vartanarsen
Apr 19, 11:47 AM
Who cares about Expose. Give me Multi-Touch Gesturing like I have on iPad 2. 4-5 finger swipe accross apps, 4-5 finger swipe up to show the mult-tasking pane; 4-5 finger pinch-close to get to the home screen........What can beat that??????
MacCoaster
Sep 22, 07:29 AM
Originally posted by avkills
Ok, so Intel has the Itanium, well they have the Itanium2 I guess if you want to get super current, so what! The Itanium is based on a brand new design that looks good on paper, but Intel will be the first to admit it has not performed as good as they hoped.
I simply meant the Itanium family, including both the original Itanium and the current Intamium 2.
Sun, IBM and SGI have had 64bit processors way before Intel. So if you say the Itanium is ok for the high-end consumer, then It's safe to say that a Sun Ultra10 or a SGI Octane would also be a high-end consumer machine.
Sure, okay. Compare the prices. The Itanium solution is much cheaper.
What makes you so sure that a 16 processor G4 machine would not perform, because of the bus speed. What about super high-end servers like the CM5 or the Cray T3D. I seriously doubt those machines have 500Mhz bus speeds, or DDR memory. I know for a fact that the CM5 had dedicated memory for each processor node, and each node had 2 vector units. If you want, I can find out specifics from my brother, who has actually programmed code for it, when he worked at Las Alamos. Whether a 16 processor G4 machine is relevant or not, it could be built and if built right, would be very fast.
Very irrevelant. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the G4 wasn't designed to be run in anything more than a dual configuration.
So the .NET family is limited to 32 processors huh....Weak, very weak. You can say what you want, UNIX still scales better than Windows, no matter what the flavor.
Windows isn't designed nor targeted at customers with more than 32 processors. If anyone wanted a 2048-way server, they'd either custom build it and load UNIX on it or have some large corporation develop the computer. It's a lot cheaper clustering 32 high-availablity servers than buying that one 2048-way server. Duh, Windows isn't scalable. It was NEVER designed primarily to be used on 2048-way supercomputers. That's way out of Microsoft's scope and market.
In my opinion, Microsoft is beginning to die a slow painful death. Everyone is tired of their ************ and half-assed attempts of secure computing. Everyone always complains that Macs are not open enough, well I think the opposite is true. Apple embraces open standards and even invents and shares them when none exist, while Microsoft shuns and sometimes even steals others work, in a attempt to push their own proprietary formats and stifle progress.
Funny that Microsoft pushed the ever-so-slow W3C to standardize further dynamic HTML/etc. technologies to become standard. Of course, W3C can't keep current to allow people to innovate in the web presentation standards. Microsoft is even pushing XML very hard with .NET Web Services. And yes, Macs are closed. Not in software, but in hardware. Maybe you were confused by the definition of Macs being closed. The older Macintosh hardware is so proprietary it's not funny. Recent Macs adopt technology that had been in PCs before, except FireWire of course, because Apple invented that. But the hardware is still proprietary. I don't see that we are able to take off-the-shelf high quality components and build our own PowerPC computers then slap Mac OS X on it. Also, Microsoft indeed is "against" open source, and yet they maintain a "shared source" implementation of .NET for FreeBSD. In fact, it's a very well done implementation -- not that most-feeble-possible-implementation that we thought could possible be.
I find it funny that Intel invented USB, but it was Apple that took the leap of faith and pushed it into the mainstream. Apple, in my opinion is the only company thinking "outside the box" and in the end, they will win because of it.
-mark
Maybe it was Apple and Microsoft (Windows 98) who popularized USB, but you've got to realize this. PCs have had USB a few years before Apple. It wasn't until iMac/Windows 98 (note, same year: 1998) that USB got popular.
Ok, so Intel has the Itanium, well they have the Itanium2 I guess if you want to get super current, so what! The Itanium is based on a brand new design that looks good on paper, but Intel will be the first to admit it has not performed as good as they hoped.
I simply meant the Itanium family, including both the original Itanium and the current Intamium 2.
Sun, IBM and SGI have had 64bit processors way before Intel. So if you say the Itanium is ok for the high-end consumer, then It's safe to say that a Sun Ultra10 or a SGI Octane would also be a high-end consumer machine.
Sure, okay. Compare the prices. The Itanium solution is much cheaper.
What makes you so sure that a 16 processor G4 machine would not perform, because of the bus speed. What about super high-end servers like the CM5 or the Cray T3D. I seriously doubt those machines have 500Mhz bus speeds, or DDR memory. I know for a fact that the CM5 had dedicated memory for each processor node, and each node had 2 vector units. If you want, I can find out specifics from my brother, who has actually programmed code for it, when he worked at Las Alamos. Whether a 16 processor G4 machine is relevant or not, it could be built and if built right, would be very fast.
Very irrevelant. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the G4 wasn't designed to be run in anything more than a dual configuration.
So the .NET family is limited to 32 processors huh....Weak, very weak. You can say what you want, UNIX still scales better than Windows, no matter what the flavor.
Windows isn't designed nor targeted at customers with more than 32 processors. If anyone wanted a 2048-way server, they'd either custom build it and load UNIX on it or have some large corporation develop the computer. It's a lot cheaper clustering 32 high-availablity servers than buying that one 2048-way server. Duh, Windows isn't scalable. It was NEVER designed primarily to be used on 2048-way supercomputers. That's way out of Microsoft's scope and market.
In my opinion, Microsoft is beginning to die a slow painful death. Everyone is tired of their ************ and half-assed attempts of secure computing. Everyone always complains that Macs are not open enough, well I think the opposite is true. Apple embraces open standards and even invents and shares them when none exist, while Microsoft shuns and sometimes even steals others work, in a attempt to push their own proprietary formats and stifle progress.
Funny that Microsoft pushed the ever-so-slow W3C to standardize further dynamic HTML/etc. technologies to become standard. Of course, W3C can't keep current to allow people to innovate in the web presentation standards. Microsoft is even pushing XML very hard with .NET Web Services. And yes, Macs are closed. Not in software, but in hardware. Maybe you were confused by the definition of Macs being closed. The older Macintosh hardware is so proprietary it's not funny. Recent Macs adopt technology that had been in PCs before, except FireWire of course, because Apple invented that. But the hardware is still proprietary. I don't see that we are able to take off-the-shelf high quality components and build our own PowerPC computers then slap Mac OS X on it. Also, Microsoft indeed is "against" open source, and yet they maintain a "shared source" implementation of .NET for FreeBSD. In fact, it's a very well done implementation -- not that most-feeble-possible-implementation that we thought could possible be.
I find it funny that Intel invented USB, but it was Apple that took the leap of faith and pushed it into the mainstream. Apple, in my opinion is the only company thinking "outside the box" and in the end, they will win because of it.
-mark
Maybe it was Apple and Microsoft (Windows 98) who popularized USB, but you've got to realize this. PCs have had USB a few years before Apple. It wasn't until iMac/Windows 98 (note, same year: 1998) that USB got popular.
saulbug
Nov 14, 12:12 PM
six airlines will begin offering their passengers iPod seat connections which power and charge their iPods during flight and allow the video content on their iPods to be viewed on the their seat back displays.
that's stupid! why would the person behind me want to watch my videos!? They shouldn't put the video on the seatback of iPod connected passengers, they should put it on the seatback of the passenger in front of them!!
that's stupid! why would the person behind me want to watch my videos!? They shouldn't put the video on the seatback of iPod connected passengers, they should put it on the seatback of the passenger in front of them!!
backdraft
Mar 24, 12:45 PM
I wonder if this has anything to do with Apple's recent hire?
http://www.macrumors.com/2010/03/15/apple-hires-expert-in-wearable-computing/
For Example:
http://www.ikey.com/ProductsList/?productID=158
http://l3shop.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=SFNT&Store_Code=LSOS
hmmm... PA Semi's previous military contracts might have to do with this as well.
Any conspiracy theories? lol
http://www.macrumors.com/2010/03/15/apple-hires-expert-in-wearable-computing/
For Example:
http://www.ikey.com/ProductsList/?productID=158
http://l3shop.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=SFNT&Store_Code=LSOS
hmmm... PA Semi's previous military contracts might have to do with this as well.
Any conspiracy theories? lol
more...
djltoronto
Jan 7, 01:36 PM
There needs to be a way to manually sync contacts, as not all my contacts in my phonebook have the same name as Facebook (i save them as nick names, family names etc).
:apple: KrayzieKray :apple:
ya... that would be nice..
But.. FYI.. even if the names don't match, as long as the contacts have email address in both the phone and FB - it will sync the.
Several of my contacts did sync, even though the names didn't match (but the email address's did.
:apple: KrayzieKray :apple:
ya... that would be nice..
But.. FYI.. even if the names don't match, as long as the contacts have email address in both the phone and FB - it will sync the.
Several of my contacts did sync, even though the names didn't match (but the email address's did.
bdj21ya
Oct 16, 06:51 PM
^ Yeah, how about voicemail? If its that important they'll leave a message. Shoot sometimes I even turn off my cell *GASP!* Dude, you need to go camping once in a while and get away from the world.
In my opinion, I don't think the "iPhone" will have more than 1GB just so that it wouldn't affect the sales of the lower capacity Nanos (the shuffle is an exception because its tiny and has a relatively lower concept).
I think that 1GB would be stupid. That's what's been holding back Music phones the most in my opinion.
In my opinion, I don't think the "iPhone" will have more than 1GB just so that it wouldn't affect the sales of the lower capacity Nanos (the shuffle is an exception because its tiny and has a relatively lower concept).
I think that 1GB would be stupid. That's what's been holding back Music phones the most in my opinion.
more...
toddybody
Mar 25, 09:28 AM
Awesome awesome price...jeeze, theres very little reason for anyone not to have an iPad now (if they wanted one in the first place).
Squonk
Sep 27, 10:30 AM
I checked the update pace for Mac OS X 10.4.
29/04/2005: 10.4.0
17/05/2005: 10.4.1 (+ 18 days)
12/07/2005: 10.4.2 (+ 26 days)
31/10/2005: 10.4.3 (+ 111 days)
11/01/2006: 10.4.4 (+ 72 days)
14/02/2006: 10.4.5 (+ 34 days)
03/04/2006: 10.4.6 (+ 48 days)
27/06/2006: 10.4.7 (+ 85 days)
27/09/2006 (today) + 92 days
I'm such a geek for this kind of trivia! Thanks!!! :D
Bring on the update!
Bring on the Leopard!
29/04/2005: 10.4.0
17/05/2005: 10.4.1 (+ 18 days)
12/07/2005: 10.4.2 (+ 26 days)
31/10/2005: 10.4.3 (+ 111 days)
11/01/2006: 10.4.4 (+ 72 days)
14/02/2006: 10.4.5 (+ 34 days)
03/04/2006: 10.4.6 (+ 48 days)
27/06/2006: 10.4.7 (+ 85 days)
27/09/2006 (today) + 92 days
I'm such a geek for this kind of trivia! Thanks!!! :D
Bring on the update!
Bring on the Leopard!
more...
Cheffy Dave
Apr 20, 02:21 PM
I have zero reason to downgrade to Sandy Bridge with its forced worthless IGP & chipset.
I do believe the backlit keyboard will make it back IF Apple continues to sell a MacBook. If Apple eliminates the MB and puts the low end MBA in its place at $999, then I suspect the backlit keyboard stays a thing of the past. If however Apple keeps the MB, I think it will conclude that at least the 13" MBA needs the upgraded feature. It is extremely low cost. I would be shocked if it costs $0.50 per MBA unit, and it seems like a big advantage. I think Apple likes to "experiment" with features so it can then add them back and act like they learned their lesson when actually they just want added sales.
I really don't believe there is any worry about a Sandy Bridge CPU making its way into the MBA. With Apple's update cycles, it could easily just wait for Ivy Bridge. Let's remember that the only Mac that uses low and ultra low voltage CPUs are the two MBAs. Apple can update the MB, Mac mini, and 21.5" iMac to Sandy Bridge standard core CPUs and not get the horrific loss in graphics performance that the MBA would receive with LV and ULV CPUs and their respective IGPs. I just think the vast majority of MBA buyers a, don't care, and b, would be better off with C2D and Nvidia 320m for another year.
I will be shocked to see a Sandy Bridge MBA unless it includes a standard voltage CPU... Ivy Bridge just makes much more sense.
I agree on the Sandy Bridge SD, I too believe they will wait until Ivy Bridge, it simply makes NO sense to screw up a perfectly spectacular machine, as well as sales and profits, just to move on from the C2D. IB will be another matter:cool:
I do believe the backlit keyboard will make it back IF Apple continues to sell a MacBook. If Apple eliminates the MB and puts the low end MBA in its place at $999, then I suspect the backlit keyboard stays a thing of the past. If however Apple keeps the MB, I think it will conclude that at least the 13" MBA needs the upgraded feature. It is extremely low cost. I would be shocked if it costs $0.50 per MBA unit, and it seems like a big advantage. I think Apple likes to "experiment" with features so it can then add them back and act like they learned their lesson when actually they just want added sales.
I really don't believe there is any worry about a Sandy Bridge CPU making its way into the MBA. With Apple's update cycles, it could easily just wait for Ivy Bridge. Let's remember that the only Mac that uses low and ultra low voltage CPUs are the two MBAs. Apple can update the MB, Mac mini, and 21.5" iMac to Sandy Bridge standard core CPUs and not get the horrific loss in graphics performance that the MBA would receive with LV and ULV CPUs and their respective IGPs. I just think the vast majority of MBA buyers a, don't care, and b, would be better off with C2D and Nvidia 320m for another year.
I will be shocked to see a Sandy Bridge MBA unless it includes a standard voltage CPU... Ivy Bridge just makes much more sense.
I agree on the Sandy Bridge SD, I too believe they will wait until Ivy Bridge, it simply makes NO sense to screw up a perfectly spectacular machine, as well as sales and profits, just to move on from the C2D. IB will be another matter:cool:
jackirish
Oct 6, 12:31 PM
let's be honest, taking the 3GS out of the equation finally and replacing it with a lower-end or even just a smaller iPhone 4 with a larger size model would be nice change. a smaller model would appeal to many customers who are constantly outdoors, athletic, or would simply welcome the smaller size to fit in skinny jeans. plus a lower price point would make it accessible to many more customers who find the $199 and $299 just out of their reach. a larger iPhone 4 with a potential OLED screen, larger storage capacity, even better camera system (front, back, or both), higher quality and louder speakers, and maybe even a scaled down version of the iWork apps, would appeal to gamers, hardcore Apple fans, businessmen and women, families, and entrepreneurs. don't doubt the appeal of a little change in size...
more...
MorphingDragon
Apr 15, 07:24 AM
And Microsoft Windows Server ? really ? Is it successful because I have to install 30 of those to run a simple SSO db like AD whereas I can run eDirectory off of 3 Sun boxes and achieve the same results with about 100 times more objects in the directory ?
God, haven't used eDirectory in ages, especially so since Novell has been a bit volatile. Been using a Mixture of FreeIPA/Zimbra OSE/Zimbra Collaboration the last couple of years, much faster and cheaper than a Microsoft stack.
So yes, Microsoft server is so successful because its just the best. :rolleyes:
They have literally held the industry back all through the 90s and early 00s, something we're just now breaking free of. Just for that, I would never lend them my expertise no matter the offer. It is an ethical and moral choice, not one based on some crazy love for one brand of products.
Don't forget the the near-brainwashing of Techs and Admins, keeping most businesses and service providers out of plain ignorance.
God, haven't used eDirectory in ages, especially so since Novell has been a bit volatile. Been using a Mixture of FreeIPA/Zimbra OSE/Zimbra Collaboration the last couple of years, much faster and cheaper than a Microsoft stack.
So yes, Microsoft server is so successful because its just the best. :rolleyes:
They have literally held the industry back all through the 90s and early 00s, something we're just now breaking free of. Just for that, I would never lend them my expertise no matter the offer. It is an ethical and moral choice, not one based on some crazy love for one brand of products.
Don't forget the the near-brainwashing of Techs and Admins, keeping most businesses and service providers out of plain ignorance.
tristangage
Apr 23, 05:17 AM
Around the Manchester area, it's about �1.40 per litre of unleaded.
That's 2.3$/litre.
If I do the maths right, that's 3.7854118 * 2.3
Which equates to 8.706$/gallon.
Pretty expensive over here at the moment.
That's 2.3$/litre.
If I do the maths right, that's 3.7854118 * 2.3
Which equates to 8.706$/gallon.
Pretty expensive over here at the moment.
more...
ltldrummerboy
Jun 14, 11:28 PM
With the new ESPN deal announced and this new hardware I might be selling my Mac mini to get one of these. If Hulu comes to Xbox it'll be a sure thing.
Does anyone know if MLB games are included in the ESPN deal?
Does anyone know if MLB games are included in the ESPN deal?
MacModMachine
Nov 18, 07:31 AM
Stolen goods or not, nevermind that - but $300 per kit? :eek:
Why not just buy a white case?
lol yup,
white case is what?...$10-$20 ?
and you can replace it in a second.
anything over 40$ is a joke for a few pieces of plastic.
Why not just buy a white case?
lol yup,
white case is what?...$10-$20 ?
and you can replace it in a second.
anything over 40$ is a joke for a few pieces of plastic.
more...
3lionsbecks
Aug 19, 03:15 PM
If you don't like it then just make sure you customize the privacy features in your account info.
I suggest this because your friends can 'tag' you in at a location even if you aren't there.
ie - pretend that you are at a stripclub and send it out to everyone......believe me, some people's friends will do stuff like this as a joke....and some will do it out of spite.
Could make for some funny encounters.....HS kids are going to get a huge kick out of this...
I suggest this because your friends can 'tag' you in at a location even if you aren't there.
ie - pretend that you are at a stripclub and send it out to everyone......believe me, some people's friends will do stuff like this as a joke....and some will do it out of spite.
Could make for some funny encounters.....HS kids are going to get a huge kick out of this...
Brometheus
Apr 19, 03:09 PM
What does ANY of this have to do to Apple rejecting a Pulitzer Prize-winning cartoonist from the App Store?
Nothing, directly. I was responding to a previous comment as you can see. There is an indirect connection to the cartoonist issue. My feeling is that there's a general failure to understand why Apple has a restrictive policy regarding what types of apps can appear in the app store. My post addressed the issue regarding the prohibition of pornography, instead of the issue of what defines an app with defamatory content as was the case with the cartoonist. There's also, in my opinion, a failure to appreciate that the lack of consistency in the app approval process is a result of Apple being unable to anticipate every scenario and nuance that is presented by certain apps, and the fact that Apple hires people to review apps. You can't realistically expect different people to always agree on situations that are slightly different. In order to respond to the explosion of submitted apps, Apple must have had to hire a lot of new reviewers. That means that you may have less control over the quality and experience level of the people that you have working as reviewers.
Nothing, directly. I was responding to a previous comment as you can see. There is an indirect connection to the cartoonist issue. My feeling is that there's a general failure to understand why Apple has a restrictive policy regarding what types of apps can appear in the app store. My post addressed the issue regarding the prohibition of pornography, instead of the issue of what defines an app with defamatory content as was the case with the cartoonist. There's also, in my opinion, a failure to appreciate that the lack of consistency in the app approval process is a result of Apple being unable to anticipate every scenario and nuance that is presented by certain apps, and the fact that Apple hires people to review apps. You can't realistically expect different people to always agree on situations that are slightly different. In order to respond to the explosion of submitted apps, Apple must have had to hire a lot of new reviewers. That means that you may have less control over the quality and experience level of the people that you have working as reviewers.
more...
twoodcc
Apr 16, 09:53 PM
I do now, for some reason it takes me a while to understand when I look at it.
i think those stats are pretty good. nothing is perfect, but they seem to work for me.
Ha ha, yes we could use some more folders.
yeah the more the better right now. and i finally got my other system up!
i think those stats are pretty good. nothing is perfect, but they seem to work for me.
Ha ha, yes we could use some more folders.
yeah the more the better right now. and i finally got my other system up!
gloss
Sep 27, 09:33 AM
I doubt a software update can magically change your crappy Intel 950 in to a worthwhile GPU.
Of course not. But it could allow multi-core support in OpenGL, which would be dandy and, yes, would affect performance even on integrated graphics systems.
Of course not. But it could allow multi-core support in OpenGL, which would be dandy and, yes, would affect performance even on integrated graphics systems.
Cliff3
Mar 29, 10:57 AM
As far as Nikon goes: The reason was the F- Mount.. High speed crop is a byproduct. the D700 does not have it and some other don't either but they all MOUNT DX lenses in crop mode AND full frame mode.
The term high speed crop was specific to the D2X. If you reduced the capture area to around 5Mpx, the frame rate increased from 4-5 FPS to 8 FPS. All of the Nikon FX bodies have a setting on the Image Setting menu called Image Area that governs whether the body automatically crops an image if it detects that a DX lens is mounted to the camera.
The only DX lens I had was the 17-55 and I sold it a few years ago when I replaced it with the 14-24 and 24-70.
The term high speed crop was specific to the D2X. If you reduced the capture area to around 5Mpx, the frame rate increased from 4-5 FPS to 8 FPS. All of the Nikon FX bodies have a setting on the Image Setting menu called Image Area that governs whether the body automatically crops an image if it detects that a DX lens is mounted to the camera.
The only DX lens I had was the 17-55 and I sold it a few years ago when I replaced it with the 14-24 and 24-70.
Laird Knox
May 2, 02:57 PM
It's clearly a QA issue Apple is having with the phones...which I think is sad given the time it took for them to release. :(
That's some serious QC issues.
Probably just terrible manufacturing, different moulds, etc.
Seriously? 1/128" is a serious QA/manufacturing issue?
That's some serious QC issues.
Probably just terrible manufacturing, different moulds, etc.
Seriously? 1/128" is a serious QA/manufacturing issue?
bella92108
Apr 1, 12:04 PM
This is the weird reality. TV Networks spend millions and even billions of dollars trying to get as many people to watch their shows for free, and then they also spend a great deal of time and money trying to stop people from watching their tv shows for free.
Imagine if they spend that energy just trying to properly record viewers for those outlets instead of weirdly begging people to watch their shows for free and then on the other hand demand they don't watch their shows for free.
Imagine if they actually spent money and time to put out shows that didn't SUCK. LOL. CBS, this means you, lol.
Imagine if they spend that energy just trying to properly record viewers for those outlets instead of weirdly begging people to watch their shows for free and then on the other hand demand they don't watch their shows for free.
Imagine if they actually spent money and time to put out shows that didn't SUCK. LOL. CBS, this means you, lol.
HecubusPro
Aug 27, 11:57 PM
It's been exciting around the macrumors forums lately, but this has the be most uninteresting story I've seen on the site since I've started coming here. And in the short amount of time it's been posted, this thread has already grown to nearly 4 pages. :eek:
AppleInLVX
Apr 19, 03:12 PM
I'm going to go out on a limb and postulate that the next release won't be iOS5, nor will the next phone be iPhone 5. Reason being, as someone already stated in the forums a few days ago, this release is more likely to be iterative--evolutionary, not revolutionary. The new design of iPhone 4 will stand, and the only changes outwardly might be the screen. Everything else is inside.
I think '5' is a catchy number, and Apple will reserve it for the 2012 iPhone. We'll see a whole new, magical iOS5 and with it, iPhone 5! Dun, dun, duuuuun!!! (or should I say, BOOM!)
I think you'll see iOS4.5 with all these cool little tweaks to the UI (and I REALLY hope improvements to notifications), and the new iPhone 4NS (New Screen or some such) in September.
...and the white iPhone at the same time. Perhaps in other cool colours... or maybe just the antenna band in those funky iPod nano colours. :)
I think '5' is a catchy number, and Apple will reserve it for the 2012 iPhone. We'll see a whole new, magical iOS5 and with it, iPhone 5! Dun, dun, duuuuun!!! (or should I say, BOOM!)
I think you'll see iOS4.5 with all these cool little tweaks to the UI (and I REALLY hope improvements to notifications), and the new iPhone 4NS (New Screen or some such) in September.
...and the white iPhone at the same time. Perhaps in other cool colours... or maybe just the antenna band in those funky iPod nano colours. :)
sunfast
Sep 25, 10:23 AM
Apple doesn't have to have a public event to update the machines. They'll just appear on the website someday.
Exactly. MacBooks appeared with no fanfare at all.
Exactly. MacBooks appeared with no fanfare at all.
No comments:
Post a Comment