mrsir2009
Apr 28, 06:00 PM
Yahoo!
SolRayz
Mar 23, 06:12 PM
The beautiful thing is that this is great advertisement for the app. I bet more people have downloaded this than ever before. I didn't know about this app until today, so thanks for that senator dumbfukz...
AidenShaw
Sep 10, 11:48 PM
I've owned SMP machines in the past and often found it more useful to force CPU affinity of CPU-heavy tasks to a single processor, as Windows 2000 (which was current at the time) by default had a habit of swapping it between chips, resulting in a lot of cache-dirtying....
However, you could see some significant improvement in processing time on some non-parallelizable cpu-bound tasks.
I came to the opposite conclusion....
Running many compute-bound single-threaded benchmarks and apps - I saw how NT (pre Win2k) would balance across CPUs (that is, a "100%" compute-bound job would show each CPU running at 50%).
However, setting affinity so that one CPU was 100% and the other was 0% had no significant effect on the run times. (And by "significant" I mean statistically significant - I literally ran hundreds of runs in each configuration.)\\
By the way, with Win2k3 (and XP 64-bit, really the same system) you see much less "balancing" - a single-threaded app will stick to a CPU for much longer.
However, you could see some significant improvement in processing time on some non-parallelizable cpu-bound tasks.
I came to the opposite conclusion....
Running many compute-bound single-threaded benchmarks and apps - I saw how NT (pre Win2k) would balance across CPUs (that is, a "100%" compute-bound job would show each CPU running at 50%).
However, setting affinity so that one CPU was 100% and the other was 0% had no significant effect on the run times. (And by "significant" I mean statistically significant - I literally ran hundreds of runs in each configuration.)\\
By the way, with Win2k3 (and XP 64-bit, really the same system) you see much less "balancing" - a single-threaded app will stick to a CPU for much longer.
TheManOfSilver
Sep 5, 08:49 PM
I'll drink to this club "iWillBuyWhateverCoolAppleGadgetComesOutOnThe12th"
Seconded :D
Seconded :D
rmhop81
Apr 22, 08:39 AM
You, sir, get it. The technologies create new capabilities that will adapt to the market. The luddites are only capable of seeing innovation as a loss.
yup, things are just changing.
why have 1,000 books on your shelf when you can toss it on a kindle? someone who wants 1,000 books on their shelf instead of on a kindle is just a hoarder ;)
yup, things are just changing.
why have 1,000 books on your shelf when you can toss it on a kindle? someone who wants 1,000 books on their shelf instead of on a kindle is just a hoarder ;)
Chupa Chupa
Sep 5, 05:15 AM
Are you insinuating that Apple should put out a gaming system to compete for PS3 dollars, or just the holiday dollars in general and right now the PS3 is the "Hot Ticket" this coming Holiday season?
Just wondering.....:confused:
No, don't be so silly or literal. PS3 dollars are the money people have dedicated to buy the PS3 -- the defacto "big ticket" item this year. Apple needs a product that will compete for that money...and press converage. Everyone and their mother got an iPod last year. Apple needs to pull a fresh product out of Jobs pocket; not a storage bump or new skins for the nano. THAT is what I'm saying.
Just wondering.....:confused:
No, don't be so silly or literal. PS3 dollars are the money people have dedicated to buy the PS3 -- the defacto "big ticket" item this year. Apple needs a product that will compete for that money...and press converage. Everyone and their mother got an iPod last year. Apple needs to pull a fresh product out of Jobs pocket; not a storage bump or new skins for the nano. THAT is what I'm saying.
aricher
Sep 26, 09:06 AM
I've been a happy Cingular customer for a few years now. Even though I just bought a new Nokia phone I'll gladly snap up an iPhone if it has all the features I need.
Eidorian
Sep 9, 02:24 PM
Yes that's right. I always have Activity Monitor on so I can see exactly what's going on with my four cores. I have the sort on the percentage column on the left followed by the application name and then I stick it in the lower right corner of my two screens. By keeping it open I can make sure nothing has crashed.It looks like Activity Monitor is the best approach then. Thanks though!
Well I am 100% certian four is not enough. But I have read there may be diminishing returns beyond 16 perhaps even beyond 8 - I have no idea.We haven't hit that wall yet. ;)
Exactly. A perfect example where one application topping out on only one core leaves the entire other one for other stuff. Probably a good thing to have that limit.
In fact, in future, I could see where application developers let the user in preferences tell the application how many cores to be allowed to use. Give the user a choice of how many cores he/she wants a particular process to use. That would be a way cool improvement in all application preferences.I have to agree. Single or multi core affinity would let you pick and maximize your usage.
Well I am 100% certian four is not enough. But I have read there may be diminishing returns beyond 16 perhaps even beyond 8 - I have no idea.We haven't hit that wall yet. ;)
Exactly. A perfect example where one application topping out on only one core leaves the entire other one for other stuff. Probably a good thing to have that limit.
In fact, in future, I could see where application developers let the user in preferences tell the application how many cores to be allowed to use. Give the user a choice of how many cores he/she wants a particular process to use. That would be a way cool improvement in all application preferences.I have to agree. Single or multi core affinity would let you pick and maximize your usage.
johnnymg
Apr 30, 02:24 PM
yes, new imac's will come, but sadly the will probably come without:
1- Matte screen option
2- USB 3
3- Blu-Ray
apple will just give consumers part of the options they want.
"You'll get NOTHING and like it" ............ Rodney Dangerfield
1- Matte screen option
2- USB 3
3- Blu-Ray
apple will just give consumers part of the options they want.
"You'll get NOTHING and like it" ............ Rodney Dangerfield
IJ Reilly
Aug 24, 06:47 PM
It may be a bookkeeping trick, but it's considered part of Generally Accepted Accounting Procedures (GAAP). The IRS and the SEC certainly doesn't have problem with it and ammorization is actually encouraged. Apple used the same method to record the $250 million cash investment in flash memory plants last year, as well as the $400 million it is setting aside for the new Cupertino campus. Neither of those big cash outlays really affected their profit recording.
I didn't mean to imply that it was somehow illegal or improper. My point was, even an amortized expense is an expense, and booking it as an asset doesn't mean it will produce a return on investment. All those numbers go on the expense side of the ledger, one way or another. Spread out over years or taken as a lump sum, they're still spending the money.
I didn't mean to imply that it was somehow illegal or improper. My point was, even an amortized expense is an expense, and booking it as an asset doesn't mean it will produce a return on investment. All those numbers go on the expense side of the ledger, one way or another. Spread out over years or taken as a lump sum, they're still spending the money.
FX120
Apr 16, 12:50 PM
Did you miss the USB to PS2 ports or are you just avoiding that? Are you also avoiding how I said it's too difficult for you to carry around an inch long adapter?
You have a fundamental misunderstanding of how those adapters work. Going from thunderbolt to USB 3 would require active electronics embedded in the adapter. The $6 MDP to HDMI adapter is just copper internally because the signaling is compatible from the source.
LOL, the drive he was using WAS 7200-RPM so I'm not even going to bother reading the rest of this paragraph.
http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?id=10492
Again, you have a fundamental flaw in your argument that you're not addressing. It doesn't matter if the bus is capable of delivering massive speed when the source is incapable of serving data fast enough. Any single-drive enclosure that is currently available will be incapable of maxing out a USB 3 connection.
Your assumption is based on comparing two different technologies and assuming they will fare the same. My assumption was comparing ADAPTER prices. How expensive do you think adapters are? :rolleyes:
You can get them for super cheap if you know where to look.
When they contain active electronics, they get expensive. Apple's own MDP to dual-link DVI adapter is a great example, at $99.00. USB 3 and Thunderbolt are not electrically compatible, and therefore it is impossible to have a simple copper-only dongle that has a TB port on one end, and USB on the other.
Once again, YOU ARE BASING THIS ON PRESENT DAY SPEEDS THAT ARE ACHIEVABLE. This isn't a discussion about current theoretical limits, it's about the limits of the future because that's where these technologies will actually matter. The fact is that when we move to SSD transfer speeds USB 3 will get demolished.
Then why do you keep pointing to that article as proof that USB 3 is incapable of reaching it's theoretical maximum?
I never said it would go away. It said it will be used for the same things USB 2 is used for which is low bandwidth peripherals like mice which you don't need USB 3 for which is why it is essentially a useless upgrade.
USB 2 is the universal standard for high speed devices. If you think otherwise, you must have never used a USB thumb drive.
Yes, believe it or not we are talking about the future and the future for Thunderbolt looks a hell of a lot better than the future of USB 3 since it isn't locked at a certain bandwidth. Technology moves fast. The reason Intel decided to support USB 3 is simply because it is (as they said) complimentary to Thunderbolt. Once again you use Thunderbolt for things that need the speed and you use USB for low bandwidth peripherals.
Thunderbolt in a copper implementation is capped at 10Gbs. For higher speeds, the physical connections become impractical for "normal" devices, which is why Intel designed TB as a transport bus, say for a single cable between a tower and a monitor, which would then break the TB bus back into it's component protocols, including USB 3.
It has USB compatibility, hell it has compatibility with pretty much any IO on the planet. The connector is simply a means to an end and it scales much better for the future when said port is smaller.
Which as I said above, makes it practical for a transport bus. For replacing USB? Not so much. Backwards compatibility alone will likely dictate the continual presence of USB 3 ports on virtually every computer for years to come.
You have a fundamental misunderstanding of how those adapters work. Going from thunderbolt to USB 3 would require active electronics embedded in the adapter. The $6 MDP to HDMI adapter is just copper internally because the signaling is compatible from the source.
LOL, the drive he was using WAS 7200-RPM so I'm not even going to bother reading the rest of this paragraph.
http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?id=10492
Again, you have a fundamental flaw in your argument that you're not addressing. It doesn't matter if the bus is capable of delivering massive speed when the source is incapable of serving data fast enough. Any single-drive enclosure that is currently available will be incapable of maxing out a USB 3 connection.
Your assumption is based on comparing two different technologies and assuming they will fare the same. My assumption was comparing ADAPTER prices. How expensive do you think adapters are? :rolleyes:
You can get them for super cheap if you know where to look.
When they contain active electronics, they get expensive. Apple's own MDP to dual-link DVI adapter is a great example, at $99.00. USB 3 and Thunderbolt are not electrically compatible, and therefore it is impossible to have a simple copper-only dongle that has a TB port on one end, and USB on the other.
Once again, YOU ARE BASING THIS ON PRESENT DAY SPEEDS THAT ARE ACHIEVABLE. This isn't a discussion about current theoretical limits, it's about the limits of the future because that's where these technologies will actually matter. The fact is that when we move to SSD transfer speeds USB 3 will get demolished.
Then why do you keep pointing to that article as proof that USB 3 is incapable of reaching it's theoretical maximum?
I never said it would go away. It said it will be used for the same things USB 2 is used for which is low bandwidth peripherals like mice which you don't need USB 3 for which is why it is essentially a useless upgrade.
USB 2 is the universal standard for high speed devices. If you think otherwise, you must have never used a USB thumb drive.
Yes, believe it or not we are talking about the future and the future for Thunderbolt looks a hell of a lot better than the future of USB 3 since it isn't locked at a certain bandwidth. Technology moves fast. The reason Intel decided to support USB 3 is simply because it is (as they said) complimentary to Thunderbolt. Once again you use Thunderbolt for things that need the speed and you use USB for low bandwidth peripherals.
Thunderbolt in a copper implementation is capped at 10Gbs. For higher speeds, the physical connections become impractical for "normal" devices, which is why Intel designed TB as a transport bus, say for a single cable between a tower and a monitor, which would then break the TB bus back into it's component protocols, including USB 3.
It has USB compatibility, hell it has compatibility with pretty much any IO on the planet. The connector is simply a means to an end and it scales much better for the future when said port is smaller.
Which as I said above, makes it practical for a transport bus. For replacing USB? Not so much. Backwards compatibility alone will likely dictate the continual presence of USB 3 ports on virtually every computer for years to come.
Silentwave
Jul 17, 06:27 PM
But wasnt Yonah supposed to come out in January this year, and Apple released the iMac early January. So tens of thousands of chips must have been shipping before the official release date, I dont see why the same couldn't be true of these new chips.
Its a matter of availability. Intel supposedly just bumped the announce date to the same as Conroe later this month, but the availability is apparently unchangd from August.
However now that the chip 'exists' prior to WWDC, I would not think that Steve would hesitate to put it in ASAP.
So I think we may see the entire line get a revamp: mac mini gets faster chips (still Yonah), perhaps same with MB, though that may just get a price drop. MBPs/iMacs get new processors, and we get the new MPs.
Its a matter of availability. Intel supposedly just bumped the announce date to the same as Conroe later this month, but the availability is apparently unchangd from August.
However now that the chip 'exists' prior to WWDC, I would not think that Steve would hesitate to put it in ASAP.
So I think we may see the entire line get a revamp: mac mini gets faster chips (still Yonah), perhaps same with MB, though that may just get a price drop. MBPs/iMacs get new processors, and we get the new MPs.
.jpg "princess diana death newspaper")
After G
Sep 14, 02:17 AM
I think that the phone interface won't have a click-wheel. Rather, it will be all screen with an on-screen wheel changing to an on-screen keypad. No slider action whatsoever. Maybe a hard switch for on/off, answer, and phonebook, but that's about all I'd put on the phone. It'll save on cost and hardware complexity too, not having to include a wheel.
Interface? Regular phone ... may be a smartphone if they figure out how to do the keyboard. Input is always questionable on small devices because there isn't room. Bluetooth perhaps? That's more $ down the drain for a keyboard :(
I hope I have the funds to buy one when one of these suckers comes out. Both GSM and CDMA would be better, but if there's only one, it should be GSM. It's easier for people to switch their phones that way, instead of having the cellphone stores cluttered up.
Good thing my sister's RAZR is dying ... maybe I'll tell her to get someone else's phone (on the cheap) when these drop (if she doesn't have enough for an Apple phone).
Interface? Regular phone ... may be a smartphone if they figure out how to do the keyboard. Input is always questionable on small devices because there isn't room. Bluetooth perhaps? That's more $ down the drain for a keyboard :(
I hope I have the funds to buy one when one of these suckers comes out. Both GSM and CDMA would be better, but if there's only one, it should be GSM. It's easier for people to switch their phones that way, instead of having the cellphone stores cluttered up.
Good thing my sister's RAZR is dying ... maybe I'll tell her to get someone else's phone (on the cheap) when these drop (if she doesn't have enough for an Apple phone).
shecky
Sep 14, 10:08 AM
So is this a stevenote or not? i think that might hint at what caliber of goodies are coming
curious about that myself. historically, have there been "special events" like this without a stevenote? (or a philnote, for that matter)
i think that just aperture would not justify a stevenote, but more than just aperture might (tho aperture would be the primary subject)
curious about that myself. historically, have there been "special events" like this without a stevenote? (or a philnote, for that matter)
i think that just aperture would not justify a stevenote, but more than just aperture might (tho aperture would be the primary subject)
Rodimus Prime
Apr 28, 04:25 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8H7)
If you compare their investment in R&D to what they manage to churn out, it's pretty sad.
That can be viewed another way. Apple is too cheap to bother risking anything that is not a sure bet.
MS willing to risk R&D and a lot of R&D on things that might be a dead end.
MS R&D is more like a university Research compared to Apple R&D that is only about profit.
Guess which one adds more better for the people. Correct answer is not Apple
If you compare their investment in R&D to what they manage to churn out, it's pretty sad.
That can be viewed another way. Apple is too cheap to bother risking anything that is not a sure bet.
MS willing to risk R&D and a lot of R&D on things that might be a dead end.
MS R&D is more like a university Research compared to Apple R&D that is only about profit.
Guess which one adds more better for the people. Correct answer is not Apple
FuNGi
Apr 25, 03:37 PM
Agreed. I've never understood why macs have such large bezel's. The 11" MBA is a notable offender in particular, since because the laptop is so small, the wide bezel looks even more immense compared to the rest of the laptop.
I think it has allot to do with the need to make the edges of the case thicker for stability. Look at the Air's internals from Apple's video. It clearly shows thicker edges that likely preclude the LCD from reaching all the way over. For Apple to reduce the Bezel entirely, the case would need to be thicker overall to maintain comparable rigidity - unless they built it of something stronger than aluminum...
what is the point of an IPS screen with a low resolution? IPS is good for viewing angles but people rarely look at a laptop from extreme viewing angles. the color and contrast on the current mbp screen are pretty good right now.
I'm sorry, the IPS is very useful if you happen to be three people wide watching a movie on your monitor. I know, it's sad, but many of us do not have televisions. That being said, I notice very little difference in viewing angle fidelity from my 24" ACD with IPS and my 2008 MBP, which presumably is a TN.
Wow, I'm really impressed by all these people hoping for Liquid Metal. I'm wondering what they think that is, this "Liquid Metal". I bet they think it's something really cool, something that is completely different from anything that humankind has ever used in manufacturing (I mean, I read something like "Black Liquidmetal" in this thread. Wtf?). But truth is, if you held something in your hands made of Liquid Metal you wouldn't even notice the difference between that and anything made of aluminium, steel or any other shiny metal. It may be a very exciting new material for metallurgists or chemists but the consumer will probably just notice that it is a bit more durable and scratch resistant than aluminium (if at all, more likely in direct comparison only). It's the same thing as carbon. When I bought my first bike with carbon forks I was like "Holy crap this is real carbon, I bet this will change my life forever". In fact, it was just the same. Neither did it have a special feel to it. It felt like plastic, not very trustworthy. I liked how it reduced the weight (it was 15% lighter than my old bike all in all), but seriously, it wasn't a big deal after I got used to it. It will be the same with liquid metal. It has a fancy name and everything but for the enormous price of the material it has no use for the consumer whatsoever. It will also have traces of fingerprints on it, it will also get scratchy after some time and so on. Sure, it will take a longer time till it looks used, but nobody will think "This Notebook looks really bad. But hey, if it was made of aluminium it would have looked this way like two months ago. God, I'm so glad it's made of Liquid Metal instead".
Do you honestly think people can't tell the difference between aluminum and steel. The metals are very different. The benefit of the liquidmetal is not in the feel per se but the strength to weight ratio. Like titanium. It is a premium for outdoor cookware because its as strong a steel but light as aluminum. If the MBP's are going to get much smaller then they need less of a body - liquidmetal would help. Also, if you've every dropped your laptop then having it bounce back would be nice.
I think it has allot to do with the need to make the edges of the case thicker for stability. Look at the Air's internals from Apple's video. It clearly shows thicker edges that likely preclude the LCD from reaching all the way over. For Apple to reduce the Bezel entirely, the case would need to be thicker overall to maintain comparable rigidity - unless they built it of something stronger than aluminum...
what is the point of an IPS screen with a low resolution? IPS is good for viewing angles but people rarely look at a laptop from extreme viewing angles. the color and contrast on the current mbp screen are pretty good right now.
I'm sorry, the IPS is very useful if you happen to be three people wide watching a movie on your monitor. I know, it's sad, but many of us do not have televisions. That being said, I notice very little difference in viewing angle fidelity from my 24" ACD with IPS and my 2008 MBP, which presumably is a TN.
Wow, I'm really impressed by all these people hoping for Liquid Metal. I'm wondering what they think that is, this "Liquid Metal". I bet they think it's something really cool, something that is completely different from anything that humankind has ever used in manufacturing (I mean, I read something like "Black Liquidmetal" in this thread. Wtf?). But truth is, if you held something in your hands made of Liquid Metal you wouldn't even notice the difference between that and anything made of aluminium, steel or any other shiny metal. It may be a very exciting new material for metallurgists or chemists but the consumer will probably just notice that it is a bit more durable and scratch resistant than aluminium (if at all, more likely in direct comparison only). It's the same thing as carbon. When I bought my first bike with carbon forks I was like "Holy crap this is real carbon, I bet this will change my life forever". In fact, it was just the same. Neither did it have a special feel to it. It felt like plastic, not very trustworthy. I liked how it reduced the weight (it was 15% lighter than my old bike all in all), but seriously, it wasn't a big deal after I got used to it. It will be the same with liquid metal. It has a fancy name and everything but for the enormous price of the material it has no use for the consumer whatsoever. It will also have traces of fingerprints on it, it will also get scratchy after some time and so on. Sure, it will take a longer time till it looks used, but nobody will think "This Notebook looks really bad. But hey, if it was made of aluminium it would have looked this way like two months ago. God, I'm so glad it's made of Liquid Metal instead".
Do you honestly think people can't tell the difference between aluminum and steel. The metals are very different. The benefit of the liquidmetal is not in the feel per se but the strength to weight ratio. Like titanium. It is a premium for outdoor cookware because its as strong a steel but light as aluminum. If the MBP's are going to get much smaller then they need less of a body - liquidmetal would help. Also, if you've every dropped your laptop then having it bounce back would be nice.
sushi
Sep 20, 03:24 AM
I would be exstatic to get a 720p movie, and like you, I would certainly have no problem waiting the time it would take to download it. I just want HD downloadable content from iTMS, which is why the iTV has me so excited. I may hold off on getting that HD-DVD player until I learn more about it.
And the download, would be platform independent with regards to BluRay or HD-DVD. Cool.
And the download, would be platform independent with regards to BluRay or HD-DVD. Cool.
chrisleeroth
Apr 22, 04:09 PM
What is the difference between listening to streaming music (subsciption) and apple's cloud... They wont actually store all my songs wont they just let me stream the music I purchased from the server?
dethmaShine
Apr 22, 05:58 AM
Any guesses on the web interface?
karthi
Sep 19, 04:02 PM
I thought TV shows in iTunes won't be a hit, why would any one need to pay $1.99 for the stuff, that is already available in cable, sat, Tivo, DVD's, Block buster, feely on the air in SDTV/HDTV, etc.. and all viewable on big screen TV.:confused:
I never bought any TV shows on iTunes, as I use DVR. I see myself buying online movie downloads, mainly for convenience and the fact that it is available on the same day as DVD.:) . Even though blockbuster is less than 5 min away, it will be at least 45 min trip. Of course I will still be renting/buying DVD's.
One more thing many forget about iTV ( Apple soon come with a real name), is that , it is not just for movies, I would happily pay third of its price just to have music and photos on my receiver and TV with the front row screen/remote.
I never bought any TV shows on iTunes, as I use DVR. I see myself buying online movie downloads, mainly for convenience and the fact that it is available on the same day as DVD.:) . Even though blockbuster is less than 5 min away, it will be at least 45 min trip. Of course I will still be renting/buying DVD's.
One more thing many forget about iTV ( Apple soon come with a real name), is that , it is not just for movies, I would happily pay third of its price just to have music and photos on my receiver and TV with the front row screen/remote.
tbobmccoy
Mar 23, 05:35 PM
Stay classy Austin :rolleyes:
As for the Senator's request, they cannot be required to take it down. If cops are so overt that apps can bust their checkpoints, maybe they should be floating checkpoints?
As for the Senator's request, they cannot be required to take it down. If cops are so overt that apps can bust their checkpoints, maybe they should be floating checkpoints?
maclaptop
Apr 20, 10:46 AM
WOW this is a major privacy breach.
This PROVES Apples an EVIL ENTERPRISE.
THE WORST BY FAR!
So damn hypocritical - accusing Google, all the while they're doing the same damn thing behind the backs of their supporters.
Personally I was aware long before this article, but I refused to reveal it since Apple's minions would have thrown tantrums of denial.
While I don't like it, the fact is ALL TECH COMPANIES do this.
Privacy was a thing of the past, long ago. Don't kid yourself, if you've used a computer in the last ten years its already too late. The only "new" development is geo location.
Welcome to the future, today.
This PROVES Apples an EVIL ENTERPRISE.
THE WORST BY FAR!
So damn hypocritical - accusing Google, all the while they're doing the same damn thing behind the backs of their supporters.
Personally I was aware long before this article, but I refused to reveal it since Apple's minions would have thrown tantrums of denial.
While I don't like it, the fact is ALL TECH COMPANIES do this.
Privacy was a thing of the past, long ago. Don't kid yourself, if you've used a computer in the last ten years its already too late. The only "new" development is geo location.
Welcome to the future, today.
MacGeek7
Mar 22, 02:31 PM
Finally! I've been waiting for an iMac update for awhile and I'm excited to see the potential of Thunderbolt even though the list of devices is relatively short right now.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 19, 08:59 PM
A strong response from Samsung:
"We're guilty!"
"We're guilty!"