mcmadhatter
Sep 12, 02:11 PM
I hope Apple releases an iPod software update so those of us who already own 5th generation iPods can take advantage of all these new features.
so do I, because I bought a game thinking it would work with my 5th generation ipod and it doesn't :(
so do I, because I bought a game thinking it would work with my 5th generation ipod and it doesn't :(
maflynn
Apr 4, 11:45 AM
How sad,
I mean a person lost his life because of his actions, and the guard now has to live with the fact that he took a life. All for what - some iToys? Doesn't seem worth it. :(
I mean a person lost his life because of his actions, and the guard now has to live with the fact that he took a life. All for what - some iToys? Doesn't seem worth it. :(
Ach111es
Apr 25, 01:10 PM
Was thinking of springing for a mid 15 for 2000 and the education deal...now I may just buy a base 13 or even MBA refresh and plan on reselling for the awesome update (which I will also buy with education deal).
airamerica
Oct 27, 11:11 AM
I know the planet is doomed and that we are all going to drown under super high sea levels BUT I just can't see the point in groups like Greenpeace.
I mean, they bang on about this and that, looking for big companies to target. It just stinks... Have you seen that raft (boat) they sail around in - it is hardly a pin-up for ecological travel.
Greenpeace you are a product of the 20th Century, turning to ever more desperate methods to get your message out. Take your tree hugging ideology and put it to good use somewhere else - fight Aids, cure cancer, help the disabled etc.
Apple and it's partners or competitors crack on! Do your thing, if you can become 'green', go for it. If not, we're all doomed anyway!
AA
I mean, they bang on about this and that, looking for big companies to target. It just stinks... Have you seen that raft (boat) they sail around in - it is hardly a pin-up for ecological travel.
Greenpeace you are a product of the 20th Century, turning to ever more desperate methods to get your message out. Take your tree hugging ideology and put it to good use somewhere else - fight Aids, cure cancer, help the disabled etc.
Apple and it's partners or competitors crack on! Do your thing, if you can become 'green', go for it. If not, we're all doomed anyway!
AA
rotobadger
Mar 30, 12:47 PM
back here in the UK Hoover were able to trade mark Hoover as their name despite the fact that hoover is the generic term for a vacuum cleaner!
Well, we ask for a "Kleenex", not a tissue.
We drink a "Coke", not a soda.
We use a "Band-Aid", not an adhesive bandage.
We like to "Roller Blade", not inline skate.
Although we don't "Hoover" here in the United States, I think "Hoover" falls into the "Coke, Kleenex, Band-aid, etc." catagory in England.
Well, we ask for a "Kleenex", not a tissue.
We drink a "Coke", not a soda.
We use a "Band-Aid", not an adhesive bandage.
We like to "Roller Blade", not inline skate.
Although we don't "Hoover" here in the United States, I think "Hoover" falls into the "Coke, Kleenex, Band-aid, etc." catagory in England.
iLunar
Oct 12, 05:34 PM
Why do they always use the smaller sized iPods for the special editions?
I wanted the U2 iPod, but it was not the 60 gig.
I would like a red iPod, but want the 8 gig!
USE THE BEST MODEL... ESPECIALLY SINCE ITS GOING TO CHARITY!!!!!!!
I think its probably an issue of volume. The smaller sizes sell more. Just a guess, I don't have actual numbers.
I wanted the U2 iPod, but it was not the 60 gig.
I would like a red iPod, but want the 8 gig!
USE THE BEST MODEL... ESPECIALLY SINCE ITS GOING TO CHARITY!!!!!!!
I think its probably an issue of volume. The smaller sizes sell more. Just a guess, I don't have actual numbers.
Dmac77
Apr 25, 12:57 AM
I think the point is that traffic laws were made to prevent stuff like this in the first place. Had you been obeying the law, there would be no issue, other than maybe a slight annoyance for a couple minutes driving a little slow.
If I'm reading this correctly, neither the woman nor you had a right to drive like that. Just because someone pulls something like a brake check, doesn't give you or anyone else the right to act dangerously. Aggressive driving is what gets people hurt or killed.
The simple fact is that I should not have to obey a 70mph speed limit if I don't want to. Why would I even bother driving a car that can hit 186mph (with the speed governor removed, with the governor top speed is 155mph) at 70 mph? A Ford Fiesta can hit those speeds, what's the point of fast cars if you're going to follow the speed limit in them?
EDIT: @ Rodimus - Had she hit me when I slammed on the brakes, she would have been at fault. All I have to do is tell the cop that I thought I saw an animal run across the road. She is supposed to keep enough distance to be able to stop if I slam on the brakes. Doesn't matter than I cut her off, she has to prove that I did, and she also has to prove that I slammed on the breaks with malice.
-Don
If I'm reading this correctly, neither the woman nor you had a right to drive like that. Just because someone pulls something like a brake check, doesn't give you or anyone else the right to act dangerously. Aggressive driving is what gets people hurt or killed.
The simple fact is that I should not have to obey a 70mph speed limit if I don't want to. Why would I even bother driving a car that can hit 186mph (with the speed governor removed, with the governor top speed is 155mph) at 70 mph? A Ford Fiesta can hit those speeds, what's the point of fast cars if you're going to follow the speed limit in them?
EDIT: @ Rodimus - Had she hit me when I slammed on the brakes, she would have been at fault. All I have to do is tell the cop that I thought I saw an animal run across the road. She is supposed to keep enough distance to be able to stop if I slam on the brakes. Doesn't matter than I cut her off, she has to prove that I did, and she also has to prove that I slammed on the breaks with malice.
-Don
Eidorian
Jul 14, 02:37 PM
As Eidorian's link points out, Core Duo (Yonah) performance falls somewhere between the Athlon X2 3800 and the Athlon X2 4200. The 2.40GHz E6600, 2.66GHz E6700, and 2.93GHz X6800 Core 2 Duos in particular are at least 40% faster, which is exactly what Intel promised at the IDF.That's where I gauged it as well. The 1.86 GHz Conroe beats AMD's FX-62 in a few tests.
Hell the E6400 (2.13 GHz, $224) and the E6500 (2.4 GHz, $316) are more then enough to compete with the FX-62 (2.8 GHz, $999)
Hell the E6400 (2.13 GHz, $224) and the E6500 (2.4 GHz, $316) are more then enough to compete with the FX-62 (2.8 GHz, $999)
aiqw9182
Apr 16, 11:47 AM
You keep talking about a non-existent adapter that costs $10 and comparing mini-display port adapters that merely convert signal paths isn't even in the same realm as converting to an entirely different interface. In other words your 'adapter' prices are 100% BS and you know it.
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?
Don't tase me bro! :eek:
Seriously, you going to compare a demonstration with a professional mass storage array that isn't available to the public yet and which I said at the bottom of my last post is a perfect use for TB (i.e. with professional editing software) with the Lacie consumer grade 5200 RPM SLOW USB3 drive? Dude, you have to compare apples to apples. You're comparing a race car to a Chevette.... That neither proves nor disproves anything about the full capability of USB3. The ad on that box is marketing BS about the "interface" not the drive they're selling (which is a slow 5200 RPM SATA drive which all top out between 40-60MB/sec PERIOD, regardless whether they use SATA, USB3, Firewire 800 or Thunderbolt). Show me a 7200 RPM (or better yet a 10,000+ SCSI rated) drive connected to USB3 AND TB (or even FW800) and then compare their actual speeds. OR find an array that goes fast like the one Intel was using that also has USB3 on it and compare their actual speeds 1 to 1. Showing me Steak Diane on one plate and a hot dog on the other doesn't prove the cook who made the hot dog doesn't know how to cook. It simply proves he was given a hot dog to cook.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
In reality, you need an actual hard drive test that makes sense not comparing a Porsche to a lawn tractor.... :rolleyes:
See above. :rolleyes:
No more than you assuming you're going to get a $10 USB3 adapter. At least my assumption is based on Firewire statistics and early adoption rates. Yours is based on dreaming.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.
I think the 5200 RPM 2.5" drive that came with my MBP capped out around 50MB/sec using a SATA II interface (or 450mbps). Does that prove my SATA chip set SUCKS? NO, IT DOES NOT. When I replaced it with a 7200 RPM Hitachi, it now caps out around 110MB/sec (or 880mbps, well above FW800's theoretical cap even). Even my PPC G4 gets 105MB/sec caps with its 1.5TB 7200 RPM Seagate Barracuda drives (and SATA does eat CPU as well; if I try to run two of them at the same time I still get a total of around 100MB/sec with the CPU pegged at 95-100%. The older PCI bus is also in the way. Thus it's not the SATA interface there that's the problem either, but you might think so if you make assumptions based only on one test number and no idea what's in the computer being used or any statistics about the CPU or Bus while its being used. Your YouTube videos comparisons are absurd in that regard. Cheap mass storage devices (like the Lacie) aren't made for performance. Show me TB making that same drive do over 100MB/sec. It won't happen.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.
I never said any such thing. I said they won't pay a premium for Thunderbolt for every-day use. If you're just going to lie and change what I said, I won't bother replying anymore.
USB 3 won't be a premium over anything. It's going to be dirt cheap and a simple performance upgrade for everyone. It already is cheap for new computers and a pretty cheap add-on for existing ones; you cannot add TB to existing computers so there's another problem it has to contend with, especially trying to get a large user base in any reasonable length of time. The longer it takes to get a large installed user base, the longer the prices will stay high on any TB products. It's plainly obvious that TB is going to be a high-end niche product just like FW800, at least for the forseeable future. While Intel's demo is totally cool, it doesn't remotely represent the AVERAGE PC user in any shape or form. Most people aren't editing 4 simultaneous streams of 1080p video on a mega-buck professional high-speed drive array.
Circulatory System photo
Circulatory System
circulatory system diagram for
Grasshopper Circulatory System
circulatory diagram 2.gif
BACK TO FROG DIAGRAM HOMEPAGE.
The circulatory system carries
circulatory system
Circulatory System - Prints
Circulatory System
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?
Don't tase me bro! :eek:
Seriously, you going to compare a demonstration with a professional mass storage array that isn't available to the public yet and which I said at the bottom of my last post is a perfect use for TB (i.e. with professional editing software) with the Lacie consumer grade 5200 RPM SLOW USB3 drive? Dude, you have to compare apples to apples. You're comparing a race car to a Chevette.... That neither proves nor disproves anything about the full capability of USB3. The ad on that box is marketing BS about the "interface" not the drive they're selling (which is a slow 5200 RPM SATA drive which all top out between 40-60MB/sec PERIOD, regardless whether they use SATA, USB3, Firewire 800 or Thunderbolt). Show me a 7200 RPM (or better yet a 10,000+ SCSI rated) drive connected to USB3 AND TB (or even FW800) and then compare their actual speeds. OR find an array that goes fast like the one Intel was using that also has USB3 on it and compare their actual speeds 1 to 1. Showing me Steak Diane on one plate and a hot dog on the other doesn't prove the cook who made the hot dog doesn't know how to cook. It simply proves he was given a hot dog to cook.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
In reality, you need an actual hard drive test that makes sense not comparing a Porsche to a lawn tractor.... :rolleyes:
See above. :rolleyes:
No more than you assuming you're going to get a $10 USB3 adapter. At least my assumption is based on Firewire statistics and early adoption rates. Yours is based on dreaming.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.
I think the 5200 RPM 2.5" drive that came with my MBP capped out around 50MB/sec using a SATA II interface (or 450mbps). Does that prove my SATA chip set SUCKS? NO, IT DOES NOT. When I replaced it with a 7200 RPM Hitachi, it now caps out around 110MB/sec (or 880mbps, well above FW800's theoretical cap even). Even my PPC G4 gets 105MB/sec caps with its 1.5TB 7200 RPM Seagate Barracuda drives (and SATA does eat CPU as well; if I try to run two of them at the same time I still get a total of around 100MB/sec with the CPU pegged at 95-100%. The older PCI bus is also in the way. Thus it's not the SATA interface there that's the problem either, but you might think so if you make assumptions based only on one test number and no idea what's in the computer being used or any statistics about the CPU or Bus while its being used. Your YouTube videos comparisons are absurd in that regard. Cheap mass storage devices (like the Lacie) aren't made for performance. Show me TB making that same drive do over 100MB/sec. It won't happen.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.
I never said any such thing. I said they won't pay a premium for Thunderbolt for every-day use. If you're just going to lie and change what I said, I won't bother replying anymore.
USB 3 won't be a premium over anything. It's going to be dirt cheap and a simple performance upgrade for everyone. It already is cheap for new computers and a pretty cheap add-on for existing ones; you cannot add TB to existing computers so there's another problem it has to contend with, especially trying to get a large user base in any reasonable length of time. The longer it takes to get a large installed user base, the longer the prices will stay high on any TB products. It's plainly obvious that TB is going to be a high-end niche product just like FW800, at least for the forseeable future. While Intel's demo is totally cool, it doesn't remotely represent the AVERAGE PC user in any shape or form. Most people aren't editing 4 simultaneous streams of 1080p video on a mega-buck professional high-speed drive array.
Dr.Gargoyle
Sep 14, 09:00 AM
anyway just trying to find an excuse for the iPhone....hehe :D
Count me in...;) I want one bad. I have been holding back on buying a new iPod in wait for the iPhone.
OT: I took a bath with my G4 iPod 40GB. I dont recommend it; bad things happen. :o
Count me in...;) I want one bad. I have been holding back on buying a new iPod in wait for the iPhone.
OT: I took a bath with my G4 iPod 40GB. I dont recommend it; bad things happen. :o
jiggie2g
Jul 14, 10:14 AM
Yeah, otherwise it's FSB antics.
Not that the locked chips aren't that bad either.
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2795&p=18
That freakin' Tuniq Tower 120 is an abosolute Beast , I may have to look into purchasing one if my Artic Cooling Freezer Pro 7 isn't up to the task. I am hoping for atleast 3.6ghz from an E6600. Can't wait till Aug.
Not that the locked chips aren't that bad either.
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2795&p=18
That freakin' Tuniq Tower 120 is an abosolute Beast , I may have to look into purchasing one if my Artic Cooling Freezer Pro 7 isn't up to the task. I am hoping for atleast 3.6ghz from an E6600. Can't wait till Aug.
IntelliUser
Jan 13, 09:52 AM
Not if you have UAC set correctly, although unfortunately it was weakened by default in 7, because of whining.
Even at that level it's a real PITA. Seriously, not only it pops up way too often, but it slows down installations. Some older computers and netbooks just freeze for several minutes after trying to open large installers, while UAC is analyzing or something.
Even at that level it's a real PITA. Seriously, not only it pops up way too often, but it slows down installations. Some older computers and netbooks just freeze for several minutes after trying to open large installers, while UAC is analyzing or something.
tsugaru
Mar 22, 03:18 PM
As for proc choices, I don't see Apple putting in a 2x00(S) processor.
- marketing would suck for it (why only 2.8GHz stock on the 2600S vs 3.4GHz stock on the 2600?)
- Intel charges more for the S models (dunno if that carries over to Apple, but maybe)
- the 27" has carried the i7-860 and i7-870 easily. Those are both 95W TDP processors. 2600S -> 65W TDP and the 2600/2600K -> 95W TDP. So the TDP doesn't increase, but the speed does.
- marketing would suck for it (why only 2.8GHz stock on the 2600S vs 3.4GHz stock on the 2600?)
- Intel charges more for the S models (dunno if that carries over to Apple, but maybe)
- the 27" has carried the i7-860 and i7-870 easily. Those are both 95W TDP processors. 2600S -> 65W TDP and the 2600/2600K -> 95W TDP. So the TDP doesn't increase, but the speed does.
fswmacguy
Apr 4, 12:35 PM
Not sure where you guys are getting your information.
In Virginia, to posses an Armed Security Guard license, you must take a 40-hour (five-day) course.
There's a place where I live that does the training. They use M4A1 rifles and M9 pistols in the course, which are both required for certification as an armed security guard.
In Virginia, to posses an Armed Security Guard license, you must take a 40-hour (five-day) course.
There's a place where I live that does the training. They use M4A1 rifles and M9 pistols in the course, which are both required for certification as an armed security guard.
briloronmacrumo
Mar 22, 08:45 PM
When the new version comes out, the iMac you bought won't be any slower..
GeekBench 2 benchmarks http://www.primatelabs.ca/blog/2011/02/macbookpro-benchmarks-early-2011/ of the new MBPs with Sandy Bridge would indicate otherwise. This review said: "....the fastest MacBook Pro is 80% faster than the fastest previous-generation MacBook Pro.". My guess is a similar situation might be true for the iMac and it will be faster ( otherwise, there's little point to a rev )
GeekBench 2 benchmarks http://www.primatelabs.ca/blog/2011/02/macbookpro-benchmarks-early-2011/ of the new MBPs with Sandy Bridge would indicate otherwise. This review said: "....the fastest MacBook Pro is 80% faster than the fastest previous-generation MacBook Pro.". My guess is a similar situation might be true for the iMac and it will be faster ( otherwise, there's little point to a rev )
spicyapple
Sep 19, 03:38 PM
They are Dolby Surround, not Dolby Digital. Dolby Surround is just matrixed stereo audio.
Aren't you contradicting yourself? iTS movies are in 5.1, so they are in fact Dolby Digital (encoded in the AC3 or MP4 format).
Aren't you contradicting yourself? iTS movies are in 5.1, so they are in fact Dolby Digital (encoded in the AC3 or MP4 format).
Silentwave
Jul 15, 10:12 AM
Have anybody seen a benchmark which compares the core 2 duo with the actuall core duo?
I can only see benchmarks between core 2 duo and AMD CPU's and standard dual core Pentium 4 cpu.
Thanks
Masoud
Core 2 duo out so far is a desktop chip being compared against other dektop chips. The Core Duo only came as a notebook chip (with one version as a very low power server chip, Sossaman)
I can only see benchmarks between core 2 duo and AMD CPU's and standard dual core Pentium 4 cpu.
Thanks
Masoud
Core 2 duo out so far is a desktop chip being compared against other dektop chips. The Core Duo only came as a notebook chip (with one version as a very low power server chip, Sossaman)
baryon
Mar 29, 01:07 PM
We expect the first devices to launch in 2012.
How can you predict the market share of a device that you can only predict will launch in a year?
I simply can't imagine the relationship of Nokia and Microsoft to bring anything like the iPhone. Nokia was good with non-smartphones and Microsoft was good with Windows XP, combine that and you get... nothing.
How can you predict the market share of a device that you can only predict will launch in a year?
I simply can't imagine the relationship of Nokia and Microsoft to bring anything like the iPhone. Nokia was good with non-smartphones and Microsoft was good with Windows XP, combine that and you get... nothing.
Lesser Evets
Mar 22, 02:56 PM
I wouldn't be surprised if the iMac and new Mac mini are the replacement for the Mac Pro...
By the time November comes around, Thunderbolt may cause the death of the Mac Pro.
Your logic is half-baked. The MacPro has one specific function which the iMac will probably never have: instant customization. You can stack tons of drive space in them, tons of RAM, and choose any sort of monitor config.
Sure, iMacs might be able to do something like that, but with a lot of garbage floating around and cluttering everything. Also, the processors in the Pro are always beefier.
However, I'd agree that for almost all people in the market, an iMac would be just as good as a MacPro. In 4 years I will probably replace my 2007 Pro with an iMac. Spending $4000 for a good Pro isn't worth it compared to $2000 for an iMac.
By the time November comes around, Thunderbolt may cause the death of the Mac Pro.
Your logic is half-baked. The MacPro has one specific function which the iMac will probably never have: instant customization. You can stack tons of drive space in them, tons of RAM, and choose any sort of monitor config.
Sure, iMacs might be able to do something like that, but with a lot of garbage floating around and cluttering everything. Also, the processors in the Pro are always beefier.
However, I'd agree that for almost all people in the market, an iMac would be just as good as a MacPro. In 4 years I will probably replace my 2007 Pro with an iMac. Spending $4000 for a good Pro isn't worth it compared to $2000 for an iMac.
GFLPraxis
Sep 5, 12:02 AM
New iMacs? Are you freakin kidding me? I just bought a damn iMac and now there is already new ones! Pffff...
Then you haven't been paying attention. We've KNOWN new iMacs were coming in September ever since Intel announced Core 2 Duo was coming in September, THREE MONTHS AGO. I've been waiting three months for the Core 2 Duo iMac update.
Then you haven't been paying attention. We've KNOWN new iMacs were coming in September ever since Intel announced Core 2 Duo was coming in September, THREE MONTHS AGO. I've been waiting three months for the Core 2 Duo iMac update.
jasper77
Sep 5, 05:50 PM
NOW you're on to something.Let's expand on that ;)
Where is the video out from the airport going to go ? The TV of course!
Now..
Why not just make a Mini type box with 802.11n with DVI/HDMI/S-Video and Digital/Analog out ports.Connect that to the tv then stream from your computer or the movie store.While we're at it toss a hefty HD in the mini for recording.
It's much more convenient too.Just sit on the couch and surf Front Row for movies then buy it and send it to the tv.POW! one step..
Apple IS about ease of use..
ease of use à la apple = buy/download a movie in the itunes movie store and stream it via airport av from your mac to a tv. or take a subscription to a tv show (like Lost or Prison Break) and let iTunes automatically download each new episode (via RSS) to your hard drive and than stream it to your tv whenever you want.
I don't think recording is the future.
Where is the video out from the airport going to go ? The TV of course!
Now..
Why not just make a Mini type box with 802.11n with DVI/HDMI/S-Video and Digital/Analog out ports.Connect that to the tv then stream from your computer or the movie store.While we're at it toss a hefty HD in the mini for recording.
It's much more convenient too.Just sit on the couch and surf Front Row for movies then buy it and send it to the tv.POW! one step..
Apple IS about ease of use..
ease of use à la apple = buy/download a movie in the itunes movie store and stream it via airport av from your mac to a tv. or take a subscription to a tv show (like Lost or Prison Break) and let iTunes automatically download each new episode (via RSS) to your hard drive and than stream it to your tv whenever you want.
I don't think recording is the future.
juicedropsdeuce
Mar 29, 11:16 AM
.
By that point Steve will be long gone so this is easily possible.
By that point Steve will be long gone so this is easily possible.
Platform
Sep 26, 07:35 AM
Leopard and iPhone....hmm...should be good, but I hope the phone comes out world wide ;)
peeInMyPantz
Sep 14, 07:12 AM
the iPhone is going to be a useless product unless they release it in big enough sizes to replace my iPod. It's like carrying two ipods around. I already have a 60 gig...why would I spend the extra money to buy an expensive phone that only holds 5 gigs or something? It's just a dumb idea, unless they release major sizes that can replace the big ipods. I don't know why everyone is drooling over this thing.
ppl are going to want it because it's a phone. I will buy it for the look.
ppl are going to want it because it's a phone. I will buy it for the look.
No comments:
Post a Comment