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.
macrumors12345
Apr 19, 12:30 PM
Please to have Thunderbolt.
4np
Sep 6, 08:46 AM
Hmm... the Mini still has no Core 2 Duo? That does not sound too promising for MacBook (Pro) updates... unless Apple only wants to use the Core 2 Duo for the high end laptops (MacBook Pro) of course... Or are they waiting untill Leopard has been released?
batitombo
Apr 21, 10:58 PM
This is what I think about this: http://youtu.be/O6b9P963jW8?hd=1
Globe199
Mar 24, 10:14 AM
I find it hard to believe anyone keeps their music uncompressed thats just dumb and plain lazy.
Good grief. The ignorance of some postings here is just breathtaking.
Course, it IS an Apple forum :D
All I have is an iPod mini from 2005. I use it almost everyday, but the battery is fried and I need an upgrade. I'd probably go for a 220GB, but I absolutely do not need a touch screen. Someone else remarked about the click wheel being easier to use in tactile-only situations, which for me is 99% of the time I'm using it. I bike to work and don't want to take the thing out of my pocket to change the volume, skip tracks, etc.
But Apple isn't about niche products, so I don't know what sort of chance the Classic stands. Probably not good, I'm guessing.
Good grief. The ignorance of some postings here is just breathtaking.
Course, it IS an Apple forum :D
All I have is an iPod mini from 2005. I use it almost everyday, but the battery is fried and I need an upgrade. I'd probably go for a 220GB, but I absolutely do not need a touch screen. Someone else remarked about the click wheel being easier to use in tactile-only situations, which for me is 99% of the time I'm using it. I bike to work and don't want to take the thing out of my pocket to change the volume, skip tracks, etc.
But Apple isn't about niche products, so I don't know what sort of chance the Classic stands. Probably not good, I'm guessing.
macmax77
Nov 29, 05:18 PM
I know that it's not quite fair to compare the two right out of the launch (a baby product versus a mature one), but MS didn't help themselves by setting up this product to compete directly with the iPod. If they had tried to target a different market (maybe primarily video as opposed to music), they might have more success, and let the hype build from there. But the way they seem to be playing it now, they're going to just throw a lot of money into something that will be in Apple's shadow. It'll offer a compelling alternative to some, but will not necessarily convince too many to become switchers. :p
Sometimes new things are the Hip thing to buy, but to get a Zune you need 2 things:
1-Bad Taste
2-Bad Taste
Sometimes new things are the Hip thing to buy, but to get a Zune you need 2 things:
1-Bad Taste
2-Bad Taste
spicyapple
Nov 29, 07:11 AM
I can't believe that MS still holds J. Allard as a big ruling leader
There is a 40 minute podcast on Inside Home Recording that has J.Allard singing the praises of the Zune to a group of music/podcast/executive types at the 2006 Music Tech Summit. Great listening, and he explains the features of Zune media player, plus reasons for whoring with Universal Music.
podcast (http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?id=79061694&s=143455&i=12059569) < takes you to iTunes podcast page.
luv ya bunches! xoxoxo
There is a 40 minute podcast on Inside Home Recording that has J.Allard singing the praises of the Zune to a group of music/podcast/executive types at the 2006 Music Tech Summit. Great listening, and he explains the features of Zune media player, plus reasons for whoring with Universal Music.
podcast (http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?id=79061694&s=143455&i=12059569) < takes you to iTunes podcast page.
luv ya bunches! xoxoxo
cube
Mar 24, 02:44 PM
Uhh, no bro. The CPU and GPU are two separate things, and Sandy Bridge smokes Fusion on the CPU side. If you want to argue OpenCL for all of the zero current day applications it currently has then be my guest and do so. Fusion is DX11? Wow, more vaporware that rarely gets added in modern games due to wanting to be backwards compatible, how exciting!
Once again, run Sandy Bridge and a discrete GPU if you are really looking for performance. There's your OpenCL and DX11 support that you need so badly. It will smoke anything AMD has to offer.
OpenCL are COMPUTE tasks. If you can't do them on the GPU, you would need a HUGELY powerful CPU. That's why having true OpenCL means you have a better "CPU".
In one or two months after Bobcat Fusion was introduced there are already 50 Fusion-oriented Windows apps.
I'm not taking about DirectX 11 concerning games, but concerning OpenCL.
Once again, run Sandy Bridge and a discrete GPU if you are really looking for performance. There's your OpenCL and DX11 support that you need so badly. It will smoke anything AMD has to offer.
OpenCL are COMPUTE tasks. If you can't do them on the GPU, you would need a HUGELY powerful CPU. That's why having true OpenCL means you have a better "CPU".
In one or two months after Bobcat Fusion was introduced there are already 50 Fusion-oriented Windows apps.
I'm not taking about DirectX 11 concerning games, but concerning OpenCL.
polsons
Jan 11, 07:20 AM
As a fellow Australian imac_japan i'll support your enthusiasm, but as one who is old enough to have actually witnessed the history of Apple I think you are about to be enormously disappointed
If indeed a headless Mac does materialize, it will not be the first to have come from Apple. Apple have tried this concept many times before and all attempts have failed miserably. Maybe a dual G5 Cube for the price of an eMac might have some success, but a miserably under specified G4 (as is being claimed) is DEAD even before it hits the stores.
True the end may be near for Apple's hardware (5 or 10 years so to speak), but MacOS will be around for as long as computers continue to be manufactured. Even the most pessimistic analyst will concede that MacOS X and Apple's apps on x86 would see Microsoft as the world's second largest software developer. And who really cares about the hardware. The best PC hardware is every bit as good as Apple's hardware....it's just that the software stinks.
Let's be honest here. Do we really want Mac OS X to become MS Windows? Yes, Windows has thousands of apps not available on Mac, but most are developed by egotistical script kiddies with absolutely no idea of what they are doing, and then trying to pass it off as the greatest app ever written solely because they coded it. The best Windows apps always have been and probably always will be available on Mac. But they are long established mature apps developed by long established developers. If you can't afford them, then buy a PC and be content with using script kiddie crap.
And therein lies the unique and most appealing aspect of Apple hardware. MORONS can't afford it. As long as Apple keeps developing MacOS X and morons are forced to buy Windows PC's, I'll remain very happy with the current situation as it stands. No $499 headless Mac and no Mac in every home for me thank you. As far as I am concerned, the last thing I want to see is a user base swarming with dickheads. Windows has already reached that plateau, and sadly Linux is running not that far behind.
If indeed a headless Mac does materialize, it will not be the first to have come from Apple. Apple have tried this concept many times before and all attempts have failed miserably. Maybe a dual G5 Cube for the price of an eMac might have some success, but a miserably under specified G4 (as is being claimed) is DEAD even before it hits the stores.
True the end may be near for Apple's hardware (5 or 10 years so to speak), but MacOS will be around for as long as computers continue to be manufactured. Even the most pessimistic analyst will concede that MacOS X and Apple's apps on x86 would see Microsoft as the world's second largest software developer. And who really cares about the hardware. The best PC hardware is every bit as good as Apple's hardware....it's just that the software stinks.
Let's be honest here. Do we really want Mac OS X to become MS Windows? Yes, Windows has thousands of apps not available on Mac, but most are developed by egotistical script kiddies with absolutely no idea of what they are doing, and then trying to pass it off as the greatest app ever written solely because they coded it. The best Windows apps always have been and probably always will be available on Mac. But they are long established mature apps developed by long established developers. If you can't afford them, then buy a PC and be content with using script kiddie crap.
And therein lies the unique and most appealing aspect of Apple hardware. MORONS can't afford it. As long as Apple keeps developing MacOS X and morons are forced to buy Windows PC's, I'll remain very happy with the current situation as it stands. No $499 headless Mac and no Mac in every home for me thank you. As far as I am concerned, the last thing I want to see is a user base swarming with dickheads. Windows has already reached that plateau, and sadly Linux is running not that far behind.
Doctor Q
Nov 27, 02:03 PM
The advantage for Apple in having a 17" widescreen monitor would be that nobody (well, almost nobody in the market for a monitor) would be priced out of the choice to buy an Apple-branded one.
There will also be competing monitors at lower prices from other companies, but many people will opt to buy an Apple monitor to go with their Mac, from Mac mini to Mac Pro.
There will also be competing monitors at lower prices from other companies, but many people will opt to buy an Apple monitor to go with their Mac, from Mac mini to Mac Pro.
(marc)
Apr 3, 07:04 AM
Ugh.
Ugg
Mar 31, 04:15 PM
We did more history coverage of WW2 than India and China combined.
But popular culture keeps it at the forefront.
It's a fascinating subject, but also an unhealthy obsession for both nations. Also, the literature on the subject is bloated with bad research, crazed theories and revisionism.
I couldn't agree more. I think what few people realize is that in almost all aspects, WWII was not so much the Second World War, as a continuation of WWI. I
For the US it was definitely our first bright and shining moment on the international stage and it has gained mythological status.
Suppose the British fascination with WWII comes from the fact that it was close, we could of easily lost.
Possibly but I think a lot of the British fascination has to do with
1. Its sense of impregnability due to its Island Status
2. WWII helped the UK regain a sense of self worth after the painful previous 2 decades. Of course, it was all thrown away again at Suez...
But popular culture keeps it at the forefront.
It's a fascinating subject, but also an unhealthy obsession for both nations. Also, the literature on the subject is bloated with bad research, crazed theories and revisionism.
I couldn't agree more. I think what few people realize is that in almost all aspects, WWII was not so much the Second World War, as a continuation of WWI. I
For the US it was definitely our first bright and shining moment on the international stage and it has gained mythological status.
Suppose the British fascination with WWII comes from the fact that it was close, we could of easily lost.
Possibly but I think a lot of the British fascination has to do with
1. Its sense of impregnability due to its Island Status
2. WWII helped the UK regain a sense of self worth after the painful previous 2 decades. Of course, it was all thrown away again at Suez...
Spoony
Apr 26, 02:31 PM
Yes you can... to a certain extent.
Two stores can be named the same if the name is generic in nature.
Apple didn't create the word "App Store". This has been proven in many threads about this very topic.
They popularized it and then went so far as to even give it generic meaning.
Steve did that himself. Now he's trying to lay claim to it after the fact.
Will he win... who knows.
But nothing is as black and white as many claim to believe it is.
Trademark law is complicated.
I've read through everone's comments and thought about it more and now I'm undecided. I see both sides and both points.
I get it "Pet Store" "Computer Store" etc.. "App Store"
Yes app is an old word, yes it is generic.
That being said no one outside computer people used that word. "App" won word of the year for 2010 b/c of apple.
So not sure but... If apple loses this that would be very frustrating for them. They created something, poured millions of dollars into advertising it "there's an app for that" and everyone else just gets to rise with their tide.
I'd say let microsoft and Amazon use the name if they both go on a month long ad blitz saying "we are going to copy apples app store name, although generic they made it famous and we are going to mooch off their success."
Two stores can be named the same if the name is generic in nature.
Apple didn't create the word "App Store". This has been proven in many threads about this very topic.
They popularized it and then went so far as to even give it generic meaning.
Steve did that himself. Now he's trying to lay claim to it after the fact.
Will he win... who knows.
But nothing is as black and white as many claim to believe it is.
Trademark law is complicated.
I've read through everone's comments and thought about it more and now I'm undecided. I see both sides and both points.
I get it "Pet Store" "Computer Store" etc.. "App Store"
Yes app is an old word, yes it is generic.
That being said no one outside computer people used that word. "App" won word of the year for 2010 b/c of apple.
So not sure but... If apple loses this that would be very frustrating for them. They created something, poured millions of dollars into advertising it "there's an app for that" and everyone else just gets to rise with their tide.
I'd say let microsoft and Amazon use the name if they both go on a month long ad blitz saying "we are going to copy apples app store name, although generic they made it famous and we are going to mooch off their success."
Alistair.nz
Apr 21, 08:51 PM
Hi, i'm probably pushing my luck by asking this but, i was wondering if anyone knew how long after the U.S. release the rest of the world gets the imac released?
I realise there is no set U.S release date at the moment, but judging from past releases will it be staggered like the iPad 2 or will it be released simultaneously across the world?
Cheers
I realise there is no set U.S release date at the moment, but judging from past releases will it be staggered like the iPad 2 or will it be released simultaneously across the world?
Cheers
Cat-toy
Sep 21, 06:10 PM
Would you say the dermaSHOT is better?
Do you people know any good cheap(few bucks) TPU cases?
Well after using both for at least two days each I would have to say the dermaSHOT is overall a better case. It has a much more substantial feel to it, and has some nice styling to it. I also got used to the kinda squishy top button. Only real downfall to this case is that I email Insipio to inquire about any new colors planned, and they told me only one more color is planned for the near future "gold" something
The $1 case is not bad at all, pretty plane jane as far looks but I really like how the buttons feel. If you take your iPod in and out of you pocket often I would pick the dermaSHOT over the dollar case because my dollar case has a habit of falling off the sides of the iPod.
I am prob going to get two more $1 cases just for the color choices, and use these cases for my plane flights. The dermaSHOT will be my EDC :)
Do you people know any good cheap(few bucks) TPU cases?
Well after using both for at least two days each I would have to say the dermaSHOT is overall a better case. It has a much more substantial feel to it, and has some nice styling to it. I also got used to the kinda squishy top button. Only real downfall to this case is that I email Insipio to inquire about any new colors planned, and they told me only one more color is planned for the near future "gold" something
The $1 case is not bad at all, pretty plane jane as far looks but I really like how the buttons feel. If you take your iPod in and out of you pocket often I would pick the dermaSHOT over the dollar case because my dollar case has a habit of falling off the sides of the iPod.
I am prob going to get two more $1 cases just for the color choices, and use these cases for my plane flights. The dermaSHOT will be my EDC :)
danvdr
Oct 23, 06:42 PM
Along with the macbook and MB pro getting updates, for $14.95 you can download an ipod nano or ipod patch/software that lets you listen to FM radio without having to purchase the radio remote. Interface is the same as with the remote.
Cool beans. Where can you get this download?
Cool beans. Where can you get this download?
Wang Foolio
Mar 25, 04:25 PM
There's a reason why you don't see millions of people snatching up copies of Call of Duty for the Wii or handhelds. As has been mentioned before, there are tons of genres that still require the precision of a controller, or simply buttons. Something like Dragon Age is hard enough without a keyboard.
That being said, underestimating the casual gamer market is a big mistake. I think a lot of analysts enjoyed the taste of foot after the Kinect sold a bajillion units in its first couple of months. The Penny Arcade guys were right, the sales figures are inversely proportional to the nerd rage over the idea of casual gaming on a console. Kinect was subjected to some serious hate, but is making MS a ton of money.
That being said, underestimating the casual gamer market is a big mistake. I think a lot of analysts enjoyed the taste of foot after the Kinect sold a bajillion units in its first couple of months. The Penny Arcade guys were right, the sales figures are inversely proportional to the nerd rage over the idea of casual gaming on a console. Kinect was subjected to some serious hate, but is making MS a ton of money.
No ice please
Nov 27, 06:46 PM
http://www.thinkgeek.com/images/products/zoom/e66e_iphone_case_with_keyboard.gif
Can't wait for it to get here!!!
Can't wait for it to get here!!!
aross99
Apr 2, 08:19 PM
That's exactly how I feel and why I use Apple products. Great commercial.
My thoughts exactly...
My thoughts exactly...
Stewie
Sep 7, 02:15 PM
Sorry for the nasty long URL (http://72.14.209.104/search?q=cache:9OrBsXYjfxgJ:www.amazon.com/b/%3Fie%3DUTF8%26node%3D16263011+unbox+site:amazon.com&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1&client=firefox-a), but this is a cache page from a google search where you can see what Amazons offerings our for their new download service.
Thunderbird
Apr 2, 08:12 PM
Is this the same Narrator that does the Ken Burns films?
Not sure who does the Ken Burns doc narrations. But I'm pretty sure this voice over for the iPad 2 was done by Peter Coyote.
Not sure who does the Ken Burns doc narrations. But I'm pretty sure this voice over for the iPad 2 was done by Peter Coyote.
chillywilly
Sep 6, 03:25 PM
I really think the next option is to even take out the Combo drives on all low end Macs and just add a SuperDrive to every model.
Even if you don't burn that many DVDs, it makes more sense to include it instead of having something that's pretty much outdated that's semi-difficult to replace for most users (the mini is the easiest out of all non-Pro and laptop models to replace the optical drive).
I don't like the idea that Apple has dropped options on lower end models, esp the SuperDrive option on the low end mini. There's not that many advantages that make the extra $200 all that inviting.
Even if you don't burn that many DVDs, it makes more sense to include it instead of having something that's pretty much outdated that's semi-difficult to replace for most users (the mini is the easiest out of all non-Pro and laptop models to replace the optical drive).
I don't like the idea that Apple has dropped options on lower end models, esp the SuperDrive option on the low end mini. There's not that many advantages that make the extra $200 all that inviting.
GeekLawyer
Apr 12, 08:19 PM
That was pretty funny. It looked on Twitter like maybe 9to5mac had sorta tricked AppleInsider into announcing FCP7. (2 years after the fact.) Apparently there's a lot of "borrowing" of stories between the two sites.
SchneiderMan
Nov 28, 02:14 PM
Well I'm "glad" Mexico comes to me :D
No comments:
Post a Comment