahead and pull the trigger now. I need you to help drive up the demand for that expensive RAM now please. ;)
I'm guessing any 8-core machine will initially be a top-entry (ala "fastest") if it is introduced too soon, and not affect the whole lineup. Otherwise I will have more trouble convincing myself to buy the dual 3.0 now :). That Mac + iPod promo ends this week!I agree. It will probably cost about $4k. And I think it's conservative to guess it won't be here before Leopard since Leopard will probably be able to deal with all those cores a lot better than Tiger ever will. So unless you are prepared for another 6-8 month wait, you should go ahead and pull the trigger now. I need you to help drive up the demand for that expensive RAM now please. ;)
Ahheck01
Sep 4, 08:22 PM
I think it is the highly anticipated iToilet with universal iPod dock and count 'em four AppleTalk ports.
No, the iToilet with universal iPod dock was released yesterday. From the press release:
"In the first release of the new iToilet, Apple has included a noise-cancelling feature that masks the noises caused by bodily functions..."
"... can select music files to be played as the flushing sound..."
"... will be available, like the macbook and ipod, in both white and black. Production for the U2 edition was halted after lead singer...."
"...died of a heart attack while using a pre-production iToilet. Several revisions have since been made."
"Steve Jobs is calling it a 'freak accident' and is said to be paying for a custom 'iFuneral' in which all attendees will be offered a rebate on Mac Pro's."
-Evan
No, the iToilet with universal iPod dock was released yesterday. From the press release:
"In the first release of the new iToilet, Apple has included a noise-cancelling feature that masks the noises caused by bodily functions..."
"... can select music files to be played as the flushing sound..."
"... will be available, like the macbook and ipod, in both white and black. Production for the U2 edition was halted after lead singer...."
"...died of a heart attack while using a pre-production iToilet. Several revisions have since been made."
"Steve Jobs is calling it a 'freak accident' and is said to be paying for a custom 'iFuneral' in which all attendees will be offered a rebate on Mac Pro's."
-Evan
bigandy
Sep 26, 07:58 AM
I hope you will be able to by it 'sim free' in the uk, im not buying it if it an O2 exclusive and this will make me sad
you will, just keep an eye on expansys.com and mphone.co.uk when (if) it's announced...
you will, just keep an eye on expansys.com and mphone.co.uk when (if) it's announced...
Consultant
Jan 5, 03:11 PM
Made a correction to the headline. It should be:
McAfee faces obsolescence with increasing Apple popularity.
;)
McAfee faces obsolescence with increasing Apple popularity.
;)
farmboy
Dec 31, 11:58 AM
Hurf. There was a checkbox for installing a trial version. You didn't uncheck it.
Maybe this is why you're using OSX then. It makes choices for you. Not yours, but you know...
Just like the choice was made for you by Adobe to install completely unrelated software if the user doesn't happen to catch the checkbox. Yeah, that's so much better.
Maybe this is why you're using OSX then. It makes choices for you. Not yours, but you know...
Just like the choice was made for you by Adobe to install completely unrelated software if the user doesn't happen to catch the checkbox. Yeah, that's so much better.
skellener
Mar 22, 02:04 PM
C'mon six core iMac!
eye
Mar 23, 05:27 PM
If any of you had ever lost someone or had someone that you loved seriously injured by a drunk driver - you'd want this app pulled.
0 good can come from drunk driving. I don't know anyone (intelligent person) who would say otherwise. Constitutional or not, who in the world would want to encourage a drunk person to get behind the wheel? ..which is exactly what these apps do. I'm sure that there's a percentage of drunk drivers who have ventured out on the roads only because they had the convenience of these apps - when otherwise, they would have gotten a ride or sobered up first.
Ummm...nobody is saying drunk driving is good. Where are people getting this from?
0 good can come from drunk driving. I don't know anyone (intelligent person) who would say otherwise. Constitutional or not, who in the world would want to encourage a drunk person to get behind the wheel? ..which is exactly what these apps do. I'm sure that there's a percentage of drunk drivers who have ventured out on the roads only because they had the convenience of these apps - when otherwise, they would have gotten a ride or sobered up first.
Ummm...nobody is saying drunk driving is good. Where are people getting this from?
BlizzardBomb
Aug 31, 02:53 PM
We're doing it again....
NEW MACBOOK PROS!
NEW MACBOOKS!
NEW UNDERWEAR!
NEW IPOD NANOS!
NEW IPODS!
NEW IMACS!
NEW ITUNES VIDEO STORE! (ITMS. iTunes Media Store?)
NEW DISPLAYS!
NEW ISIGHTS!
NEW IPOD SOCKS!
NEW IPHONE!
Have we learned nothing? Apple never lets everything out of the bag.
w00t! Love it anyway. :D
While I would normally agree, look at the MBP, iMac, Mac Mini, iPod 5G, iPod Nano, iPod Shuffle and iSight. These products have not been updated for a while and the product line is starting to get stale.
NEW MACBOOK PROS!
NEW MACBOOKS!
NEW UNDERWEAR!
NEW IPOD NANOS!
NEW IPODS!
NEW IMACS!
NEW ITUNES VIDEO STORE! (ITMS. iTunes Media Store?)
NEW DISPLAYS!
NEW ISIGHTS!
NEW IPOD SOCKS!
NEW IPHONE!
Have we learned nothing? Apple never lets everything out of the bag.
w00t! Love it anyway. :D
While I would normally agree, look at the MBP, iMac, Mac Mini, iPod 5G, iPod Nano, iPod Shuffle and iSight. These products have not been updated for a while and the product line is starting to get stale.
aeaglex07
Apr 20, 10:40 AM
Don't rely on encryption to protect you in any way. The police can crack it, as can hackers, and they can simply demand with a court order that you give them the password. Then you're forced to essentially testify against yourself. No, pleading the 5th won't help.
*We Luvz Big Bruther* :(
*We Luvz Big Bruther* :(
Bubbasteve
Sep 15, 05:31 PM
If by early '07 TS means this Tuesday then yes.....early '07 it is :cool:
Small White Car
Nov 13, 02:45 PM
Just like every other copyright, you don't have the right to breech. If Apple doesn't defend their copyright, then they can lose it, so they HAVE to fight for it.
RA didn't break any copywright laws. Those images are broadcast by OS X specifically so other computers can dislplay them.
Just to be clear, if RA had made an application for a Macbook that displayed these images, that's ok. Because they made the application for an iPhone instead, it's not ok.
Does that make sense to anyone?
RA didn't break any copywright laws. Those images are broadcast by OS X specifically so other computers can dislplay them.
Just to be clear, if RA had made an application for a Macbook that displayed these images, that's ok. Because they made the application for an iPhone instead, it's not ok.
Does that make sense to anyone?
No comments:
Post a Comment