a.gomez
Mar 22, 01:36 PM
Samsung redesigned the 10.1 'just like that' did they? Wow, that's going to be one impressive piece of carefully considered and crafted engineering if they poured over it for such an extensive amount of time.... </sarcasm>
Seriously, either Samsung have pulled something incredible out of the bag or, more likely IMHO, this 'new' 10.1 wont be all that. They're certainly desperate to have a tablet success!
For a company the size of Samsung? - do not think it was a big deal.
Seriously, either Samsung have pulled something incredible out of the bag or, more likely IMHO, this 'new' 10.1 wont be all that. They're certainly desperate to have a tablet success!
For a company the size of Samsung? - do not think it was a big deal.
JAT
Apr 19, 11:54 PM
For that matter, people say that Apple ripped off their bookshelf from Delicious Library. Which itself took it from who knows where.
Mediaman (http://www.imediaman.com/) for Windows, perhaps. The companies appear to have started within a couple months of each other, one writing on Mac, one on Win. Interestingly, neither has appeared to try going to the other OS with their virtually identical products. Suspicious?
I always wondered which actually came first.
Mediaman (http://www.imediaman.com/) for Windows, perhaps. The companies appear to have started within a couple months of each other, one writing on Mac, one on Win. Interestingly, neither has appeared to try going to the other OS with their virtually identical products. Suspicious?
I always wondered which actually came first.
shamino
Jul 20, 09:37 AM
But as some already pointed out, many applications can't use multiple cores, therefore you won't get any performance improvements with multi cores.
A single application, if not multithreaded, won't see any performance boost.
But if you're running multiple applications at once, your overall system performance will definitely improve.
Also note that many of Apple's system facilities (like Core Image) are internally multithreaded. So apps that use these system services will see performance boosts even if the application developer didn't write any multithreading code into the app.
I am also certain that we'll see more and more developers using multithreading, now that all but the cheapest systems sold will have at least two cores. Especially with those apps that are CPU-intensive, and could therefore gain the most from multiprocessing.
(Gee, it seems like it was only a few short years ago that we were having this same discussion about AltiVec :) )
A single application, if not multithreaded, won't see any performance boost.
But if you're running multiple applications at once, your overall system performance will definitely improve.
Also note that many of Apple's system facilities (like Core Image) are internally multithreaded. So apps that use these system services will see performance boosts even if the application developer didn't write any multithreading code into the app.
I am also certain that we'll see more and more developers using multithreading, now that all but the cheapest systems sold will have at least two cores. Especially with those apps that are CPU-intensive, and could therefore gain the most from multiprocessing.
(Gee, it seems like it was only a few short years ago that we were having this same discussion about AltiVec :) )
inkswamp
Mar 31, 02:43 PM
John Gruber would eat Steve Job's ***** if he could. His opinion is extremely biased.
You don't read his site, do you?
You don't read his site, do you?
DwightSchrute
Aug 27, 01:03 PM
Then for some reason it was bumped to a new ship date of august 31st, just enough time to drop a new merom processor in it!
That is interesting because I ordered a Macbook on Tuesday (the 22nd) and mine is also scheduled to ship on the 31st. It is suspiciously strange and hopefully it means that we'll get Meroms because I was waiting for the Merom MBP when I decided to just order a Yonah MB.
That is interesting because I ordered a Macbook on Tuesday (the 22nd) and mine is also scheduled to ship on the 31st. It is suspiciously strange and hopefully it means that we'll get Meroms because I was waiting for the Merom MBP when I decided to just order a Yonah MB.
MacBoobsPro
Jul 20, 08:34 AM
It's the future, you know, soon the clock speed will be irrelevant and we'll be expressing processor speed in number of cores octocore, hexacore, tricontradicore, hexacontetracore, hecticosoctocore, and such and such
You mean its the future today? I thought it was next week! :D
You mean its the future today? I thought it was next week! :D
NAG
Apr 27, 08:50 AM
And here I thought that data wasn't sent to Apple? At least they encrypted it so that you can't tell what actually is sent.
Edit:
But really, they are doing the right thing by truncating the size, removing it from files being backuped, and encrypting the file.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the wasn't sent argument was short for wasn't sent to Apple to track you personally. You're always sending out some sort of location data whether it be your IP or the wifi data. This was announced as a feature back when they first showed of location tracking on the iPhone (so you can't say it was secret). I guess the assumption was that people would remember context of what was said before. The context was that we knew about the anonymous wifi data and people were claiming location database on the phone was being used by Apple to track people personally (the 3rd party local access as a reasonable concern although a bit unlikely). I guess we should have been more explicit in and hoped people try to understand context instead of only becoming irrationally angry at the words "location". Oh well.
Oh, and I like how people are claiming the non-encryption was said by Apple to be a bug and then acting incredulous. Yeah, that tends to happen when you make something up. The only thing that was a bug was the cache not getting culled over time or deleted completely when location services is off. Encryption is a new feature (that arguably should have been there to start) and the file being backed up was probably an oversight. I have no idea how Apple handles their audits but they should probably look into it since they messed up here and only addressed it after we got yet another "-gate" in the media. (Do they even have a fence at this point or is it just a bunch of gates? Maybe they should make a "-gate" for that.) Informing people is, of course, good. However hysterics and hyperbole don't really do a very good job of that.
Edit:
But really, they are doing the right thing by truncating the size, removing it from files being backuped, and encrypting the file.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the wasn't sent argument was short for wasn't sent to Apple to track you personally. You're always sending out some sort of location data whether it be your IP or the wifi data. This was announced as a feature back when they first showed of location tracking on the iPhone (so you can't say it was secret). I guess the assumption was that people would remember context of what was said before. The context was that we knew about the anonymous wifi data and people were claiming location database on the phone was being used by Apple to track people personally (the 3rd party local access as a reasonable concern although a bit unlikely). I guess we should have been more explicit in and hoped people try to understand context instead of only becoming irrationally angry at the words "location". Oh well.
Oh, and I like how people are claiming the non-encryption was said by Apple to be a bug and then acting incredulous. Yeah, that tends to happen when you make something up. The only thing that was a bug was the cache not getting culled over time or deleted completely when location services is off. Encryption is a new feature (that arguably should have been there to start) and the file being backed up was probably an oversight. I have no idea how Apple handles their audits but they should probably look into it since they messed up here and only addressed it after we got yet another "-gate" in the media. (Do they even have a fence at this point or is it just a bunch of gates? Maybe they should make a "-gate" for that.) Informing people is, of course, good. However hysterics and hyperbole don't really do a very good job of that.
guzhogi
Jul 20, 10:07 AM
First of all, you assume that it is possible to make "one big core equal in processing power to the 8 cores". I don't think it is possible to do this (at least not with the x86 architecture using today's technology.)
But assuming such a chip exists, the answer depends on what kind of efficiency you're thinking of.
If you mean computational efficiency (meaning the most useful processing per clock-tick), then a single big core will do better. This is because single-threaded apps will be able to use the full power (whereas multiple threads are needed to take advantagte of multiple cores.) Also, the operating system can get rid of the overhead that is needed to keep software running on the multiple cores from stepping on each other.
If you mean energy efficiency (amount of processing per watt of electricity consumed), then it could go either way, depending on how the chips are made. But given today's manufacturing processes and the non-linear power curve that we see as clock speeds are increased, the multiple-core solution will almost definitely use less power.
I remember hearing about how it is possible to make multiple cores act like one (Idon't remember where I heard this). Anyways, whether 8 cores acting separately or together like 1 big processor has an advantage depends on the program you use. If the program is multi-threaded, then the cores acting separately might have the advantage while single threaded apps will have an advantage if the cores are acting like one. However, many apps today won't see that much improvement either way (like a simple calculator, or solitare and word processing).
But assuming such a chip exists, the answer depends on what kind of efficiency you're thinking of.
If you mean computational efficiency (meaning the most useful processing per clock-tick), then a single big core will do better. This is because single-threaded apps will be able to use the full power (whereas multiple threads are needed to take advantagte of multiple cores.) Also, the operating system can get rid of the overhead that is needed to keep software running on the multiple cores from stepping on each other.
If you mean energy efficiency (amount of processing per watt of electricity consumed), then it could go either way, depending on how the chips are made. But given today's manufacturing processes and the non-linear power curve that we see as clock speeds are increased, the multiple-core solution will almost definitely use less power.
I remember hearing about how it is possible to make multiple cores act like one (Idon't remember where I heard this). Anyways, whether 8 cores acting separately or together like 1 big processor has an advantage depends on the program you use. If the program is multi-threaded, then the cores acting separately might have the advantage while single threaded apps will have an advantage if the cores are acting like one. However, many apps today won't see that much improvement either way (like a simple calculator, or solitare and word processing).
KnightWRX
Apr 9, 11:12 AM
I thought the 320m was also integrated? Wouldn't that mean that would be your only graphics card were nvidia allowed to add them to sandy bridge? I don't see why you would have integrated intel hd 3000 along with an integrated 320m (or successor).
Why not ? A 320m successor would just destroy the Intel HD 3000 which is sub-par compared to the current 320m. Why not use 2 IGPs and go for a 2 chip solution instead of using a dedicated GPU and have to rely on a 3 chip solution if that 2nd IGP just blows away the first ?
Heck, just disable the Intel 3000 HD entirely.
Intel got greedy.
Why not ? A 320m successor would just destroy the Intel HD 3000 which is sub-par compared to the current 320m. Why not use 2 IGPs and go for a 2 chip solution instead of using a dedicated GPU and have to rely on a 3 chip solution if that 2nd IGP just blows away the first ?
Heck, just disable the Intel 3000 HD entirely.
Intel got greedy.
citizenzen
Mar 22, 02:59 PM
A dictator is slaughtering his own people.
A government in power is responding against a rebellion.
If a rebellion sprang up in the United States, our government would respond with force as well.
"Slaughtering his own people" sounds a little propogandish to me. Are you saying that Qaddafi is taking people who have no connection to the rebellion at all and slaughtering them?
How can any government meet armed internal rebellion without qualifying as "slaughtering their own people"?
A government in power is responding against a rebellion.
If a rebellion sprang up in the United States, our government would respond with force as well.
"Slaughtering his own people" sounds a little propogandish to me. Are you saying that Qaddafi is taking people who have no connection to the rebellion at all and slaughtering them?
How can any government meet armed internal rebellion without qualifying as "slaughtering their own people"?
MacBoobsPro
Nov 29, 03:14 AM
Apple should ask for royalties for every song Universal produce! :D
Or just drop Universal.
Or just drop Universal.
djchristie
Nov 29, 08:10 AM
Surely if they want a cut of mp3 players they should also have a cut of:
Hard drive sales in general (my computer has more music on thatn my iPod)
Mobile phones that can play mp3's
PSP's
cd players and hifi's that play mp3 cd's
any SD, memory stick, flash drive etc that could be used to store alleged stolen music.....
the list goes on.
Hope steve, and everyone else, tells them where to go.
Hard drive sales in general (my computer has more music on thatn my iPod)
Mobile phones that can play mp3's
PSP's
cd players and hifi's that play mp3 cd's
any SD, memory stick, flash drive etc that could be used to store alleged stolen music.....
the list goes on.
Hope steve, and everyone else, tells them where to go.
hyperpasta
Nov 28, 06:26 PM
Won't happen.
michaelrjohnson
Aug 7, 04:46 PM
So the cat won't be out of the bag until Spring 2007?
I thought Leopard was slated for December?
Maybe that means it will actually be launched at MWSF in January ...
January is not Spring. Do not expect a release in January; Expect a full-featured preview, with an announcement of a final shipping-date.
I thought Leopard was slated for December?
Maybe that means it will actually be launched at MWSF in January ...
January is not Spring. Do not expect a release in January; Expect a full-featured preview, with an announcement of a final shipping-date.
sgibson
Mar 31, 02:38 PM
You keep using that word� (http://cl.ly/0X032o272d2a3G1T1K3D)
fivepoint
Apr 27, 02:28 PM
They're not. The proper file is flat. I downloaded and opened the PDF from the White House. Flat in both Illustrator and Photoshop, just one group on one layer... and no security on the PDF. No embedded fonts.
This is a fraud.
Uh huh- thanks again, fivepoint.
Are you calling me a liar? I literally went to WhiteHouse.gov, opened the file in Illustrator, and moved the text around myself. :rolleyes:
Some things never change. Laughably bias.
Anyway, like I said, I'm sure there's an explanation... are there any graphic designers here who can help?
This is a fraud.
Uh huh- thanks again, fivepoint.
Are you calling me a liar? I literally went to WhiteHouse.gov, opened the file in Illustrator, and moved the text around myself. :rolleyes:
Some things never change. Laughably bias.
Anyway, like I said, I'm sure there's an explanation... are there any graphic designers here who can help?
KipCoon
Nov 29, 10:34 AM
They aren't. The entire music business revenues are down 40% since 2001. Sales are down hugely. I can tell you from representing these artists that all the money is down too.
Are you spending as much on music as you did years ago?
Actually, moreso, as I've been picking up more small time bands and getting legal copies of my older stuff pre-iPod ownership.
But honestly, like many have said, most of the new stuff out sucks.
Are you spending as much on music as you did years ago?
Actually, moreso, as I've been picking up more small time bands and getting legal copies of my older stuff pre-iPod ownership.
But honestly, like many have said, most of the new stuff out sucks.
Bill Gates
Aug 6, 01:53 PM
Domain Name: MAC-PRO.COM
New York Times Magazine
rayz
Aug 8, 02:31 AM
Time Machine: the attempts to say this was done before with VMS, System Restore or Shadow Copy are pathetic, and those who made the comparison should be ashamed of themselves. Of course it isn't a completely new idea: it's been something that people have wanted to do for years. As far as I can see, Apple is the company that first demonstrated a practical version of this feature that an ordinary person could use. I predict that Microsoft's implementation will be a complicated mess that regular users find opaque and will not use (just like System Restore is).
Er ... you right click on the file, select properties, and then just click on the previous versions tab.
MS has actually put it where most people expect to find it; I thought they might put it on the actual right-click menu, but I honestly don't think that it's going to get used enough for folk to want to have it in their face all the time.
Oh, and MS doesn't need a separate drive for it to work. If the Apple Time Machine ( :rolleyes: ) really does need a separate drive, then it sounds as if Apple has probably just skinned a version control system it pulled from the open source world.
Er ... you right click on the file, select properties, and then just click on the previous versions tab.
MS has actually put it where most people expect to find it; I thought they might put it on the actual right-click menu, but I honestly don't think that it's going to get used enough for folk to want to have it in their face all the time.
Oh, and MS doesn't need a separate drive for it to work. If the Apple Time Machine ( :rolleyes: ) really does need a separate drive, then it sounds as if Apple has probably just skinned a version control system it pulled from the open source world.
NJRonbo
Jun 14, 07:24 PM
Bbiz,
Keep us posted. Worse case I pre order from Apple first
thing tomorrow then cancel if Radio Shack guarantees me
a phone later that day with their PIN program.
Keep us posted. Worse case I pre order from Apple first
thing tomorrow then cancel if Radio Shack guarantees me
a phone later that day with their PIN program.
SevenInchScrew
Aug 19, 09:21 AM
I'm 100% sure the GT site says all the cars were remodeled for the ps3, as in not the ps2 cars.
http://us.gran-turismo.com/us/news/d5247.html
recreated
As in not copypasta'd over from gt4.
All that I get from that quote is that they are using older models, but that they will, obviously, be rendered in the new GT5 engine. So, the marketing team can say all they want, but actual screen shots of Standard� cars do not show much improvement, if any at all, resolution increase notwithstanding.
Do we know if all cars have fully modelled interiors or if thats just for the luxury cars?
No, the only cars that have an interior view are the Premium� models. From NSB's link above...
Standard cars do not support vehicle interior camera views.
http://us.gran-turismo.com/us/news/d5247.html
recreated
As in not copypasta'd over from gt4.
All that I get from that quote is that they are using older models, but that they will, obviously, be rendered in the new GT5 engine. So, the marketing team can say all they want, but actual screen shots of Standard� cars do not show much improvement, if any at all, resolution increase notwithstanding.
Do we know if all cars have fully modelled interiors or if thats just for the luxury cars?
No, the only cars that have an interior view are the Premium� models. From NSB's link above...
Standard cars do not support vehicle interior camera views.
gugy
Aug 16, 11:28 PM
this is the paragraph from the article that makes more sense for Adobe users on the quad G5:
"SHOULD YOU BUY A MAC PRO?
Should you buy a new Mac Pro or a closeout or refurbished Quad-Core G5? If cost is a factor and you use non-UB pro apps (like Photoshop CS2), then we think the Quad-Core G5 is still a valid choice. After all, you can sell it on eBay when Photoshop CS3 is released and buy next year's "Octo-Core" Mac Pro."
It makes me itching now. I want a Mac Pro! :eek:
But I think wait for the "Octo-Core" will be rewarding alongside Adobe CS3.
"SHOULD YOU BUY A MAC PRO?
Should you buy a new Mac Pro or a closeout or refurbished Quad-Core G5? If cost is a factor and you use non-UB pro apps (like Photoshop CS2), then we think the Quad-Core G5 is still a valid choice. After all, you can sell it on eBay when Photoshop CS3 is released and buy next year's "Octo-Core" Mac Pro."
It makes me itching now. I want a Mac Pro! :eek:
But I think wait for the "Octo-Core" will be rewarding alongside Adobe CS3.
xxBURT0Nxx
Apr 9, 09:45 AM
I don't think 2IS is getting that IF Intel allowed Nvidia to continue making sandy bridge chipsets, Nvidia could've easily integrated a 320m successor into the south bridge. This would give you the best of both worlds, the downclocked Low-voltage Intel HD graphics when on battery or basic surfing, or the 320m successor in the south bridge when playing games or aperture photo editing. All this WITHOUT raising the motherboard chip count that putting a separate discrete (on it's own, not integrated into the chipset like 320m) would entail.
I thought the 320m was also integrated? Wouldn't that mean that would be your only graphics card were nvidia allowed to add them to sandy bridge? I don't see why you would have integrated intel hd 3000 along with an integrated 320m (or successor).
I thought the 320m was also integrated? Wouldn't that mean that would be your only graphics card were nvidia allowed to add them to sandy bridge? I don't see why you would have integrated intel hd 3000 along with an integrated 320m (or successor).
doctor-don
Apr 27, 10:43 AM
I'm glad they're fixing this "bug"
But their response is utter crap. They know it - and now everyone knows it.
As reports came out over a year ago about this - it's only after this tremendous bad press that they "found" it. Mhhhmmmm sure.
Commenting on it officially is not the same as "found" it.
But their response is utter crap. They know it - and now everyone knows it.
As reports came out over a year ago about this - it's only after this tremendous bad press that they "found" it. Mhhhmmmm sure.
Commenting on it officially is not the same as "found" it.
No comments:
Post a Comment