dukebound85
Apr 12, 06:11 PM
I don't think people are pumping it up at all. I personally think that people who can't drive a standard transmission, are just lazy (and that goes for my mother, and her habit of doing her makeup while driving). People only get autos, because they don't want to have to "inconvenience" themselves with pushing down on the clutch and throwing the car into the next gear; because doing so requires them to stop shoving food down their face, or to get of the damn phone. I also hate to hear people moan about how inconvenient a standard transmission is during stop and go traffic; I mean it's not that bad, and I recently took my standard transmission accord to chicago and drove in stop and go traffic for over two hours, and it was not as annoying as some would make it out to be. People are just too willing to sacrifice the fun of driving for convenience.
-Don
having driven a manual for over 10 years, it gets annoying quite often...
-Don
having driven a manual for over 10 years, it gets annoying quite often...
macnews
Jul 20, 02:33 AM
*Most critical applications will be converted by September*
Interesting...
I found this to be most interesting. I think we could actually see some Adobe apps by Septemeber. Adobe has been going on an 18-24 month cycle and based when CS2 was released Sept/Oct would be 18 months and 24 would be April when Adobe has said basically "no later than".
Interesting...
I found this to be most interesting. I think we could actually see some Adobe apps by Septemeber. Adobe has been going on an 18-24 month cycle and based when CS2 was released Sept/Oct would be 18 months and 24 would be April when Adobe has said basically "no later than".
alphaod
Mar 24, 01:25 PM
I'd love to move up on to a 6970� as long as we don't get it when the 7xxx is about to be released.
lyzardking
Dec 29, 03:23 PM
Sorry you couldn't have stayed in 4th place for longer lyzardking... but at least you can claim you were there! :D And you are getting more points for the team!
Doesn't look like I'll be fifth for that long (looking over a shoulder at a quickly approaching twoodcc)
:cool:
Doesn't look like I'll be fifth for that long (looking over a shoulder at a quickly approaching twoodcc)
:cool:
Apple OC
Apr 22, 07:51 PM
Why is it necessary to keep your location a secret? What are Google and Apple going to do to you? What *exactly* and *specifically* is there to be afraid of?
Your location is *never* a secret, unless you're the President and it's a national crisis.
What, are you worried that Apple and Google saw you shop at Target? LOL
I am more interested in knowing what good or purpose this is even been added for?
plus unencrypted is a major privacy concern ... just of the top of my mind, I can see where someone's house could be broken into by tracking the owners whereabouts.
Your location is *never* a secret, unless you're the President and it's a national crisis.
What, are you worried that Apple and Google saw you shop at Target? LOL
I am more interested in knowing what good or purpose this is even been added for?
plus unencrypted is a major privacy concern ... just of the top of my mind, I can see where someone's house could be broken into by tracking the owners whereabouts.
QCassidy352
Aug 29, 05:13 PM
this is Think Secret we're talking about. I don't believe a word out of their lying mouths.
wolfie37
Apr 25, 12:22 PM
In short...You are all good little sheep!
The only sheep around this forum are the paranoid who are jumping on the media bandwagon about this non-story about a non-privacy issue. It isn't even news having been published, over a year ago, by more learned academics than the two attention seekers currently hogging the limelight.
This file has existed in every iPhone since day one, albeit under a different name, logs of where your mobile phone is are kept by every mobile phone company. Yet none of this seems to matter to anyone until these two, questionable academics, decide to publicise this as a "big brother is watching you' privacy story.
Away and graze in your field, we need more wool from you!
The only sheep around this forum are the paranoid who are jumping on the media bandwagon about this non-story about a non-privacy issue. It isn't even news having been published, over a year ago, by more learned academics than the two attention seekers currently hogging the limelight.
This file has existed in every iPhone since day one, albeit under a different name, logs of where your mobile phone is are kept by every mobile phone company. Yet none of this seems to matter to anyone until these two, questionable academics, decide to publicise this as a "big brother is watching you' privacy story.
Away and graze in your field, we need more wool from you!
coolfactor
Aug 7, 07:48 AM
OS X needs a robust Security System Preference Panel that provides virus checking and other defenses and actively monitors for intrusions.
Go to Sharing preference pane, enable the Firewall, click Advanced, and enabling Firewall Logging.
Your wish just came true. All blocked intrusions are now logged for your perusal.
Go to Sharing preference pane, enable the Firewall, click Advanced, and enabling Firewall Logging.
Your wish just came true. All blocked intrusions are now logged for your perusal.
wordoflife
Nov 26, 05:44 PM
Swatch New Gent "black Rebel"
http://www.kstreetwear.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Swatch-New-Gent-Watches-03.jpeg
Where did you buy that watch and for how much? I really like it :o
__________________________________________________________
Last purchase:
http://www.i-mockery.com/minimocks/candycane-report/5.jpg
http://www.kstreetwear.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Swatch-New-Gent-Watches-03.jpeg
Where did you buy that watch and for how much? I really like it :o
__________________________________________________________
Last purchase:
http://www.i-mockery.com/minimocks/candycane-report/5.jpg
thesdx
Jan 12, 11:32 AM
You never know. The same thing happened with the fat Nano rumor:
There's not even a tiny chance that Apple would release something that daft.
There's not even a tiny chance that Apple would release something that daft.
Veg
Feb 26, 03:45 PM
Lamp: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000BCDGMG
External HDD: http://www.macally.com/EN/Product/ipod4show.asp?ArticleID=209
Speakers: http://www.amazon.com/Logitech-Z-3-Wood-Grained-Speakers/dp/B0000C20V3/ref=sr_1_12?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1298679238&sr=1-12
iPhone stand: http://www.xtand.net/xtand.html
Oh yeah and actually that's not the stand, I got the stand from monoprice.
http://www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?c_id=108&cp_id=10833&cs_id=1083113&p_id=6862&seq=1&format=2
Monoprice makes great products and sells them cheaply, I recommend them.
External HDD: http://www.macally.com/EN/Product/ipod4show.asp?ArticleID=209
Speakers: http://www.amazon.com/Logitech-Z-3-Wood-Grained-Speakers/dp/B0000C20V3/ref=sr_1_12?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1298679238&sr=1-12
iPhone stand: http://www.xtand.net/xtand.html
Oh yeah and actually that's not the stand, I got the stand from monoprice.
http://www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?c_id=108&cp_id=10833&cs_id=1083113&p_id=6862&seq=1&format=2
Monoprice makes great products and sells them cheaply, I recommend them.
snebes
Apr 19, 04:37 PM
Nothing mind-blowing there...but forget about Lion, it's coming later in June.
No, its coming in the "Summer". Expect it in August. Be surprised if it is early.
No, its coming in the "Summer". Expect it in August. Be surprised if it is early.
ethernet76
Sep 6, 10:47 AM
i agree. i would never buy a computer that didn't have a dvd burner....and i'd never advise someone else to either
Remind me to never ask you for computer advice.
The parents bought a top of the line g4 iMac back when superdrives were 2x.
They still haven't used the superdrive to burn a dvd.
Remind me to never ask you for computer advice.
The parents bought a top of the line g4 iMac back when superdrives were 2x.
They still haven't used the superdrive to burn a dvd.
MacRumors
Aug 29, 08:52 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Think Secret claims (http://www.thinksecret.com/news/0608macmini.html) to have information on the rumored revision (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060824183848.shtml) to the Mac Mini. According to the site, Apple will replace the existing Core Solo model with the existing 1.66 GHz Core Duo model, and add a 1.83 GHz Core Duo model, effectively eliminating all single-core CPUs from Apple's computer product line.
The new systems are said to be "ready for production." Think Secret believes the models will be introduced in a few weeks time with little fanfare, although not totally under the radar like the last Mac Mini update (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2005/09/20050930023909.shtml).
Think Secret claims (http://www.thinksecret.com/news/0608macmini.html) to have information on the rumored revision (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060824183848.shtml) to the Mac Mini. According to the site, Apple will replace the existing Core Solo model with the existing 1.66 GHz Core Duo model, and add a 1.83 GHz Core Duo model, effectively eliminating all single-core CPUs from Apple's computer product line.
The new systems are said to be "ready for production." Think Secret believes the models will be introduced in a few weeks time with little fanfare, although not totally under the radar like the last Mac Mini update (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2005/09/20050930023909.shtml).
adroit
Nov 15, 11:25 AM
That really depends on the program, on how "parallelizable" the application is.
The simplest way to think of it is like this: Let's say you have a program that first has to calculate A. Then, when it's done that, it uses the result of A to calculate B. Then, when it's done that, uses the result of B to calculate C, then C to D, and so on. That's a *serial* problem there. The calculation of B can't begin until A is done, so it doesn't matter how many processors you have running, all computation is held up on one spot.
On the other hand, let's say you have an application that needs to calculate A, B, C and D, but those four values are not dependent on each other at all. In that case, you can use four processors at the same time, to calculate all four values at the same time.
Think of it like baking a cake. You can't start putting on the icing until the cake is done baking. And you can't start baking the cake until the ingredients are all mixed together. But you can have people simultaneously getting out and measuring the ingredients.
So that problem is partially parallelizable, but the majority of its workload is a serial process.
Some software applications, just by their very nature, will never be able to do anything useful with multiple processors.
This is true, but there are still many many ways to optimize the multi-core processor that's not currently being use.
For example, I am waiting for a program to compile right now. Although I have a dual core on my computer, the compiler only compile one file at a time and usually takes about 10 min to do a full compile . If I have an 8 core computer with a multi-threaded compiler then I can cut the total time to jsut over a min + couple of seconds for linking time.
I think the main problem with muti-threading program is that it is difficult to implement, especially for coders who only knows high-level languages. Muti-threading in low-level program such as C is not easy but at least it is straight-forward. But trying to muti-thread high-level language such as VB or C# can get you into a big headace since everything is abstracted from the programmer. To do that, you need to get into unsafe code and call a bunch of DLLs, and it's easy to get memory leaks. Basically it can start to get very complicated, very quickly.
The simplest way to think of it is like this: Let's say you have a program that first has to calculate A. Then, when it's done that, it uses the result of A to calculate B. Then, when it's done that, uses the result of B to calculate C, then C to D, and so on. That's a *serial* problem there. The calculation of B can't begin until A is done, so it doesn't matter how many processors you have running, all computation is held up on one spot.
On the other hand, let's say you have an application that needs to calculate A, B, C and D, but those four values are not dependent on each other at all. In that case, you can use four processors at the same time, to calculate all four values at the same time.
Think of it like baking a cake. You can't start putting on the icing until the cake is done baking. And you can't start baking the cake until the ingredients are all mixed together. But you can have people simultaneously getting out and measuring the ingredients.
So that problem is partially parallelizable, but the majority of its workload is a serial process.
Some software applications, just by their very nature, will never be able to do anything useful with multiple processors.
This is true, but there are still many many ways to optimize the multi-core processor that's not currently being use.
For example, I am waiting for a program to compile right now. Although I have a dual core on my computer, the compiler only compile one file at a time and usually takes about 10 min to do a full compile . If I have an 8 core computer with a multi-threaded compiler then I can cut the total time to jsut over a min + couple of seconds for linking time.
I think the main problem with muti-threading program is that it is difficult to implement, especially for coders who only knows high-level languages. Muti-threading in low-level program such as C is not easy but at least it is straight-forward. But trying to muti-thread high-level language such as VB or C# can get you into a big headace since everything is abstracted from the programmer. To do that, you need to get into unsafe code and call a bunch of DLLs, and it's easy to get memory leaks. Basically it can start to get very complicated, very quickly.
After G
Sep 5, 12:14 AM
I thought Core Solo production was winding down, so maybe Apple could buy 'em all and do a price-drop. :D
Maybe in another life ... :(
Maybe in another life ... :(
Carl Spackler
Nov 29, 03:51 PM
You know I originally thought that, but I kind of like the way it works now. I would much rather have a few codecs that work very well. Then play everything under the sun just not very well.
Perhaps I'm selling iTunes short in what it can currently play without re-encoding, but it seems really slim.
Perhaps I'm selling iTunes short in what it can currently play without re-encoding, but it seems really slim.
BrianMojo
Jul 19, 04:54 PM
Wow, he basically just revealed they're working on an iPhone...
twoodcc
Apr 1, 10:55 PM
Ok, I think the panics were caused by something I did, not the update, that is what I get for making too many changes at once, I'll have to test the configurations to see what caused them. All is well at the moment.
Definitely the 12 core ;)
I moved the 2 GPU machines to the basement where it is much cooler (I know the dust and spiders might kill them, but... hopefully no snakes...) and it is almost quiet upstairs now! The mac pro is soooo quiet! No other Mac that I remember having has been so quiet. I had to run the KVM and network cables between an air duct and the floor, it's kinda goofy but better than a new hole in the floor. Oh, and I accidentally created a network loop, not a good thing as it took me a while to fix. Downtime was only about 2 1/2 hrs, should have been less but I wasn't very well prepared; it was getting way too hot upstairs already.
Oh. Well good luck with the configs.
Good! 12 cores would be awesome! (24 logical cores).
As long as you have a case on your machines. The spiders and dust shouldn't be too bad, just clean them once a month or so
Definitely the 12 core ;)
I moved the 2 GPU machines to the basement where it is much cooler (I know the dust and spiders might kill them, but... hopefully no snakes...) and it is almost quiet upstairs now! The mac pro is soooo quiet! No other Mac that I remember having has been so quiet. I had to run the KVM and network cables between an air duct and the floor, it's kinda goofy but better than a new hole in the floor. Oh, and I accidentally created a network loop, not a good thing as it took me a while to fix. Downtime was only about 2 1/2 hrs, should have been less but I wasn't very well prepared; it was getting way too hot upstairs already.
Oh. Well good luck with the configs.
Good! 12 cores would be awesome! (24 logical cores).
As long as you have a case on your machines. The spiders and dust shouldn't be too bad, just clean them once a month or so
Digitalclips
Jan 12, 07:51 AM
First time I've seen USB called complicated :).
I see what you mean from a design standpoint though, inelegant might be a better word. But it just makes too much sense not to do it. I hardly EVER use my optical drive. Why am I carrying it everywhere I go?
I agree, I can't remember the last time I used a disk in my laptops, I even install using ADR. Also, one day soon even USB won't be needed, some kind of dedicated wi-fi could be used for an Apple Optical drive I suspect.
I see what you mean from a design standpoint though, inelegant might be a better word. But it just makes too much sense not to do it. I hardly EVER use my optical drive. Why am I carrying it everywhere I go?
I agree, I can't remember the last time I used a disk in my laptops, I even install using ADR. Also, one day soon even USB won't be needed, some kind of dedicated wi-fi could be used for an Apple Optical drive I suspect.
gwangung
Apr 21, 11:49 AM
Once again, people are going off half cocked, without knowing anything about either the law or the technical details (and, sorry, but the details MATTER).
wizard
Mar 24, 02:17 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
That is exactly what I'm thinking! Seriously there is no need for that many GPUs in the Pro and IMac requires a custom card. So where would all of these cards go - XMac is my guess.
Or it could simply be a sign of a unified driver from AMD. That would make sense as it is a smarter approach than the highly targeted drivers of the past.I don't see why Apple would want to start supporting older 5000 cards for said machine? *shrug*
How is it silly ? We're talking about a GPU. Even at 1280x800, the Intel GPU sucks, why would it be silly to want to run games on high settings
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4205/the-macbook-pro-review-13-and-15-inch-2011-brings-sandy-bridge/8
It outperforms the 320M under OS X. It certainly doesn't "suck" as much as you make it out to be.
Don't fall for anandtechs crap. Those tests where designed to make Intels GPU look good. The minute you do anything demanding the GPU falls flat on it's face. By this I mean turn on all the latest features to get the best on screen results.
For many other reasons I don't consider anandtech to be a credible web site. It has become an extension of Intels marketing team. A lot of people don't want to hear that but there is a trend in the articles that indicate that they have become a fan site and have lost the ability to report objectively.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
That is exactly what I'm thinking! Seriously there is no need for that many GPUs in the Pro and IMac requires a custom card. So where would all of these cards go - XMac is my guess.
Or it could simply be a sign of a unified driver from AMD. That would make sense as it is a smarter approach than the highly targeted drivers of the past.I don't see why Apple would want to start supporting older 5000 cards for said machine? *shrug*
How is it silly ? We're talking about a GPU. Even at 1280x800, the Intel GPU sucks, why would it be silly to want to run games on high settings
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4205/the-macbook-pro-review-13-and-15-inch-2011-brings-sandy-bridge/8
It outperforms the 320M under OS X. It certainly doesn't "suck" as much as you make it out to be.
Don't fall for anandtechs crap. Those tests where designed to make Intels GPU look good. The minute you do anything demanding the GPU falls flat on it's face. By this I mean turn on all the latest features to get the best on screen results.
For many other reasons I don't consider anandtech to be a credible web site. It has become an extension of Intels marketing team. A lot of people don't want to hear that but there is a trend in the articles that indicate that they have become a fan site and have lost the ability to report objectively.
NameUndecided
Apr 3, 12:42 AM
The reason Lion's only 3.7 GB right now is because it's an upgrade only. You can't install Lion on a clean partition right now, only upgrade from Snow Leopard.
Apple likely did this to reduce download times.
??? My 25gb partition was clean and blank when I installed Lion DP 1 and I think that's the case for most others as well. I'm not sure where you heard that, if I'm understanding you correctly.
Apple likely did this to reduce download times.
??? My 25gb partition was clean and blank when I installed Lion DP 1 and I think that's the case for most others as well. I'm not sure where you heard that, if I'm understanding you correctly.
Rodimus Prime
Apr 23, 01:09 AM
for all your defending of this feature ... can you give me even one positive reason this is good for the average person that out-weighs the negative ones ... just one
That is a good question.
I have a huge issue with how it is done and the fact that you can not opt out of it. On top of that Apple has piss poor protection of the file and Apple history at security is not exactly the best.
There should be a way to opt out. But collecting them with out my choice is an issue.
I trust Google a hell of a lot more with the info and being more up front about it then Apple and I do not trust Google that much.
If LTD wants an example other wise you can see companies start using these feature on the phones to track employees at all time and what they do. Or in court cases them being pulled it to use against one spouse in a mess divorce.
Spying on ones spouse is another example.
That is a good question.
I have a huge issue with how it is done and the fact that you can not opt out of it. On top of that Apple has piss poor protection of the file and Apple history at security is not exactly the best.
There should be a way to opt out. But collecting them with out my choice is an issue.
I trust Google a hell of a lot more with the info and being more up front about it then Apple and I do not trust Google that much.
If LTD wants an example other wise you can see companies start using these feature on the phones to track employees at all time and what they do. Or in court cases them being pulled it to use against one spouse in a mess divorce.
Spying on ones spouse is another example.
No comments:
Post a Comment