AutumnSkyline
Oct 23, 02:33 PM
I don't know if this update is imminent. apple.com store still shows macbooks and mbp as shipping within 24 hours....
then they lie!!!!!!!!!!!!:)
then they lie!!!!!!!!!!!!:)
dguisinger
Aug 7, 07:58 AM
Well all those measure are bogus. OS X is far more secure than you can get from that Windows crap.
Thats why Leopard is Vista Reloaded, ver 2.0
:)
Eh, but you still have to find the stuff and set it up. In XPSP2 all security related settings are in one place, its nice. And the OS keeps annoying the hell out of you if you dont turn the firewall on.....
OOH, and even better....this one I like:
XP SP2, with firewall enabled, will tell you when a application is attempting to make a network connection, ask for authorization (allow once, allow always, or never), and adjust your firewall settings. If you are playing a game, no more swearing, the OS tells you whats wrong and asks if you trust the application. Good for the clueless people (or, good for those damn games that dont document their TCP/UDP ports)
Thats why Leopard is Vista Reloaded, ver 2.0
:)
Eh, but you still have to find the stuff and set it up. In XPSP2 all security related settings are in one place, its nice. And the OS keeps annoying the hell out of you if you dont turn the firewall on.....
OOH, and even better....this one I like:
XP SP2, with firewall enabled, will tell you when a application is attempting to make a network connection, ask for authorization (allow once, allow always, or never), and adjust your firewall settings. If you are playing a game, no more swearing, the OS tells you whats wrong and asks if you trust the application. Good for the clueless people (or, good for those damn games that dont document their TCP/UDP ports)
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.
balamw
Sep 9, 05:56 PM
because im sure alot of people have a video ipod now or plan on getin one soon and say hey i wanna play movies on there i know i did i mean i like riping my own movies but some times its alot of work to rip a movie and put it on ur ipod this way people can just order there fav movie and put it in on ther ipod in a easy way
If that's the extent of it, I'm going to be very underwhelmed on Tuesday. 320x240 movies. (Maximum supported by the 5G iPod). Meh.
B
If that's the extent of it, I'm going to be very underwhelmed on Tuesday. 320x240 movies. (Maximum supported by the 5G iPod). Meh.
B
ciTiger
Mar 24, 01:26 PM
Odd move by Apple... But nice...
skunk
Mar 20, 07:29 AM
I actually think having troops is better. It is specifically outside the UN resolution to put troops on the ground.
charlesdjones1
Apr 12, 06:36 PM
After owning every iPod out there, I can honestly say Apple's next approach to the Classic lineup could be something familiar yet adding updated features to take advantage of the newest tech, but no major changes to an otherwise timeless layout. I still use my 80gb model, and wouldn't change anything personally. I've used the Touch, the Nano, and the Classic, to me, for pure music enjoyment the Classic is all I will ever need or use. I have spliced together a possible direction Apple could/ would go in, and I believe it makes the perfect iPod Classic. Basically, anyone familiar with the older Nano style Touch Wheel is going to be right at home, as the the wheel is smaller by about 25% compared to the Classice, but still being more than accessable. At the same time adding a larger, higher def screen makes viewing song selection, videos, podcasts, and coverflow much easier and appealing to the eyes now, yet using todays AMOLED screen which is lighter, brighter and easier on the battery life. A standard 320 gb hard drive keeps you up to date on all the latest hi def content that is released over iTunes, but keeping a smaller overall form factor makes it lighter in the pocket. These are my ideas which I feel would be popular for newer users and older ones as well. Just for an added bonus, you could implement a streamlined touch interface using the classic style menu, adding nice features such as the App Store and even some touch based games.
rxse7en
Oct 23, 11:33 AM
New MacBook Pro's and video iPods for some, abortions and miniature American flags for others
Sacrilicious!
Sacrilicious!
reel2reel
Apr 12, 09:18 PM
What was the render dialog ?
The ancient "rendering video..." progress bar you get to watch, which locks you out of every other function.
The ancient "rendering video..." progress bar you get to watch, which locks you out of every other function.
Gem�tlichkeit
Apr 12, 09:29 PM
I hope this means we will eventually see a 64bit version of iMovie ;)
Linito
Sep 6, 09:24 AM
Still cant see any sign of MBPs.*weeps*
Maybe next tuesday...
new processor needs new motherboard, there for new sistem needs new case, i think their gonna release a new mbp and will be aa killer!
Maybe next tuesday...
new processor needs new motherboard, there for new sistem needs new case, i think their gonna release a new mbp and will be aa killer!
designed
Mar 23, 11:36 AM
33 mins per frame with the iMac i7? That seems awfully fast. 25k PPD. That looks like the time of a 3Ghz 8 core previous generation Mac Pro.
Actually I'm using a Mac Pro with a 8-core 2,26GHz setup.
Actually I'm using a Mac Pro with a 8-core 2,26GHz setup.
shackleb
Apr 27, 07:41 PM
Here is a snapshot of the website 'portableapps.com' from Christmas of 2005:
http://replay.web.archive.org/20051225045018/http://portableapps.com/
Note that it defines 'app' as "a computer program like a web browser or word processor", and then further notes:
"A portable app is a computer program that you can carry around with you on a portable device and use on any Windows computer. When your USB thumbdrive, portable hard drive, iPod or other portable device is plugged in, you have access to your software and personal data just as you would on your own PC. And when you unplug, none of your personal data is left behind."
Not sure when Apple's app store opened, but I know that I personally have (as others have) been using the term 'app' for many MANY years before even 2005 to refer to applications.
Now I'm no lawyer, but it seems to me that if you can't own 'drug store', 'hardware store', 'grocery store', 'software store', or 'application store', it doesn't make sense that Apple, or anyone else, could own 'app store'.
Just sayin'
http://replay.web.archive.org/20051225045018/http://portableapps.com/
Note that it defines 'app' as "a computer program like a web browser or word processor", and then further notes:
"A portable app is a computer program that you can carry around with you on a portable device and use on any Windows computer. When your USB thumbdrive, portable hard drive, iPod or other portable device is plugged in, you have access to your software and personal data just as you would on your own PC. And when you unplug, none of your personal data is left behind."
Not sure when Apple's app store opened, but I know that I personally have (as others have) been using the term 'app' for many MANY years before even 2005 to refer to applications.
Now I'm no lawyer, but it seems to me that if you can't own 'drug store', 'hardware store', 'grocery store', 'software store', or 'application store', it doesn't make sense that Apple, or anyone else, could own 'app store'.
Just sayin'
whoooaaahhhh
Jul 14, 09:54 AM
Good post, sums up the current situation very nicely.
Given that dual layer 50GB blu-ray discs cant even be produced yet, i think the 200GB claim is complete vaporware.
I hope HD-DVD wins this war soon, as it is out of the gates first, and thus far a far superior format. If Blu-Ray were to give up now, i dont think many people would be sad. One format is better for everyone.
NO.
First of all, Blu-Ray discs are a completely new material and fabrication process, so highlighting the fact that they've only made 25GB discs (which were stable-ly created long before almost ANY HD-DVD's) and can't produce a disk which is far above the specs of the competition, is like saying screw the russians cuz they're space program hasn't sent a man to mars (nobody's done it yet, anyway). You can't blame Blu-Ray for not being able to deliver 50 GB yet, the meat of the war is just beginning anyway.
Secondly, what was said about the VC-1 codec is very wrong. Microsoft's VC-1 codec is far worse and more difficult to work with than MPEG 2 or MPEG 4 that sony will probably offer in later versions of Blu-Ray. All this malarky about artifacts doesn't really make sense when you consider that we've been USING MPEG2 IN DVD'S FOR YEARS NOW! There's no way that the algorithim could be to blame for the artifacts! Sure it's fatter, but it's a lighter compression, and as Sony has shown with their PCM Audio on Blu-Ray, sometimes light compression on a bigger disk is better than heavy compression on smaller disks. It will be a lot easier to change to a more efficient codec down the line (which is what we've done with computers time and time again, as well as professional video) so we can get Ultra HD on Blu Ray when it comes out as well.
I'm sorry, I understand people really want HD-DVD to win because it's easier and cheaper right now, but since when has the easiest option been the best? If Blu-Ray doesn't win this war we'll have another short life-span format, this version of HD will not be enough for the professional industry much longer, take it from a video guy. I've written a frickin' paper on this very subject.
IMHO I'd like to see a Blu-Ray with the Mac Pro's to help solidify the consumer base into purchasing a better product, because that's how you standardize something in the market...sales...But I don't know that it will happen. Although remember DVD-RAM? Apple seemed to like that for awhile...that died...
I also don't want microsoft handling my video codec, anybody remember the wonderous creation of WMV/WMA? The one that like none of us can use on macs? HD-DVD's codec is a derivation of the WMV-HD codec. Welcome to the Microsoft reality. They really like controlling proprietary codecs. Also...MPEG was created by a group of companies and people working together, Microsoft created WMV, so they've got almost complete say in how that plays out.
Given that dual layer 50GB blu-ray discs cant even be produced yet, i think the 200GB claim is complete vaporware.
I hope HD-DVD wins this war soon, as it is out of the gates first, and thus far a far superior format. If Blu-Ray were to give up now, i dont think many people would be sad. One format is better for everyone.
NO.
First of all, Blu-Ray discs are a completely new material and fabrication process, so highlighting the fact that they've only made 25GB discs (which were stable-ly created long before almost ANY HD-DVD's) and can't produce a disk which is far above the specs of the competition, is like saying screw the russians cuz they're space program hasn't sent a man to mars (nobody's done it yet, anyway). You can't blame Blu-Ray for not being able to deliver 50 GB yet, the meat of the war is just beginning anyway.
Secondly, what was said about the VC-1 codec is very wrong. Microsoft's VC-1 codec is far worse and more difficult to work with than MPEG 2 or MPEG 4 that sony will probably offer in later versions of Blu-Ray. All this malarky about artifacts doesn't really make sense when you consider that we've been USING MPEG2 IN DVD'S FOR YEARS NOW! There's no way that the algorithim could be to blame for the artifacts! Sure it's fatter, but it's a lighter compression, and as Sony has shown with their PCM Audio on Blu-Ray, sometimes light compression on a bigger disk is better than heavy compression on smaller disks. It will be a lot easier to change to a more efficient codec down the line (which is what we've done with computers time and time again, as well as professional video) so we can get Ultra HD on Blu Ray when it comes out as well.
I'm sorry, I understand people really want HD-DVD to win because it's easier and cheaper right now, but since when has the easiest option been the best? If Blu-Ray doesn't win this war we'll have another short life-span format, this version of HD will not be enough for the professional industry much longer, take it from a video guy. I've written a frickin' paper on this very subject.
IMHO I'd like to see a Blu-Ray with the Mac Pro's to help solidify the consumer base into purchasing a better product, because that's how you standardize something in the market...sales...But I don't know that it will happen. Although remember DVD-RAM? Apple seemed to like that for awhile...that died...
I also don't want microsoft handling my video codec, anybody remember the wonderous creation of WMV/WMA? The one that like none of us can use on macs? HD-DVD's codec is a derivation of the WMV-HD codec. Welcome to the Microsoft reality. They really like controlling proprietary codecs. Also...MPEG was created by a group of companies and people working together, Microsoft created WMV, so they've got almost complete say in how that plays out.
Riemann Zeta
Apr 1, 11:49 PM
Thus far, stability-wise, it is not too bad for a beta. A lot of the UI rendering errors from beta 1 have been ironed out. My bet would be that this will be a $29 upgrade, as it doesn't add much but rather refines what 10.6 started.
innominato5090
Feb 20, 01:24 AM
New work machine.
snip
beautiful. I love the colors and the symmetry of your desk! may I ask you for a bigger pic?
snip
beautiful. I love the colors and the symmetry of your desk! may I ask you for a bigger pic?
Winni
Apr 27, 06:23 AM
How long until Apple releases a product called "Amazon", then? Named after the river, of course.
Interesting. I've always associated the name with the legendary tribe of female warriors.
Interesting. I've always associated the name with the legendary tribe of female warriors.
SaMaster14
Jan 4, 09:18 AM
My pride and joy.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3038/3118434529_012ae33259.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/30820359@N08/3118434529/)
Side (http://www.flickr.com/photos/30820359@N08/3118434529/) by ljcarrD300 (http://www.flickr.com/people/30820359@N08/), on Flickr
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3315/3179882976_ba29866369.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/30820359@N08/3179882976/)
Front side 1 (1) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/30820359@N08/3179882976/) by ljcarrD300 (http://www.flickr.com/people/30820359@N08/), on Flickr
Love the looks of the C-class... I'm just surprised they made it so slow in comparison to the competition. Definitely a luxurious car and smooth-riding, but just no power to back it up (obviously except for the C63).
Thanks :) Manufacturer claims it's low 5's, but I think it's closer to 5.5 (stock). Whilst I've got some mods on it (intake/exhaust), I recently detuned it because the aftermarket tune I was running was misfiring when WOT (might've been cool to teenagers watching from the side of the road but scared the heck out of me as I don't want engine trouble!).
Haha, makes sense. And thats about the same as my Infiniti's 0-60. Stock says around 5.5, but it seems a bit faster to me (its an automatic car, but I always drive in DS manual mode (paddleshifters) and it definitely gets to 60 faster than when letting the car shift).
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3038/3118434529_012ae33259.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/30820359@N08/3118434529/)
Side (http://www.flickr.com/photos/30820359@N08/3118434529/) by ljcarrD300 (http://www.flickr.com/people/30820359@N08/), on Flickr
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3315/3179882976_ba29866369.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/30820359@N08/3179882976/)
Front side 1 (1) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/30820359@N08/3179882976/) by ljcarrD300 (http://www.flickr.com/people/30820359@N08/), on Flickr
Love the looks of the C-class... I'm just surprised they made it so slow in comparison to the competition. Definitely a luxurious car and smooth-riding, but just no power to back it up (obviously except for the C63).
Thanks :) Manufacturer claims it's low 5's, but I think it's closer to 5.5 (stock). Whilst I've got some mods on it (intake/exhaust), I recently detuned it because the aftermarket tune I was running was misfiring when WOT (might've been cool to teenagers watching from the side of the road but scared the heck out of me as I don't want engine trouble!).
Haha, makes sense. And thats about the same as my Infiniti's 0-60. Stock says around 5.5, but it seems a bit faster to me (its an automatic car, but I always drive in DS manual mode (paddleshifters) and it definitely gets to 60 faster than when letting the car shift).
amacgenius
Jan 1, 05:15 PM
The only two I'm betting on are iLife '07 and iTV, because those seem most feasible at this point.
A new Mac Pro and another more in depth Leopard preview would be nice, but I don't think that's in the Pipeline (kudos to those who get the joke).
A new Mac Pro and another more in depth Leopard preview would be nice, but I don't think that's in the Pipeline (kudos to those who get the joke).
jc1350
Apr 21, 12:45 PM
Al Franken isnt tracking me, my iphone is.
What a lame ass attempt to politicize the issue :rolleyes:
When it comes to politicians, EVERYTHING is political. They don't do or say anything without some idea on how it can help them politically.
What a lame ass attempt to politicize the issue :rolleyes:
When it comes to politicians, EVERYTHING is political. They don't do or say anything without some idea on how it can help them politically.
ianray
Jun 23, 04:52 AM
While we have seen very interesting advancements in App design between iPhone and iPad, I wonder how iOS could scale up to a 'Desktop PC' form-factor (or screen-size) without looking like some "Fisher-Price" toy?
Peace
Oct 23, 12:01 PM
Battery and component shortages abound ladies and gentlemen.Have patience.
http://news.com.com/2061-10792_3-6128501.html?part=rss&tag=6128501&subj=news
http://news.com.com/2061-10792_3-6128501.html?part=rss&tag=6128501&subj=news
hakuryuu
Apr 11, 02:47 AM
I honestly cringe at the thought of driving an automatic at this point. I learned on an auto but i've driven a stick for the last 7 years (much of that in Los Angeles traffic) and when I wasn't in my car I was on my motorcycle (love sequential gearboxes). I like the control I have over the car and even in a car that isn't fast it makes driving more fun as long as the box isn't crap.
However I find myself looking at a lot of cars that don't even offer a manual these days :( and I am going to be getting myself something relatively new in the next year or two (though it quite likely will be another Triumph motorcycle)
However I find myself looking at a lot of cars that don't even offer a manual these days :( and I am going to be getting myself something relatively new in the next year or two (though it quite likely will be another Triumph motorcycle)
Evangelion
Aug 29, 11:16 AM
Nonono, Merom costs the same as Yonah's June price
points which are still here even with Merom out in the wild.
intel will sell yonahs for quite some time besides merom. why sell them when merom is better? answer: because they will sell them for lower price
points which are still here even with Merom out in the wild.
intel will sell yonahs for quite some time besides merom. why sell them when merom is better? answer: because they will sell them for lower price
