tribulation
Nov 28, 08:12 PM
what if i have no artists distributed by universal? if this takes effect then the ipod price will just go up and we all will be paying for it. what makes them think that i am even listening to any of their artists on my ipod and why should they get a cut if i dont >> or even if i do. ridiculous and better not happen.
manu chao
Apr 25, 02:23 PM
What the heck would ANYONE do to cause harm to you by knowing what cell towers you ping off of?
Anybody doing credit card fraud would have a somewhat better chance of staying undetected if they knew you usually whereabouts. Credit card companies use highly evolved software to track if a CC transaction is unusual.
I think it is save to assume that most people do not store their credit card number in plain text on their computer. If some piece of software (eg, a browser) would do this, wouldn't this be something you preferred it would not do?
Anybody doing credit card fraud would have a somewhat better chance of staying undetected if they knew you usually whereabouts. Credit card companies use highly evolved software to track if a CC transaction is unusual.
I think it is save to assume that most people do not store their credit card number in plain text on their computer. If some piece of software (eg, a browser) would do this, wouldn't this be something you preferred it would not do?
shawnce
Jul 27, 11:02 AM
"...Core 2 Duo chips need less electricity, drawing just 65 watts compared to the Pentium 4’s 95 watts and Pentium D’s 130 watts"
Good Lord - does anybody know what the G5 is? I'd imagine that the elaborate cooling system in the current G5 towers probably won't be needed it it's running anything like the D's...
1) The watts numbers listed are TDP (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_Design_Power). They are not the amount of power the processor consumes ("drawing").
2) PPC 970fx falls in the realm of Conroe in terms of heat generation but of course the Conroe has better performance.
I should note that the PPC 970FX is a single core chip while the PPC 970MP is the dual core one... don't have good numbers for the later but I would guess it would be about 1.75 times (or more) the PPC 970FX in terms of thermal generation and power consumption.
Good Lord - does anybody know what the G5 is? I'd imagine that the elaborate cooling system in the current G5 towers probably won't be needed it it's running anything like the D's...
1) The watts numbers listed are TDP (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_Design_Power). They are not the amount of power the processor consumes ("drawing").
2) PPC 970fx falls in the realm of Conroe in terms of heat generation but of course the Conroe has better performance.
I should note that the PPC 970FX is a single core chip while the PPC 970MP is the dual core one... don't have good numbers for the later but I would guess it would be about 1.75 times (or more) the PPC 970FX in terms of thermal generation and power consumption.
three
Nov 12, 03:07 PM
Here's the official release notice from Sony.
http://blog.us.playstation.com/2010/11/12/gran-turismo-5-release-date-confirmed-for-november-24th-2010/
as well as the car list and the track list.
http://www.gran-turismo.com/local/jp/data1/products/gt5/carlist_en.html
http://www.gran-turismo.com/local/jp/data1/products/gt5/courselist_en.html
I'm disappointed the Bugatti Veyron is standard only, and not surprised there's no Porsches, since I believe the license to use Porsches are exclusive to EA, no other game from any company really has them. But, I am hoping that GT5 will be released on the 24th, for real this time, instead of being pushed back for the 40,000,001st time.
Today was a great day for Gran Turismo news. The Mazda 3 (Axela) I drive in real life is on the game, and the tracks look nice.
http://blog.us.playstation.com/2010/11/12/gran-turismo-5-release-date-confirmed-for-november-24th-2010/
as well as the car list and the track list.
http://www.gran-turismo.com/local/jp/data1/products/gt5/carlist_en.html
http://www.gran-turismo.com/local/jp/data1/products/gt5/courselist_en.html
I'm disappointed the Bugatti Veyron is standard only, and not surprised there's no Porsches, since I believe the license to use Porsches are exclusive to EA, no other game from any company really has them. But, I am hoping that GT5 will be released on the 24th, for real this time, instead of being pushed back for the 40,000,001st time.
Today was a great day for Gran Turismo news. The Mazda 3 (Axela) I drive in real life is on the game, and the tracks look nice.
twoodcc
Aug 27, 01:06 AM
i just hope they don't forget the mac mini
wtmk81
Mar 22, 01:41 PM
Blackberry playbook = The IPad 2 killer - you heard it here first.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
I'd agree with you, but the Playbook is showing up Sunday for a party on Saturday. It had a chance, but I think the late release killed it.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
I'd agree with you, but the Playbook is showing up Sunday for a party on Saturday. It had a chance, but I think the late release killed it.
Tones2
Apr 11, 01:23 PM
The iPhone 4 is still the best smartphone in the market, so not surprising.
As for people expecting a 4" screen on the next iPhone dream on. They are not going to make an iPhone with a bigger screen.
To me, it's much more likely that the iPhone 5 will have a 4"+ screen than it is to have 64GB or 4G, although given Apple's increasing tendancy to underwhelm us with new technology features (which are in fact old by the time of their introduction 1-2 years after everyone else), I doubt we get any of these three.
Tony
As for people expecting a 4" screen on the next iPhone dream on. They are not going to make an iPhone with a bigger screen.
To me, it's much more likely that the iPhone 5 will have a 4"+ screen than it is to have 64GB or 4G, although given Apple's increasing tendancy to underwhelm us with new technology features (which are in fact old by the time of their introduction 1-2 years after everyone else), I doubt we get any of these three.
Tony
Multimedia
Jul 29, 12:24 AM
I recall someone here recently reiterating the point that Merom should not use less power than Yonah, but accomplish 20% more work. That was my understanding.
Now the claim is being made that a Core 2 Duo Notebook can get longer battery life than a "previous model" notebook, up to 5 hours.
Video: Long-lasting Intel Core 2 Duo notebooks (http://news.com.com/1606-2_3-6100051.html?part=rss&tag=6100051&subj=news)Love this news. Just what I was expecting and one of the main reasons to have waited for Core 2 Duo mobile Macs. :)
Now the claim is being made that a Core 2 Duo Notebook can get longer battery life than a "previous model" notebook, up to 5 hours.
Video: Long-lasting Intel Core 2 Duo notebooks (http://news.com.com/1606-2_3-6100051.html?part=rss&tag=6100051&subj=news)Love this news. Just what I was expecting and one of the main reasons to have waited for Core 2 Duo mobile Macs. :)
portishead
Apr 12, 12:54 PM
Then that just begs the question, "why haven't these people left already?" FCP has been fairly stagnant for years. There are plenty of other alternatives, so doesn't that kinda make them fanboyish too for sticking it out when up to this point Apple has given zero hints about when or how it will take FCP to the next level?
I'm not in the video editing biz, but if the pro s/w I use in my profession hobbled my efficiency and workflow the way you are carping about FCP, and there were viable alternatives, I would abandon it quicker than pigeon can snatch a bread crumb. Just sayin'.
People just love to complain. Yes Apple has been a little behind in the NLE business lately. They can't be on top all the time. Avid has made fantastic strides lately, and so has Adobe, although I would never advise using Premiere. You have to remember though Avid made a lot of bad moves, from nearly dropping Mac support to their closed hardware system. Just recently have they finally started to look like they got it together. FCP is being updated today, so all this nonsense about apple neglecting the pro market can stop. You may not like the update, but from what I've heard (not much) it's going to be pretty amazing.
I'm not in the video editing biz, but if the pro s/w I use in my profession hobbled my efficiency and workflow the way you are carping about FCP, and there were viable alternatives, I would abandon it quicker than pigeon can snatch a bread crumb. Just sayin'.
People just love to complain. Yes Apple has been a little behind in the NLE business lately. They can't be on top all the time. Avid has made fantastic strides lately, and so has Adobe, although I would never advise using Premiere. You have to remember though Avid made a lot of bad moves, from nearly dropping Mac support to their closed hardware system. Just recently have they finally started to look like they got it together. FCP is being updated today, so all this nonsense about apple neglecting the pro market can stop. You may not like the update, but from what I've heard (not much) it's going to be pretty amazing.
2ndPath
Aug 6, 12:04 PM
To me the answer to the whole IR/Mac Pro/Front Row thing is obvious - put an integrated IR receiver into the keyboard. The keyboard would come with the Mac Pro (unlike the display) and is rarely under the desk. :)
Plus they could sell the keyboard for any Mac (including ones that don't have Front Row - they could include the app with it).
Why sell a new keyboard for front row, if you can sell a new Mac to the same person? Including the sensor in the Cinema Displays would enable Apple to sell more of their display, on which they probably have a very good profit margin (when you compare to other manufacturers).
They could also just put it into the tower. Even if that is under the desk, it might not be that much of a problem. In my experience the sensor responds very nicely to the remote even if the line of sight between them is somewhat obstructed.
However the best solution I think, was suggested by someone on these forums. I don't know, whether it has been quoted here already, because I did not go through all the messages. This poster suggested to combine the sensor with an external iSight. That could be connected to any monitor and would probably have a good IR reception because of beeing on top of the monitor and thus very exposed.
Plus they could sell the keyboard for any Mac (including ones that don't have Front Row - they could include the app with it).
Why sell a new keyboard for front row, if you can sell a new Mac to the same person? Including the sensor in the Cinema Displays would enable Apple to sell more of their display, on which they probably have a very good profit margin (when you compare to other manufacturers).
They could also just put it into the tower. Even if that is under the desk, it might not be that much of a problem. In my experience the sensor responds very nicely to the remote even if the line of sight between them is somewhat obstructed.
However the best solution I think, was suggested by someone on these forums. I don't know, whether it has been quoted here already, because I did not go through all the messages. This poster suggested to combine the sensor with an external iSight. That could be connected to any monitor and would probably have a good IR reception because of beeing on top of the monitor and thus very exposed.
iMeowbot
Sep 19, 08:43 AM
All you people who keep whining about "But I want 64 bit!!!" need to step back and think about what possible benefit a 64-bit system will give you. Those of you who need to address more than 4 gigs of RAM are excused. The rest of you, tell me WHY you need 64-bit computing.
There is a general unease about the AMD64 instruction set. We are already seeing a few programs that only run on Intel Macs. What's to stop developers from ignoring the x86 target in new software, especially on the high end, given the short sales cycle of x86-only Macs? The Mac Pro didn't even have a 32-bit version.
There is a general unease about the AMD64 instruction set. We are already seeing a few programs that only run on Intel Macs. What's to stop developers from ignoring the x86 target in new software, especially on the high end, given the short sales cycle of x86-only Macs? The Mac Pro didn't even have a 32-bit version.
guzhogi
Jul 15, 10:03 AM
I also wish Apple used standard ATX power supplies. That way, if you need a new power suply, you can get one from your local electronics store. I don't know if Apple already uses them, but I have a beige desktop G3 and the power supply on it is getting old and I have a bunch of extra stuff in it and the power supply can't handle it all. I've been told I can get one from a b&w G3, but going to a best buy or where ever and getting a new one I think would be a lot easier.
Phobophobia
Jul 20, 01:24 PM
More like $13,950
:rolleyes:
You're both wrong. The price is infinite because it doesn't exist, and yet there is demand. ;)
:rolleyes:
You're both wrong. The price is infinite because it doesn't exist, and yet there is demand. ;)
vand0576
Aug 11, 01:46 PM
...There's no way in the world Apple would make as much money off of this as if they got in with one of the big guys. Just ask Disney - ESPN mobile is bombing as is Disney mobile....
They are failing because they believe media content is what is important to people. Pumping their phones full of media and "services" which only are really advertisements that don't help anyone but Disney and ESPN. They are phones with superficial artificial sustainance.
Technology wouldn't be such a boom if people couldn't advertise with it some way. Apple will only succeed if it can avoid this and make a product that is functional and serves a true purpose in the consumer's life without the bullcrap content.
They are failing because they believe media content is what is important to people. Pumping their phones full of media and "services" which only are really advertisements that don't help anyone but Disney and ESPN. They are phones with superficial artificial sustainance.
Technology wouldn't be such a boom if people couldn't advertise with it some way. Apple will only succeed if it can avoid this and make a product that is functional and serves a true purpose in the consumer's life without the bullcrap content.
Warbrain
Aug 26, 04:06 PM
Im guessing hopefully by the years end for the G5.... :) :)
I was told it would be released before Christmas. I can't wait!
I was told it would be released before Christmas. I can't wait!
Fabio_gsilva
Jul 27, 11:53 AM
Gee, talk about getting ahead of yourself.
Core 3 will be out before Vista is. I'm going to call it now.
Everybody, be my witness, Core 3 (any processor that goes beyond Core 2 because I don't know if they'll call it "Core 3") will be out before a consumer version of Vista is shipped.
I'll remember!
Core 3 will be out before Vista is. I'm going to call it now.
Everybody, be my witness, Core 3 (any processor that goes beyond Core 2 because I don't know if they'll call it "Core 3") will be out before a consumer version of Vista is shipped.
I'll remember!
MacRumors
Aug 16, 10:33 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Barefeats provides (http://www.barefeats.com/quad06.html) benchmarks comparing the Quad 3GHz Mac Pro (Xeon) vs the Quad G5 2.5GHz Power Mac (G5). This represents the new top of the line vs the old top of the line Mac.
They provide benchmarks for both non-Universal and Universal applications between the Mac Pro 3GHz, Mac Pro 2.66GHz and PowerMac G5 Quad 2.5GHz.
The top-end Mac Pro performed well compared to the Quad G5 with both Photoshop CS2 and After Effects 7.0 despite running under Rosetta emulation on the Mac Pro. Universal upgrades to these applications should provide additional performance boosts.
Meanwhile, Universal applications iMovie HD 6, Final Cut Pro 5, FileMaker Pro 8.5 and Cinebench 9.5 generally showed substantial improvements even in the 2.66GHz Mac Pro vs the 2.5GHz PowerMac.
There's no doubt that both versions of the Mac Pro are faster than the G5 Quad-Core running Universal Binary apps like iMovie, Final Cut Pro, etc. As you can see from the four UB tests we ran in this session, the Mac Pro 2.66GHz was as much as 62% faster than the Quad-Core G5/2.5GHz. The Mac Pro 3.0GHz was as much as 85% faster.
Barefeats provides (http://www.barefeats.com/quad06.html) benchmarks comparing the Quad 3GHz Mac Pro (Xeon) vs the Quad G5 2.5GHz Power Mac (G5). This represents the new top of the line vs the old top of the line Mac.
They provide benchmarks for both non-Universal and Universal applications between the Mac Pro 3GHz, Mac Pro 2.66GHz and PowerMac G5 Quad 2.5GHz.
The top-end Mac Pro performed well compared to the Quad G5 with both Photoshop CS2 and After Effects 7.0 despite running under Rosetta emulation on the Mac Pro. Universal upgrades to these applications should provide additional performance boosts.
Meanwhile, Universal applications iMovie HD 6, Final Cut Pro 5, FileMaker Pro 8.5 and Cinebench 9.5 generally showed substantial improvements even in the 2.66GHz Mac Pro vs the 2.5GHz PowerMac.
There's no doubt that both versions of the Mac Pro are faster than the G5 Quad-Core running Universal Binary apps like iMovie, Final Cut Pro, etc. As you can see from the four UB tests we ran in this session, the Mac Pro 2.66GHz was as much as 62% faster than the Quad-Core G5/2.5GHz. The Mac Pro 3.0GHz was as much as 85% faster.
QCassidy352
Jul 20, 03:53 PM
I hate to burst everyone's bubble, but Kentsfield will not be appearing in any of the Pro machines for some time.
Apple will be using them exclusively in the Xserves, at for the most part of 2007. This will finally give Apple another way to distinguish their server line from their pro line.
What? Apple*differentiates the XServes by having them 1U thick and rackmountable. One buys a rackmount server not because it's faster but because it's smaller and fits in a rack.
yeah, what he said. Apple does not have to distinguish powermacs from servers with processor speeds. People (businesses) who need servers are not going to buy powermacs to do the job even if they are a little bit faster or cheaper; they are going to buy real rack-mounted servers.
Apple will be using them exclusively in the Xserves, at for the most part of 2007. This will finally give Apple another way to distinguish their server line from their pro line.
What? Apple*differentiates the XServes by having them 1U thick and rackmountable. One buys a rackmount server not because it's faster but because it's smaller and fits in a rack.
yeah, what he said. Apple does not have to distinguish powermacs from servers with processor speeds. People (businesses) who need servers are not going to buy powermacs to do the job even if they are a little bit faster or cheaper; they are going to buy real rack-mounted servers.
TangoCharlie
Jul 28, 05:16 AM
Can I swop the Merom with the Yonah in my MB?
No. Not unless you're extremely handy with a soldering iron!
No. Not unless you're extremely handy with a soldering iron!
Mister Snitch
Mar 31, 02:46 PM
I knew it would happen eventually.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEidDDR8ltLanoHjKrEtYWjMoVQw5IMgw_feyy13PjZUflYbH1Yz2vvC4EM7e3d6kShni04w34KKaiU_EexWfopzBk6ixTe-SEAfJ4JjiQwNfTJHJ8P9KZIAfm3EqAkES1Yw9j6xXERA4Rkm/s1600/darth-vader-face.jpg
It was.... their DESTINY!
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEidDDR8ltLanoHjKrEtYWjMoVQw5IMgw_feyy13PjZUflYbH1Yz2vvC4EM7e3d6kShni04w34KKaiU_EexWfopzBk6ixTe-SEAfJ4JjiQwNfTJHJ8P9KZIAfm3EqAkES1Yw9j6xXERA4Rkm/s1600/darth-vader-face.jpg
It was.... their DESTINY!
LagunaSol
Mar 22, 01:47 PM
I'm sure sales of this new Samsung device will be very "smooth."
Whatever that means.
Whatever that means.
mkruck
Apr 6, 04:18 PM
Isn't it amazing that so many of these XOOM owners also, coincidentally, "own" an iPad/iPad 2, or their spouse/mom/dog/significant other does?
Either there's a lot of exaggerating (astroturfing) going on, or someone's spouse/mom/dog/significant other has a lot more sense. ;)
Why, I own an iPad and a XOOM and a Galaxy Tab and that HP Windows 7 Slate thingy and a Nook and a prototype PlayBook and I can tell you from personal experience that the iPad is like 100x better than all of those! :rolleyes:
What's so amazing about it? We're talking $400 - $600 devices, and in the case of the Nook Color that I rooted, $200. You don't have to be Daddy Warbucks to own technology.
If you'd like, I'll line up all three tablets and take a picture for you. I'll even put my dogs in the picture. :)
Either there's a lot of exaggerating (astroturfing) going on, or someone's spouse/mom/dog/significant other has a lot more sense. ;)
Why, I own an iPad and a XOOM and a Galaxy Tab and that HP Windows 7 Slate thingy and a Nook and a prototype PlayBook and I can tell you from personal experience that the iPad is like 100x better than all of those! :rolleyes:
What's so amazing about it? We're talking $400 - $600 devices, and in the case of the Nook Color that I rooted, $200. You don't have to be Daddy Warbucks to own technology.
If you'd like, I'll line up all three tablets and take a picture for you. I'll even put my dogs in the picture. :)
ergle2
Sep 14, 01:17 PM
True (today anyway; in the NT era they were indeed separate platforms though. Which brings me to my next point..)
Point of total (and obnoxious) pedantry here -- XP and W2K3 Server aren't strictly the same codebase; The latter was a huge rewrite job with some fairly significant internal changes.
XP 64bit is based on W2K3, and Vista originally started out on the XP code base and then was scrapped, and was started over using the W2K3 codebase.
It doesn't invalidate your point in any way and the latter is most definitely descended from the former, but unlike previous products they weren't released in parallel. I mention it purely because I find it interesting, and it's also an example of how Windows is "evolving", so to speak.
I think people who say stuff like that are exhibiting a syndrome common to Mac folk who've never spent any time in the PC world -- they take negative comments they remember regarding versions of Windows or the PC experience from about 5 years back and assume they apply to today. XP, for example, really was for the most part a window-dressing of Windows 2000, but that is not the case for Vista. You see similar statements regarding "blue screens of death", overall system stability, etc, which suggest they haven't seen or used a PC since the late 90s/early 00's.
This is very common on both sides of the divide. Many Mac-only people seem to think Windows is still stuck in the Win9x days, and many of the Windows-only types seem to think MacOS is still in the 8.x days.
I guess it's a little like when your friend has kids and you don't see them for a few years, and you're surprised that instead of still being little kids they're teenagers... :)
Point of total (and obnoxious) pedantry here -- XP and W2K3 Server aren't strictly the same codebase; The latter was a huge rewrite job with some fairly significant internal changes.
XP 64bit is based on W2K3, and Vista originally started out on the XP code base and then was scrapped, and was started over using the W2K3 codebase.
It doesn't invalidate your point in any way and the latter is most definitely descended from the former, but unlike previous products they weren't released in parallel. I mention it purely because I find it interesting, and it's also an example of how Windows is "evolving", so to speak.
I think people who say stuff like that are exhibiting a syndrome common to Mac folk who've never spent any time in the PC world -- they take negative comments they remember regarding versions of Windows or the PC experience from about 5 years back and assume they apply to today. XP, for example, really was for the most part a window-dressing of Windows 2000, but that is not the case for Vista. You see similar statements regarding "blue screens of death", overall system stability, etc, which suggest they haven't seen or used a PC since the late 90s/early 00's.
This is very common on both sides of the divide. Many Mac-only people seem to think Windows is still stuck in the Win9x days, and many of the Windows-only types seem to think MacOS is still in the 8.x days.
I guess it's a little like when your friend has kids and you don't see them for a few years, and you're surprised that instead of still being little kids they're teenagers... :)
Bradley W
Aug 7, 10:24 PM
_
No comments:
Post a Comment