twostep665
Apr 4, 12:12 PM
Yes, they were running away and unarmed. Read the article before making such an idiotic post.
If they were running away and unarmed then the security guard was in the wrong.
Tennessee v Garner says that you cannot shoot an unarmed fleeing felon in the back.
If they were running away and unarmed then the security guard was in the wrong.
Tennessee v Garner says that you cannot shoot an unarmed fleeing felon in the back.
Multimedia
Sep 9, 02:39 PM
Yes an OS issue.
http://www.math.purdue.edu/~abarreno/affinitydlg.gifWow so if that's in XP already it's gotta be a feature in Leopard.
You call that Application Core Affinity or what's the correct full termonology? And where in the OS do you choose the applications to assign x number of cores with that dialog box. Looks like they're ready for a lot of cores coming up?!?! :eek:
32. I'd say that's planning ahead.
Are we hijacking this thread? Don't mean to go so far Off Topic folks. :D
http://www.math.purdue.edu/~abarreno/affinitydlg.gifWow so if that's in XP already it's gotta be a feature in Leopard.
You call that Application Core Affinity or what's the correct full termonology? And where in the OS do you choose the applications to assign x number of cores with that dialog box. Looks like they're ready for a lot of cores coming up?!?! :eek:
32. I'd say that's planning ahead.
Are we hijacking this thread? Don't mean to go so far Off Topic folks. :D
Dmac77
Apr 25, 12:03 AM
There's no such thing as being safe driving 25 above the limit. I'm not the type of person to slow people down, because that's not my business, but I am the type of person to laugh at someone who whizzes past me, then I pass 5 miles later getting written up. Just wait until your first ticket or accident, you'll reconsider your driving habits.
Technically I was only 20 over the limit (I'm in Michigan). Also, radar detectors are a great thing:)
EDIT: @mrsir2009 - no that lady was doing 5mph under the speed limit in the passing lane, while not even passing. Traffic in the right side lane was passing her. She then proceeded to brake check me and travel under 55mph (the posted minimum in Michigan). More like wtf is wrong with her.
-Don
Technically I was only 20 over the limit (I'm in Michigan). Also, radar detectors are a great thing:)
EDIT: @mrsir2009 - no that lady was doing 5mph under the speed limit in the passing lane, while not even passing. Traffic in the right side lane was passing her. She then proceeded to brake check me and travel under 55mph (the posted minimum in Michigan). More like wtf is wrong with her.
-Don
wnurse
Aug 23, 09:58 PM
I don't know...with five lawsuits between the companies, I wouldn't be surprised if the litigation would have cost at least $100 million. But I do think Apple wasn't terribly confident...
Edit: The estimates I've seen say that a typical patent infringement case costs up to $5 million per side. This would probably be higher than a typical case, with $100 million in total not out of the question.
If apple paid 100 million, they should then sue their lawyers for fraud. This suit would not even come close to 100 million.
Edit: The estimates I've seen say that a typical patent infringement case costs up to $5 million per side. This would probably be higher than a typical case, with $100 million in total not out of the question.
If apple paid 100 million, they should then sue their lawyers for fraud. This suit would not even come close to 100 million.
PeterQVenkman
May 3, 10:29 AM
Two high end screens from dual thunderbolt on a 27 inch iMac? Wow. That is bad ass.
powers74
Mar 30, 12:51 PM
What is the App Store? It is a store where you buy apps, an app store.
It's not a "shed where you buy apps", for example.
Wow, great point. Care to pick off any of the other ideas?
It's not a "shed where you buy apps", for example.
Wow, great point. Care to pick off any of the other ideas?
craigsharp@spym
Sep 14, 08:54 AM
iPhone.org is a hoax, i think. I'm not sure, but it is kinda funny that Apple owns mammals.org? why in the heck does apple own that domain name? Kinda lookin forward to seeing the the all new Apple Mammal, It's a robot that looks and feels human, can think and even reproduces the same way a human does. LOL Oh and it can play the new movies too.
bandas101
Mar 23, 05:51 PM
Censorship Sucks! Don't do it Apple . Don't drink and drive. Doesn't matter what party a senator is from , they all are liars and cheats.
vincebio
Sep 14, 08:05 AM
here we go again
apple are on fire at the moment.....bring it on
apple are on fire at the moment.....bring it on
edcrosay
Aug 23, 05:37 PM
I hope this eventually leads to Sound Blaster support for macs.
vansouza
Sep 9, 05:41 PM
world peace... cool... an iMac on every desk and an iPhone in every pocket.:D
FuNGi
Apr 25, 12:53 PM
I like the current iteration sans the glass. What would really interest me would be a transition to liquidmetal allowing for a lighter and stronger case. I'm sure many will speculate an end to the CD/DVD drive with this one but I wouldn't be so sure.
Popeye206
Mar 30, 11:24 AM
Let the "App" battle begin!
And all the lawyers rejoiced. :rolleyes:
And all the lawyers rejoiced. :rolleyes:
.jpg "princess diana crash photos")
FX120
Apr 16, 12:50 PM
Did you miss the USB to PS2 ports or are you just avoiding that? Are you also avoiding how I said it's too difficult for you to carry around an inch long adapter?
You have a fundamental misunderstanding of how those adapters work. Going from thunderbolt to USB 3 would require active electronics embedded in the adapter. The $6 MDP to HDMI adapter is just copper internally because the signaling is compatible from the source.
LOL, the drive he was using WAS 7200-RPM so I'm not even going to bother reading the rest of this paragraph.
http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?id=10492
Again, you have a fundamental flaw in your argument that you're not addressing. It doesn't matter if the bus is capable of delivering massive speed when the source is incapable of serving data fast enough. Any single-drive enclosure that is currently available will be incapable of maxing out a USB 3 connection.
Your assumption is based on comparing two different technologies and assuming they will fare the same. My assumption was comparing ADAPTER prices. How expensive do you think adapters are? :rolleyes:
You can get them for super cheap if you know where to look.
When they contain active electronics, they get expensive. Apple's own MDP to dual-link DVI adapter is a great example, at $99.00. USB 3 and Thunderbolt are not electrically compatible, and therefore it is impossible to have a simple copper-only dongle that has a TB port on one end, and USB on the other.
Once again, YOU ARE BASING THIS ON PRESENT DAY SPEEDS THAT ARE ACHIEVABLE. This isn't a discussion about current theoretical limits, it's about the limits of the future because that's where these technologies will actually matter. The fact is that when we move to SSD transfer speeds USB 3 will get demolished.
Then why do you keep pointing to that article as proof that USB 3 is incapable of reaching it's theoretical maximum?
I never said it would go away. It said it will be used for the same things USB 2 is used for which is low bandwidth peripherals like mice which you don't need USB 3 for which is why it is essentially a useless upgrade.
USB 2 is the universal standard for high speed devices. If you think otherwise, you must have never used a USB thumb drive.
Yes, believe it or not we are talking about the future and the future for Thunderbolt looks a hell of a lot better than the future of USB 3 since it isn't locked at a certain bandwidth. Technology moves fast. The reason Intel decided to support USB 3 is simply because it is (as they said) complimentary to Thunderbolt. Once again you use Thunderbolt for things that need the speed and you use USB for low bandwidth peripherals.
Thunderbolt in a copper implementation is capped at 10Gbs. For higher speeds, the physical connections become impractical for "normal" devices, which is why Intel designed TB as a transport bus, say for a single cable between a tower and a monitor, which would then break the TB bus back into it's component protocols, including USB 3.
It has USB compatibility, hell it has compatibility with pretty much any IO on the planet. The connector is simply a means to an end and it scales much better for the future when said port is smaller.
Which as I said above, makes it practical for a transport bus. For replacing USB? Not so much. Backwards compatibility alone will likely dictate the continual presence of USB 3 ports on virtually every computer for years to come.
You have a fundamental misunderstanding of how those adapters work. Going from thunderbolt to USB 3 would require active electronics embedded in the adapter. The $6 MDP to HDMI adapter is just copper internally because the signaling is compatible from the source.
LOL, the drive he was using WAS 7200-RPM so I'm not even going to bother reading the rest of this paragraph.
http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?id=10492
Again, you have a fundamental flaw in your argument that you're not addressing. It doesn't matter if the bus is capable of delivering massive speed when the source is incapable of serving data fast enough. Any single-drive enclosure that is currently available will be incapable of maxing out a USB 3 connection.
Your assumption is based on comparing two different technologies and assuming they will fare the same. My assumption was comparing ADAPTER prices. How expensive do you think adapters are? :rolleyes:
You can get them for super cheap if you know where to look.
When they contain active electronics, they get expensive. Apple's own MDP to dual-link DVI adapter is a great example, at $99.00. USB 3 and Thunderbolt are not electrically compatible, and therefore it is impossible to have a simple copper-only dongle that has a TB port on one end, and USB on the other.
Once again, YOU ARE BASING THIS ON PRESENT DAY SPEEDS THAT ARE ACHIEVABLE. This isn't a discussion about current theoretical limits, it's about the limits of the future because that's where these technologies will actually matter. The fact is that when we move to SSD transfer speeds USB 3 will get demolished.
Then why do you keep pointing to that article as proof that USB 3 is incapable of reaching it's theoretical maximum?
I never said it would go away. It said it will be used for the same things USB 2 is used for which is low bandwidth peripherals like mice which you don't need USB 3 for which is why it is essentially a useless upgrade.
USB 2 is the universal standard for high speed devices. If you think otherwise, you must have never used a USB thumb drive.
Yes, believe it or not we are talking about the future and the future for Thunderbolt looks a hell of a lot better than the future of USB 3 since it isn't locked at a certain bandwidth. Technology moves fast. The reason Intel decided to support USB 3 is simply because it is (as they said) complimentary to Thunderbolt. Once again you use Thunderbolt for things that need the speed and you use USB for low bandwidth peripherals.
Thunderbolt in a copper implementation is capped at 10Gbs. For higher speeds, the physical connections become impractical for "normal" devices, which is why Intel designed TB as a transport bus, say for a single cable between a tower and a monitor, which would then break the TB bus back into it's component protocols, including USB 3.
It has USB compatibility, hell it has compatibility with pretty much any IO on the planet. The connector is simply a means to an end and it scales much better for the future when said port is smaller.
Which as I said above, makes it practical for a transport bus. For replacing USB? Not so much. Backwards compatibility alone will likely dictate the continual presence of USB 3 ports on virtually every computer for years to come.
*LTD*
Apr 28, 10:22 PM
Did you forget that Microsoft is what got the pc world to where it is today?
They did. And boy, does it show! Part of the reason Apple has done so remarkably well for years now.
They did. And boy, does it show! Part of the reason Apple has done so remarkably well for years now.
theelysium
Mar 30, 11:53 AM
Microsoft needs to get bent!:mad:
THX1139
Jul 19, 08:26 PM
http://news.com.com/2100-1006_3-6096192.html?part=rss&tag=6096192&subj=news
Cloverton and Kentsfield coming 4th quarter 2006
So we will see them introduced at MWSF 2007. That's a no-brainer that we knew was coming.
Cloverton and Kentsfield coming 4th quarter 2006
So we will see them introduced at MWSF 2007. That's a no-brainer that we knew was coming.
mohaukachi
Sep 14, 01:29 AM
so who else thinks this looks just like the chocolate?
http://www.dagadgets.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/03/lg_kg800.jpg
http://www.dagadgets.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/03/lg_kg800.jpg
KingCrimson
Apr 28, 05:26 PM
Wow, Apple is pretty much unstoppable now. And if anyone tries to get in their way, they've got a $60b war chest.
Cite? The latest Yahoo! financial page has them at $29 billion.
Cite? The latest Yahoo! financial page has them at $29 billion.
kedar
Sep 14, 11:45 AM
Hmmm, an Aperture update would be cool. I wonder if they would make any financial "concessions" to people who have recently purchased Aperture... :o
I have just received two copies of Aperture - what is Apple's policy on this - do I just have to go and buy upgrade two weeks later. :(
I have just received two copies of Aperture - what is Apple's policy on this - do I just have to go and buy upgrade two weeks later. :(
sinsin07
Mar 23, 06:21 PM
I'd rather have an app that shows police officers donut runs.
MacRumors
Sep 10, 04:46 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
TG Daily news (http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/09/09/preview_kentsfield_processor/) reports that Tom's Hardware will be posting preliminary benchmarks for Intel's upcoming Kenstfield processor on Monday.
Kentsfield is Intel's next revision of their "Core" processors which was originally scheduled to be released in the 1st Quarter of 2007. According to the article, it is now planned for late 2006 availability.
Kentsfield is a Quad-core chip and essentially combines two Conroe chips. It is expected to be a Conroe "drop-in" and should work with the same motherboards as Conroe. More details about the chip are expected at the fall Intel Developer Forum (http://www.intel.com/idf/) which takes place between September 26-28 in San Francisco.
Apple originally used the Core Duo (Yonah) processor in first Intel Macs released in January of 2006. In the past month, Intel introduced the Core 2 Duo Mobile (Merom) and Desktop (Conroe) processors as a successor to the Core Duo (Yonah). Last week, Apple incorporated the Core 2 Duo Mobile (Merom) into the new iMacs (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060906091309.shtml). Apple has not yet utilized the Core 2 Duo Desktop (Conroe) processors for any Macs. Meanwhile, the Mac Pro, introduced in August (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060807144713.shtml), uses the higher-end Xeon (Woodcrest) processor.
Apple's current line up is as follows:
Mac mini - Core Duo (Yonah)
iMac - Core 2 Duo (Merom)
MacBook - Core Duo (Yonah)*
MacBook Pro - Core Duo (Yonah)*
Mac Pro - Xeon (Woodcrest)
Xserve - Xeon (Woodcrest)
* Unlike the other models, the MacBook and MacBook Pro have not seen updates (http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/) for 4-5 months. As a result, many are speculating that they will see updates soon.
TG Daily news (http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/09/09/preview_kentsfield_processor/) reports that Tom's Hardware will be posting preliminary benchmarks for Intel's upcoming Kenstfield processor on Monday.
Kentsfield is Intel's next revision of their "Core" processors which was originally scheduled to be released in the 1st Quarter of 2007. According to the article, it is now planned for late 2006 availability.
Kentsfield is a Quad-core chip and essentially combines two Conroe chips. It is expected to be a Conroe "drop-in" and should work with the same motherboards as Conroe. More details about the chip are expected at the fall Intel Developer Forum (http://www.intel.com/idf/) which takes place between September 26-28 in San Francisco.
Apple originally used the Core Duo (Yonah) processor in first Intel Macs released in January of 2006. In the past month, Intel introduced the Core 2 Duo Mobile (Merom) and Desktop (Conroe) processors as a successor to the Core Duo (Yonah). Last week, Apple incorporated the Core 2 Duo Mobile (Merom) into the new iMacs (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060906091309.shtml). Apple has not yet utilized the Core 2 Duo Desktop (Conroe) processors for any Macs. Meanwhile, the Mac Pro, introduced in August (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060807144713.shtml), uses the higher-end Xeon (Woodcrest) processor.
Apple's current line up is as follows:
Mac mini - Core Duo (Yonah)
iMac - Core 2 Duo (Merom)
MacBook - Core Duo (Yonah)*
MacBook Pro - Core Duo (Yonah)*
Mac Pro - Xeon (Woodcrest)
Xserve - Xeon (Woodcrest)
* Unlike the other models, the MacBook and MacBook Pro have not seen updates (http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/) for 4-5 months. As a result, many are speculating that they will see updates soon.
calculus
Sep 12, 06:50 PM
Okay, so it appears that owners of 5th generation iPods (before the latest release) who update their iPod software to version 1.2 get a few cool features that come pre-loaded out of the box on the latest 5th generation iPods, but not all.
We get:
� Gapless playback
� Ability to adjust backlight brightness (I'm particularly excited about this, I've been wanting it for ages, I bet it increases battery battery life immensely with the brightness turned way down)
� When rapidly scrolling through ARTISTS we get overlayed alphabet letters which correspond to where we are on our list
� Ability to play games bought from iTunes
We don't get:
� New search function
** Video playback details yet to be determined
You also get the letters searching albums - at the moment I am finding this feature a little irritating. I love the gapless playback and the backlight control. I downloaded tetris for nostalgic reasons and it works fine.
We get:
� Gapless playback
� Ability to adjust backlight brightness (I'm particularly excited about this, I've been wanting it for ages, I bet it increases battery battery life immensely with the brightness turned way down)
� When rapidly scrolling through ARTISTS we get overlayed alphabet letters which correspond to where we are on our list
� Ability to play games bought from iTunes
We don't get:
� New search function
** Video playback details yet to be determined
You also get the letters searching albums - at the moment I am finding this feature a little irritating. I love the gapless playback and the backlight control. I downloaded tetris for nostalgic reasons and it works fine.
linux2mac
Apr 28, 10:57 PM
Really!? You never received a quality product? In 20 years? Please tell.
The closest was Windows 2000 Professional. I quit at XP.
The closest was Windows 2000 Professional. I quit at XP.
No comments:
Post a Comment