BlizzardBomb
Aug 6, 05:17 PM
Sources inform me that it is going to be blue.
:p
No way! :p Well looking back, it seems to get swooshier as time goes on, maybe that's a pointer ;) But what if... there's something radically different? :eek:
:p
No way! :p Well looking back, it seems to get swooshier as time goes on, maybe that's a pointer ;) But what if... there's something radically different? :eek:
iMikeT
Sep 13, 07:55 AM
I'll just wait for the 16 core model.:p
DeathChill
Apr 19, 08:06 PM
Me, Urg, first caveman to make rock round! Michelin and Firestone steal idea!
I'm not a lawyer but I play one on the Internet. You have a bulletproof case; let's sue.
I'm not a lawyer but I play one on the Internet. You have a bulletproof case; let's sue.
robogobo
Apr 8, 05:01 AM
Maybe they ate too much magical unicorn dust and it clouded their judgement. :rolleyes:
Omg unicorn dust that is so funny! Where do you get this awesome material? Hilarious!
Omg unicorn dust that is so funny! Where do you get this awesome material? Hilarious!
ezekielrage_99
Aug 17, 02:01 AM
A lot of folks are waiting for game benchmarks...bring 'em on!
Yeah put up some World of Warcraft or Doom 3 results, that's what this is all about a Mac being the fastest gaming machine :cool:
Yeah put up some World of Warcraft or Doom 3 results, that's what this is all about a Mac being the fastest gaming machine :cool:
edoates
Apr 7, 11:27 AM
'
Wake up and smell the coffee... BR is the main distribution method for paid HD content in the world. Also the quality is far better then with any download service.
And I'm going to point out again: 1080p BluRay movies are about 30GB each for a full length movie, not counting the "extras." Even if Netflix et al allowed such quality downloads, most ISPs have a maximum monthly bandwidth limit that is not prominently mentioned when you sign up, but exists none the less (for Comcast Cable, it's 250GB).
If you have only DSL, that's not a big issue because at 3mbs or so, you might not be able to download 250GB in a month ;-) But at 20 to 50mbs with cable, or if Google's 1gbs fiber connections work out, that's only 10 movies a month.
I'd love to see network delivery of everything - cancel Directv, etc., but with the extant bandwidth limitations, I don't think it happening.
BluRay lives.
Eddie O
Wake up and smell the coffee... BR is the main distribution method for paid HD content in the world. Also the quality is far better then with any download service.
And I'm going to point out again: 1080p BluRay movies are about 30GB each for a full length movie, not counting the "extras." Even if Netflix et al allowed such quality downloads, most ISPs have a maximum monthly bandwidth limit that is not prominently mentioned when you sign up, but exists none the less (for Comcast Cable, it's 250GB).
If you have only DSL, that's not a big issue because at 3mbs or so, you might not be able to download 250GB in a month ;-) But at 20 to 50mbs with cable, or if Google's 1gbs fiber connections work out, that's only 10 movies a month.
I'd love to see network delivery of everything - cancel Directv, etc., but with the extant bandwidth limitations, I don't think it happening.
BluRay lives.
Eddie O
Stridder44
Nov 28, 09:06 PM
No guys, this sounds like a great idea....*cough*.....
I WAS the one
Mar 23, 06:44 AM
Let's the game begin.... Nothing will be greater than the iPad unless they make an iOS based Tablet.
TangoCharlie
Jul 20, 08:38 AM
Anyone else think this is getting out of hand? Two cores, great improvement. Four cores, ehh it's faster but Joe can't tell. Eight cores, now thats just stupid.
Let me guess it will only come with 512mb of Ram :p (ok it will be at least a GB).
The riduculous speculation is certainly getting out of control! A quad core iMac... I don't think so! Not for a long while. 8 Cores (ie dual-quads) will only become available in the top-end of the MacPro (assuming the MacPro does indeed go with the Xeon CPU), and the top-end XServes.
If you want wild speculation, here goes....
Apple might use the Conroe and ConroeXE in the first Mac Pros and then add in support for Kentsfield (quad) when it becomes available. This could well be the reason why Intel has brought forward the release of Kentsfield.
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.
Any further speculation is just farcical! :eek:
Let me guess it will only come with 512mb of Ram :p (ok it will be at least a GB).
The riduculous speculation is certainly getting out of control! A quad core iMac... I don't think so! Not for a long while. 8 Cores (ie dual-quads) will only become available in the top-end of the MacPro (assuming the MacPro does indeed go with the Xeon CPU), and the top-end XServes.
If you want wild speculation, here goes....
Apple might use the Conroe and ConroeXE in the first Mac Pros and then add in support for Kentsfield (quad) when it becomes available. This could well be the reason why Intel has brought forward the release of Kentsfield.
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.
Any further speculation is just farcical! :eek:
Eidorian
Jul 20, 05:57 PM
According to Daily Tech Merom is already shipping! Intel announced it during Intel's Q2'06 earnings report. Is an upgraded MBP going to make an appearance at the WWDC?
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=3421��Qué?!
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=3421��Qué?!
MacBoobsPro
Jul 20, 08:43 AM
I got it...
Octopros :D
Octopros :D
jaxstate
Jul 27, 11:11 AM
I read the link, and it give no mention of the speeds of the notebook chips. It only gives a range for the desktop chips. Maybe you didn't read it.
If you read the linked articled you will find the answer.
Also, right from the macrumors page is a quote that says, "Core 2 Duo runs at slower clock speeds than Pentium-era chips, but is still more productive because it handles more calculations per clock cycle." I think that would show that this has nothing to do with the Mhz myth but is the opposite.
When did Apple have pentium-era chips in their machines?
If you read the linked articled you will find the answer.
Also, right from the macrumors page is a quote that says, "Core 2 Duo runs at slower clock speeds than Pentium-era chips, but is still more productive because it handles more calculations per clock cycle." I think that would show that this has nothing to do with the Mhz myth but is the opposite.
When did Apple have pentium-era chips in their machines?
Iconoclysm
Apr 19, 06:29 PM
Alright, I was originally going to take Apple's side on this, since I could clearly see it looks a lot like iOS, but having looked at Samsung's F700, I don' think Apple has any right to sue..
Although the Samsung F700 has very simple icons, Apple clearly has the same placement of icons, even looking at the bottom you find the four dock like icons..
http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/9559/samsungf700cellular.jpg
I'd say that Apple copied Samsung :P.. Honestly I'm not one to take sides just because I like Apple Products, I just think its wrong to sue since Samsung clearly had this type of UI first.. Apple has no right to sue..
Which launched 6 months after the original iPhone...and was displayed in February of 2007 with an entirely different interface.
Although the Samsung F700 has very simple icons, Apple clearly has the same placement of icons, even looking at the bottom you find the four dock like icons..
http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/9559/samsungf700cellular.jpg
I'd say that Apple copied Samsung :P.. Honestly I'm not one to take sides just because I like Apple Products, I just think its wrong to sue since Samsung clearly had this type of UI first.. Apple has no right to sue..
Which launched 6 months after the original iPhone...and was displayed in February of 2007 with an entirely different interface.
mcrain
Apr 28, 02:48 PM
I guess the republicans can maybe now look at the issues.
I am glad that Obama put out the papers to shut the conspiracy theorists up.
Putting the papers out has made all the people who spewed this crap look like total and complete fools; and exposed their racism for all to see and mock. :D
For all the GOPers who wouldn't tell the racist fools in your own party to drop it, you are complicit in this farce. John Boehner, I'm talking to you! Yes, it was your job. (http://www.mediaite.com/tv/speaker-boehner-its-not-my-job-to-tell-americans-that-obama-is-not-a-muslim/)
I am glad that Obama put out the papers to shut the conspiracy theorists up.
Putting the papers out has made all the people who spewed this crap look like total and complete fools; and exposed their racism for all to see and mock. :D
For all the GOPers who wouldn't tell the racist fools in your own party to drop it, you are complicit in this farce. John Boehner, I'm talking to you! Yes, it was your job. (http://www.mediaite.com/tv/speaker-boehner-its-not-my-job-to-tell-americans-that-obama-is-not-a-muslim/)
eMagius
Aug 7, 07:36 PM
As others have said, Time Machine is likely either a direct port of Sun's ZFS, or an equivalent implementation in HFS+.
I don't think we can say exactly how things work underneath. Windows 2003 offers differential snapshots without making massive changes to NTFS, for example. It would be neat if Apple did throw its weight behind ZFS, but I'm pretty sure it's not going to happen with 10.5.
According to today's keynote, Apple has finally added support for network drives. But I wonder -- does this mean only other Leopard Macs, or any shared drive that the Mac can connect to? Can I index a Windows shared drive from my Mac, or even a Unix NFS mount? Or is it only other Macs? Once again, if it's limited to other Leopard Macs, then this would be useless for a lot of people (mostly ME! :D).
I don't see how this would work for anything other than other Leopard (maybe Tiger, with a software update) Macs. Spotlight has to have the indexes pre-generated, after all.
Finally, gotta wonder what those "top secret" features are, and why so secret?
Call me a cynic, but I'd say Apple either hasn't implemented them yet or hasn't thought of them yet.
I don't think we can say exactly how things work underneath. Windows 2003 offers differential snapshots without making massive changes to NTFS, for example. It would be neat if Apple did throw its weight behind ZFS, but I'm pretty sure it's not going to happen with 10.5.
According to today's keynote, Apple has finally added support for network drives. But I wonder -- does this mean only other Leopard Macs, or any shared drive that the Mac can connect to? Can I index a Windows shared drive from my Mac, or even a Unix NFS mount? Or is it only other Macs? Once again, if it's limited to other Leopard Macs, then this would be useless for a lot of people (mostly ME! :D).
I don't see how this would work for anything other than other Leopard (maybe Tiger, with a software update) Macs. Spotlight has to have the indexes pre-generated, after all.
Finally, gotta wonder what those "top secret" features are, and why so secret?
Call me a cynic, but I'd say Apple either hasn't implemented them yet or hasn't thought of them yet.
SuperCachetes
Mar 23, 04:23 PM
"Is it your position that Libya represents a larger danger to American assets/security than Iraq? If not, is it your suggestion that America should be involved in every humanitarian crisis with brutal dictators worldwide, or at least those comparable to Libya? If so, why aren't we in North Korea? Why aren't we in any number of African nations?
I think this is a fair point, and it really doesn't matter if it's the United States making the calls, or the United Nations. We are essentially playing "God" with the other nations of the world. My complaint on the first page revolved around the lack of a quantifiable threshold for intervention. We inadvertently play favorites, and the world has every right to wonder about the motivation any time the USA takes action against a sovereign state. We should either stay out of ALL interference, or else put on the damn star-spangled cape and superhero tights and get to business already. Wherever evil is, we must go and fight it! :rolleyes:
Why you keep on referring to Iraq when the scale of action in scope of resources and time isn't remotely on the size of the Iraq invasion, is a complete mystery. If you're attempting to make this Obama's 'Iraq' folly, then you will fail. This will be off the front pages of US papers in terms of US engagement within a week or two.
Quite right. So far the whole Libya affair has a lot more in common with Desert Fox (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Iraq_(December_1998)) than Iraq...
I think this is a fair point, and it really doesn't matter if it's the United States making the calls, or the United Nations. We are essentially playing "God" with the other nations of the world. My complaint on the first page revolved around the lack of a quantifiable threshold for intervention. We inadvertently play favorites, and the world has every right to wonder about the motivation any time the USA takes action against a sovereign state. We should either stay out of ALL interference, or else put on the damn star-spangled cape and superhero tights and get to business already. Wherever evil is, we must go and fight it! :rolleyes:
Why you keep on referring to Iraq when the scale of action in scope of resources and time isn't remotely on the size of the Iraq invasion, is a complete mystery. If you're attempting to make this Obama's 'Iraq' folly, then you will fail. This will be off the front pages of US papers in terms of US engagement within a week or two.
Quite right. So far the whole Libya affair has a lot more in common with Desert Fox (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Iraq_(December_1998)) than Iraq...
mdntcallr
Sep 13, 10:30 AM
this is pretty neat news.
means people like me can buy a mac pro tower with the 2.0 ghz core. good video card.
then upgrade later on when i have more money. that and it will be powerful as hell.
super nice!
means people like me can buy a mac pro tower with the 2.0 ghz core. good video card.
then upgrade later on when i have more money. that and it will be powerful as hell.
super nice!
Orange-DE
Jul 31, 11:04 AM
You Do Dat!
Gupster
Apr 7, 10:40 PM
d
rjohnstone
Apr 25, 03:19 PM
"Federal Marshals need a warrant. . . . . "
Duh, the police always have to jump over a higher bar . . . I, personally, can come into your home, take your bag of cocaine, and go give it to the police and it will be admissible, even though the cops need a warrant. (I can be sued for breaking and entering, etc., but the drugs are still admissible
Actually it would not be admissible.
The police would not be able to verify where it actually came from unless they actually watched you retrieve it.
At that point a good attorney would argue that you were acting as an agent of the police and the subsequent discovery and retrieval of the coke would fall under the same rules for gathering evidence and require a warrant.
The coke evidence would get tossed and you would go to jail for breaking and entering.
The officers who you handed the coke too would either be reprimanded or fired.
Duh, the police always have to jump over a higher bar . . . I, personally, can come into your home, take your bag of cocaine, and go give it to the police and it will be admissible, even though the cops need a warrant. (I can be sued for breaking and entering, etc., but the drugs are still admissible
Actually it would not be admissible.
The police would not be able to verify where it actually came from unless they actually watched you retrieve it.
At that point a good attorney would argue that you were acting as an agent of the police and the subsequent discovery and retrieval of the coke would fall under the same rules for gathering evidence and require a warrant.
The coke evidence would get tossed and you would go to jail for breaking and entering.
The officers who you handed the coke too would either be reprimanded or fired.
jhedges3
Aug 11, 02:40 PM
OK. let us just cut to the chase. The keyword here is hand-over. CDMA2000 doesnt support it from GSM. GSM has 81%. Hence cdma is and will always be a small local network that can be used in small pockets on this planet. Furthermore, I seriously doubt ITU/FOMA will change anything in the standard to allow any compability for CDMA2000 since it is not in their interest.
The faster cdam/CDMA2000 moves to oblivion the better.
We would all benefit from one standard, cheaper phones, worldwide access, lower minute rates (from higher competition) Just look at how Vz bills you.
Having multiple standard on cellphones is just as clever as having two incompatible internet.
I couldn't care less about whether my phone works well in the EU. What is your data on the percentage of consumers that travel the world to such an extent that they purchase their phones with inter-country usability as their primary consideration?
What maters to me more, not most, is that the phone works well were I make the majority of calls, New York. The majority of people I know do the same. Some people are willing to sacrifice network for phone and a few extra dollars a month, they pref TM and similar carriers. Others want to have better network and get VW and pay for that accordingly.
It seems to me that there is some level of implicit, or not so implicit, EU v US on both sides here. To the person in the EU they should have it first cause, LEST WE NOT FORGET, most of them are using a standard with 81% of the world.
But does anyone really believe that App would bring a phone to market without making it widely available to US consumers, regardless of whether we�re in the 19% minority? Is there any history of this? Have they ever, for example, released new gen iPods late here? Have they ever, for example, released new gen iPods in Sweden first and had the rest of us in the US buying them on eBay from the lucky ones in Stockholm? It simply wouldn�t make sense.
But it�s not even worth fighting over. The availability of any App phone will be sufficient to include nearly all of us; which is to say that if they release such a product all dedicated App consumers will be able to get one on some carrier at some cost.
The faster cdam/CDMA2000 moves to oblivion the better.
We would all benefit from one standard, cheaper phones, worldwide access, lower minute rates (from higher competition) Just look at how Vz bills you.
Having multiple standard on cellphones is just as clever as having two incompatible internet.
I couldn't care less about whether my phone works well in the EU. What is your data on the percentage of consumers that travel the world to such an extent that they purchase their phones with inter-country usability as their primary consideration?
What maters to me more, not most, is that the phone works well were I make the majority of calls, New York. The majority of people I know do the same. Some people are willing to sacrifice network for phone and a few extra dollars a month, they pref TM and similar carriers. Others want to have better network and get VW and pay for that accordingly.
It seems to me that there is some level of implicit, or not so implicit, EU v US on both sides here. To the person in the EU they should have it first cause, LEST WE NOT FORGET, most of them are using a standard with 81% of the world.
But does anyone really believe that App would bring a phone to market without making it widely available to US consumers, regardless of whether we�re in the 19% minority? Is there any history of this? Have they ever, for example, released new gen iPods late here? Have they ever, for example, released new gen iPods in Sweden first and had the rest of us in the US buying them on eBay from the lucky ones in Stockholm? It simply wouldn�t make sense.
But it�s not even worth fighting over. The availability of any App phone will be sufficient to include nearly all of us; which is to say that if they release such a product all dedicated App consumers will be able to get one on some carrier at some cost.
citizenzen
Mar 22, 11:00 AM
Oh yeah... and here's a fun little nugget for those who like to tout Obama's coalition:
I'm confused. :confused:
What point is 5P trying to make here?
Is the fact that one list contains more countries by count make it superior to the second? Is that the only way to judge a coalition, by count?
That seems a little too simplistic to me.
For instance, I added up these two lists (after removing duplicates) according to how much the countries spend on their military ...
• Coalition Countries - Iraq - 2003 ~ 152 billion
• Coalition - Libya - 2011 ~ 179 billion
I guess it's just how you want to look at it. :cool:
I'm confused. :confused:
What point is 5P trying to make here?
Is the fact that one list contains more countries by count make it superior to the second? Is that the only way to judge a coalition, by count?
That seems a little too simplistic to me.
For instance, I added up these two lists (after removing duplicates) according to how much the countries spend on their military ...
• Coalition Countries - Iraq - 2003 ~ 152 billion
• Coalition - Libya - 2011 ~ 179 billion
I guess it's just how you want to look at it. :cool:
AppleScruff1
Apr 20, 02:13 AM
Why do you keep countering an argument that no one is actually making?
Straw man fail.
Not at all. I'm only showing where Apple has done what they don't like being done to them. Only a die hard defends them at all cost.
Straw man fail.
Not at all. I'm only showing where Apple has done what they don't like being done to them. Only a die hard defends them at all cost.
DotCom2
Apr 27, 09:25 AM
Problem is, if you turn "Location Services" off, then you can't use "Find My iPhone" which I think is quite a useful feature! :(
No comments:
Post a Comment