iMikeT
Nov 28, 11:52 PM
Stupid Microsoft!:mad:
SPUY767
Jul 27, 04:03 PM
It's always a little alarming when a post starts "sorry if I missed it but..."
The 2.7 G5 will be the highest clocked chip in a mac for a while, but probably not the fastest. In a number of benchmarks, Yonah has already beaten dual G5's, the conroes and woodrests will likely widen the gap even more.
I'm sorry. I thought that it was adequately implied that I meant the fastest chip, to date. Anyway, that's what I meant if I've been misunderstood.
The 2.7 G5 will be the highest clocked chip in a mac for a while, but probably not the fastest. In a number of benchmarks, Yonah has already beaten dual G5's, the conroes and woodrests will likely widen the gap even more.
I'm sorry. I thought that it was adequately implied that I meant the fastest chip, to date. Anyway, that's what I meant if I've been misunderstood.
DTphonehome
Nov 28, 06:49 PM
Hahahahahahahahahaha(breathe)hahahahahahahahaha!
As if Apple would ever agree to this! Back when the iTMS was in its infancy, I could see Universal making a demand like this. But now, what leverage do they have? "If you don't pay, we're going to pull all Universal songs off the iTMS!" Um, ok, great, lose one of the only profitable revenue streams the music industry has these days? Right.
As if Apple would ever agree to this! Back when the iTMS was in its infancy, I could see Universal making a demand like this. But now, what leverage do they have? "If you don't pay, we're going to pull all Universal songs off the iTMS!" Um, ok, great, lose one of the only profitable revenue streams the music industry has these days? Right.
alent1234
Apr 20, 07:37 AM
I'm surprised to see iPhones have outsold iPod Touches by so much; I've never really considered the figures but just assumed that there would be way more iPod Touches around than iPhones.
most ipods i see are Nano's for people to listen to music on the train home. why buy a Touch when it's useless unless you have wifi. it's just a lower priced SKU for apple to defend the iphone market share
most ipods i see are Nano's for people to listen to music on the train home. why buy a Touch when it's useless unless you have wifi. it's just a lower priced SKU for apple to defend the iphone market share
Hawaga
Apr 5, 05:31 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; fr-fr) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148a Safari/6533.18.5)
Well, if it's a dramatic improvement, I may start looking into it...
...A proud Avid user ;)
Well, if it's a dramatic improvement, I may start looking into it...
...A proud Avid user ;)
FF_productions
Aug 15, 11:34 AM
Check it out!
http://barefeats.com/quad06.html
The 3 ghz Mac Pro is neck and neck with the G5 Quad in the Adobe benchmarks, sick considering the fact it's running under rosetta!!
http://barefeats.com/quad06.html
The 3 ghz Mac Pro is neck and neck with the G5 Quad in the Adobe benchmarks, sick considering the fact it's running under rosetta!!
guzhogi
Jul 15, 11:20 AM
Something I liked about the power supply in my beige G3 was that not only did it have a power in socket, but allso a power out one too to a monitor or something.
maclaptop
Apr 11, 05:42 PM
Do you really think they care? Even if they make a phone that doesn't make calls people will think it's the greatest innovation in the history of mankind.
This is so true it's sickening.
The number one function I'd like to see in the upcoming model is a phone that works as well as every other smartphone I own. Then I'd be able to rely on it, and promote it to my primary phone. Id like nothing better.
This is so true it's sickening.
The number one function I'd like to see in the upcoming model is a phone that works as well as every other smartphone I own. Then I'd be able to rely on it, and promote it to my primary phone. Id like nothing better.
maelstromr
Apr 25, 03:18 PM
So an old post says apple is exploiting them and you imply I said that then? I said on numerous occasions clearly that this is not about Apple using this data. Interesting way to quote posts you have there:rolleyes:
Now I'm confused - YOU quote MY post replying to someone suggesting exactly that Apple is exploiting customers through this, and now I'm selectively quoting you?
Though I am skeptical, to say the least, of YOUR point as well, it's not nearly as ridiculous as the people who DO claim Apple is trying to get people.
Now I'm confused - YOU quote MY post replying to someone suggesting exactly that Apple is exploiting customers through this, and now I'm selectively quoting you?
Though I am skeptical, to say the least, of YOUR point as well, it's not nearly as ridiculous as the people who DO claim Apple is trying to get people.
Erasmus
Jul 22, 03:59 AM
I agree with your point on never saying a computer is too powerful, although living in computers is probably not going to happen. Sounds a bit too Matrix-like for me.
:D You never know, you never know.
Ye of little faith in technology!
Never mind.
I think its more along the lines of whether the public will let it happen without turning it into a big moral/ethical/religeous dilemma.
Well, anyway, I am going to stop, because this is way, way, way off topic. I shouldn't have brought it up to begin with.
:D You never know, you never know.
Ye of little faith in technology!
Never mind.
I think its more along the lines of whether the public will let it happen without turning it into a big moral/ethical/religeous dilemma.
Well, anyway, I am going to stop, because this is way, way, way off topic. I shouldn't have brought it up to begin with.
ThunderSkunk
Apr 6, 04:03 PM
I guess I see it like this:
We use two models of Motion tablets in our studios, the LE1700 running Win7 and the newer J running XP Tablet, for maximum horsepower. Both allow our designers to create complex CAD programs with huge 3d files and multipart assemblies parametric to external data sources, and do it in the field. These tablets have wacom pressure sensitive digitizers, highly visible outdoor displays, 3hr battery lives, weigh 4-5lbs, and cost 3-4 thousand dollars.
We use iPads for everything else mobile, because they're fast, and light, and we're used to carrying around yellow pads everywhere we go anyway. No more yellow pads. Eventually, when more people start to realize that the platform is a good one for more than just content consumption, we'll get more and bigger functionality in better and better applications.
The xoom has neither the functionality of windows nor that of iOS. The day Androids marketplace starts catching up with iOS, we'll reconsider.
But throwing in slightly bigger megapixel cameras and SD card readers really doesn't enter into it.
We use two models of Motion tablets in our studios, the LE1700 running Win7 and the newer J running XP Tablet, for maximum horsepower. Both allow our designers to create complex CAD programs with huge 3d files and multipart assemblies parametric to external data sources, and do it in the field. These tablets have wacom pressure sensitive digitizers, highly visible outdoor displays, 3hr battery lives, weigh 4-5lbs, and cost 3-4 thousand dollars.
We use iPads for everything else mobile, because they're fast, and light, and we're used to carrying around yellow pads everywhere we go anyway. No more yellow pads. Eventually, when more people start to realize that the platform is a good one for more than just content consumption, we'll get more and bigger functionality in better and better applications.
The xoom has neither the functionality of windows nor that of iOS. The day Androids marketplace starts catching up with iOS, we'll reconsider.
But throwing in slightly bigger megapixel cameras and SD card readers really doesn't enter into it.
LightSpeed1
Mar 31, 02:40 PM
I knew it would happen eventually.
david77
Apr 25, 02:31 PM
I should have become a lawyer.
Easy money at this point.
Easy money at this point.
SiliconAddict
Aug 7, 07:50 PM
Not very innovative so-far. The Intel change took the OS's soul and the inspiration.
Give me a fracking break. Intel has NOTHING to do with this. NOTHING. I wish PPC fanbois would just give it up. Soon they will be claiming that ozone depletion is due too Intel chips.
does upgrading to leopard cost money for tiger users?
Yes.
Give me a fracking break. Intel has NOTHING to do with this. NOTHING. I wish PPC fanbois would just give it up. Soon they will be claiming that ozone depletion is due too Intel chips.
does upgrading to leopard cost money for tiger users?
Yes.
gkarris
Nov 29, 10:39 AM
In the 70's:
Universal makes "Battlestar Galactica", and "Buck Rogers in the 25th Century", fun Sci-Fi shows.
In the 90's and early 00's:
USA Networks launches the Scifi Channel. They get great shows such as "Stargate SG-1" and "Farscape". USA Network has some great shows as well, "Monk", "The Dead Zone", "Peacemakers"
That was then....
This is now...
NBC has nothing but crap and gets jeleous of cable networks such as USA.
NBC/Universal buys USA Networks.
NBC/Universal cancels the last season of "Farscape", and the new western, "Peacemakers". They attempt to cancel "Monk" and "The Dead Zone", but to no avail. They also attempt to cancel "Stargate SG-1" and replace it with "Stargate Atlantis", this fails too.
NBC/Universal "retells" "Battlestar Galactica" - sorry, it's all about skin and a drunk Col. Tigh - junk.
NBC/Universal now is "cleaning up" the Scifi Channel by putting on on its own shows, "Eureka" (it is good though).
NBC/Universal is cancelling "Stargate SG-1", at a con, one of its actors did mention that "Universal did let it go on for another 5 seasons".
NBC/Universal's #1 show on the Sci-Fi channel is Wrestling....
Universal is good for what again???
(note: I might have my timing off, like the Farscape cancellation, but I think Scifi might have seen it coming with that series cancellation).
Universal makes "Battlestar Galactica", and "Buck Rogers in the 25th Century", fun Sci-Fi shows.
In the 90's and early 00's:
USA Networks launches the Scifi Channel. They get great shows such as "Stargate SG-1" and "Farscape". USA Network has some great shows as well, "Monk", "The Dead Zone", "Peacemakers"
That was then....
This is now...
NBC has nothing but crap and gets jeleous of cable networks such as USA.
NBC/Universal buys USA Networks.
NBC/Universal cancels the last season of "Farscape", and the new western, "Peacemakers". They attempt to cancel "Monk" and "The Dead Zone", but to no avail. They also attempt to cancel "Stargate SG-1" and replace it with "Stargate Atlantis", this fails too.
NBC/Universal "retells" "Battlestar Galactica" - sorry, it's all about skin and a drunk Col. Tigh - junk.
NBC/Universal now is "cleaning up" the Scifi Channel by putting on on its own shows, "Eureka" (it is good though).
NBC/Universal is cancelling "Stargate SG-1", at a con, one of its actors did mention that "Universal did let it go on for another 5 seasons".
NBC/Universal's #1 show on the Sci-Fi channel is Wrestling....
Universal is good for what again???
(note: I might have my timing off, like the Farscape cancellation, but I think Scifi might have seen it coming with that series cancellation).
aafuss1
Jul 14, 11:54 PM
Interesting question, but I don't think any of us here will have the answers.
PCs don't use EFI. I don't know if a generic AGP/PCIe card can be initialized by EFI, or if the card will need some EFI code to be on-board.
As for OS X, I think we can be fairly certain that Apple will only bundle drivers for cards that Apple sells. If you install a third-party card, they will probably tell you that you'll need a driver from the card's manufacturer - that's what they've historically told customers.
Generic VGA drivers? I'm sure they were developed - they'd be very useful during that time when OS X/Intel was internal-only. But I wouldn't expect them to be bundled with a shipping copy of the system software.
Now, assuming that the Mac firmware (including whatever EFI drivers they include in it) is capable of initializing a generic video card, then there should be no need for more than a device driver, which the card vendors can probably provide, if they are so inclined. If the cards will require special ROM code for EFI, however, then we're back to the same problem that plagued the PPC systems.
I agree-eg. to add a Crossfire configuration would mean that Apple would need to have a preference pane to configure that, which they don't-they supply a driver only.
PCs don't use EFI. I don't know if a generic AGP/PCIe card can be initialized by EFI, or if the card will need some EFI code to be on-board.
As for OS X, I think we can be fairly certain that Apple will only bundle drivers for cards that Apple sells. If you install a third-party card, they will probably tell you that you'll need a driver from the card's manufacturer - that's what they've historically told customers.
Generic VGA drivers? I'm sure they were developed - they'd be very useful during that time when OS X/Intel was internal-only. But I wouldn't expect them to be bundled with a shipping copy of the system software.
Now, assuming that the Mac firmware (including whatever EFI drivers they include in it) is capable of initializing a generic video card, then there should be no need for more than a device driver, which the card vendors can probably provide, if they are so inclined. If the cards will require special ROM code for EFI, however, then we're back to the same problem that plagued the PPC systems.
I agree-eg. to add a Crossfire configuration would mean that Apple would need to have a preference pane to configure that, which they don't-they supply a driver only.
SevenInchScrew
Aug 12, 01:15 AM
its kind of like comparing two different beasts imo.
I know they are fundamentally two different types of games in a similar genre, but he brought up the sales of the series, so I offered up another racing game series with much higher sales.
let's see, my original post:
{quote of your incorrect original post}
noticed i said, "not including demos". which all other versions are, except for the psp game. granted, the last demo, or prologue, is a PS3 greatest hits.
I don't really care if you count the Prologues as full releases or not. The fact remains...
GT1 + GT2 + GT3 + GT4 = 46M
...not 57M like you originally, and incorrectly, said.
...but if we go off number of sales (since you seem to think b/c i mentioned it, it's the only thing i take into consideration)...i'd say GT5 stacks up very well with NFS, considering everything. again, just looking at sales here
You brought up sales, not me. And last I checked, objectively, 100 is more than 57, regardless of how you subjectively look at it.
that's still not the point. having that many cars adds to the game, and adds up in data on that one disk. i'm sure many players drive those same cars in real life
No, the only thing that adds to is a stat point on the back of the box. I mean, hooray, someone's 87 CRX is in a racing game. YAY!! :rolleyes:
That is the problem with GT these days. Too much fluff, and lacking in the racing. I mean, whatever, they can make whatever kind of game they want. If they want to fill the game with 1000 cars, 800 of which most people never touch, they can do that. To me, though, they are losing what made the series great years ago.
GT5 is only on playstation.
NO WAY!!! I never knew that. :rolleyes:
with so many cars, and so many races, some need a guide. some races are very difficult.
Sure, but a "Guinness Record" for it? Again, to much fluff.
but again, it still is a real car. and the intention of producing 6 of these cars was for this game. that is clear.
No, it is a concept car that Citro�n paraded around at car shows. Lots of concept cars get built with the fake intention of going into production. But you know what? Almost none of them do. This Citro�n is no different.
I know they are fundamentally two different types of games in a similar genre, but he brought up the sales of the series, so I offered up another racing game series with much higher sales.
let's see, my original post:
{quote of your incorrect original post}
noticed i said, "not including demos". which all other versions are, except for the psp game. granted, the last demo, or prologue, is a PS3 greatest hits.
I don't really care if you count the Prologues as full releases or not. The fact remains...
GT1 + GT2 + GT3 + GT4 = 46M
...not 57M like you originally, and incorrectly, said.
...but if we go off number of sales (since you seem to think b/c i mentioned it, it's the only thing i take into consideration)...i'd say GT5 stacks up very well with NFS, considering everything. again, just looking at sales here
You brought up sales, not me. And last I checked, objectively, 100 is more than 57, regardless of how you subjectively look at it.
that's still not the point. having that many cars adds to the game, and adds up in data on that one disk. i'm sure many players drive those same cars in real life
No, the only thing that adds to is a stat point on the back of the box. I mean, hooray, someone's 87 CRX is in a racing game. YAY!! :rolleyes:
That is the problem with GT these days. Too much fluff, and lacking in the racing. I mean, whatever, they can make whatever kind of game they want. If they want to fill the game with 1000 cars, 800 of which most people never touch, they can do that. To me, though, they are losing what made the series great years ago.
GT5 is only on playstation.
NO WAY!!! I never knew that. :rolleyes:
with so many cars, and so many races, some need a guide. some races are very difficult.
Sure, but a "Guinness Record" for it? Again, to much fluff.
but again, it still is a real car. and the intention of producing 6 of these cars was for this game. that is clear.
No, it is a concept car that Citro�n paraded around at car shows. Lots of concept cars get built with the fake intention of going into production. But you know what? Almost none of them do. This Citro�n is no different.
neko girl
Mar 3, 11:17 PM
no one is preventing you from living with the person you love or having sex with him
A bit of delay in my response because I had to look it up, but thanks for letting us have this right for 7 years now..
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0e/Map_of_US_sodomy_laws.svg/400px-Map_of_US_sodomy_laws.svg.png
Red = Sodomy Laws struck down by the US Supreme Court in 2003
A bit of delay in my response because I had to look it up, but thanks for letting us have this right for 7 years now..
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0e/Map_of_US_sodomy_laws.svg/400px-Map_of_US_sodomy_laws.svg.png
Red = Sodomy Laws struck down by the US Supreme Court in 2003
Mr_Ed
Jul 20, 08:39 AM
I wonder what they're going to call them, Quad sounds cool but "Octa or Octo" just sounds a bit silly.
MacPro8?
The Mactopus??
I got it!
The Macintosh Quadra!
No, wait . . . .
;)
MacPro8?
The Mactopus??
I got it!
The Macintosh Quadra!
No, wait . . . .
;)
Iconoclysm
Apr 19, 08:28 PM
Apple may have expanded upon existing GUI elements, but it didn't invent the GUI. Very big difference there.
Interesting that you now notice the difference between the two when you started the entire discussion with your complete misunderstanding of someone already differentiating between the two...
Interesting that you now notice the difference between the two when you started the entire discussion with your complete misunderstanding of someone already differentiating between the two...
Macnoviz
Jul 20, 10:14 AM
At some point your going to have deminished returns. Sure multimedia apps can take advantage of a few more cores, but I dont see Mail running faster on 4 cores, nevermind 2!
How fast do you want mail to go? The main reasons you need good processors is not for browsing, e-mail, text, and such and such. I highly doubt someone who does all these things on a five year old computer will be much slower than someone on a 16 GB RAM top of the line Powermac
Why don't they just call it: Big Mac.
I think that's the best name I've heard in this thread (sorry, Chundles)
How fast do you want mail to go? The main reasons you need good processors is not for browsing, e-mail, text, and such and such. I highly doubt someone who does all these things on a five year old computer will be much slower than someone on a 16 GB RAM top of the line Powermac
Why don't they just call it: Big Mac.
I think that's the best name I've heard in this thread (sorry, Chundles)
~Shard~
Jul 14, 03:05 PM
Power Supply at the top is REALLY stupid.
I've never thought much of the relevance of its placement myself - why do you say that? Care to elaborate on why it is "REALLY stupid"?
I've never thought much of the relevance of its placement myself - why do you say that? Care to elaborate on why it is "REALLY stupid"?
shelterpaw
Jul 20, 11:11 AM
I think Logic can only use two cores/processors with a cludge to use the other two on a quad (by pretending it's a remote machine). Someone told me this though so I'm not 100% on that.I'm not sure either and I shouldn't have made the assumption. I know Ableton and Cubase do as I've used both and I'm now an avid Ableton user. I'd imagine Logic will take full advantage sometime soon since it's now one of Apple's pro applications. It certainly makes sense considering how bogged down your system gets once you load enough virtual instruments and effects.
rayz
Aug 8, 03:08 AM
Well I for one was kind of disappointed. Leopard is sort of Apple's chance to prove they can out-Vista Vista, and I'm not really sure what we saw today does it. I've been following Vista somewhat closely, and it really does catch Windows up to OS X in terms of features and prettiness.
I really think most of the features shown off today are already present in Windows (I've definitely heard about all of them before) or will be in Vista, and it's too bad Apple didn't have anything truly innovative to show us. Hopefully those secret features are something good...
The other thing that has me a little concerned is the huge amount of Vista-bashing that went on. I feel like if Leopard at this point were truly better than Vista, they'd be silent about Vista entirely and let the new system speak for itself. That would be really slick. That's not what happened however, and instead there was a lot of "look what Vista copied from us" and "check out how much better Leopard is." What I saw today, though, makes the former statement sound whiney and the latter sound foolish, since in my eyes, in terms of features, they're about on-par with each other.
I really hope Apple pulls it together. They've got to do this right, because come next year, most of the myriad reasons for switching to a Mac will be nullified by Vista.
BTW: whoever this "Platform Experience" guy is, get him off the stage and go back to Steve.
Have to agree with you on just about everything. If MS tried to release something like this, as anything other than a service pack, their user base would (quite rightly) crucify them.
The TimeMachine mirrors the same functionality that was announced for Vista about a week ago, and everything else is an upgrade rather than anything really new. I was expecting more from the desktop switching, but I have a feeling that will look much different when it's actually released.
But since there is some other stuff planned, then it's best to wait and see what they come up with, before declaring it a dud.
Looks like a nice solid revision so far, but not much else.
.. and given the universal unpopularity of Microsoft's Flip3D interface, I was surprised to see it showing up in the UI for TimeMachine.
I really think most of the features shown off today are already present in Windows (I've definitely heard about all of them before) or will be in Vista, and it's too bad Apple didn't have anything truly innovative to show us. Hopefully those secret features are something good...
The other thing that has me a little concerned is the huge amount of Vista-bashing that went on. I feel like if Leopard at this point were truly better than Vista, they'd be silent about Vista entirely and let the new system speak for itself. That would be really slick. That's not what happened however, and instead there was a lot of "look what Vista copied from us" and "check out how much better Leopard is." What I saw today, though, makes the former statement sound whiney and the latter sound foolish, since in my eyes, in terms of features, they're about on-par with each other.
I really hope Apple pulls it together. They've got to do this right, because come next year, most of the myriad reasons for switching to a Mac will be nullified by Vista.
BTW: whoever this "Platform Experience" guy is, get him off the stage and go back to Steve.
Have to agree with you on just about everything. If MS tried to release something like this, as anything other than a service pack, their user base would (quite rightly) crucify them.
The TimeMachine mirrors the same functionality that was announced for Vista about a week ago, and everything else is an upgrade rather than anything really new. I was expecting more from the desktop switching, but I have a feeling that will look much different when it's actually released.
But since there is some other stuff planned, then it's best to wait and see what they come up with, before declaring it a dud.
Looks like a nice solid revision so far, but not much else.
.. and given the universal unpopularity of Microsoft's Flip3D interface, I was surprised to see it showing up in the UI for TimeMachine.