BJNY
Aug 23, 09:38 AM
My Quad G5 is silent as well, unlike Dual 2.7's which rev frequently.
I was concerned that the fans at the rear ports never spin, even during the Apple Hardware Test, but I've noticed that in other Quads as well. CPU temps are 50 to 60 degrees celcius.
Multimedia, would you confirm both with your Quad G5, please?
I was concerned that the fans at the rear ports never spin, even during the Apple Hardware Test, but I've noticed that in other Quads as well. CPU temps are 50 to 60 degrees celcius.
Multimedia, would you confirm both with your Quad G5, please?
jackc
Aug 7, 04:15 PM
Time Machine looks pretty sweet. How do you think it will work in terms of space requirements?
gnasher729
Jul 14, 05:20 PM
A 2.66 Ghz Woodcrest will probably be faster than a 2.93Ghz Conroe. A 1.83Ghz Yonah is faster than a 3.2Ghz Pentium, right?;)
Merom, Conroe and Woodcrest all use Intel's new "Core Microarchitecture" (a bit confusing: Core Duo does _not_ use "Core Microarchitecture", it is basically an improved Pentium III. The Core 2 Duo chips use Core Microarchitecture).
All three chips produce the same performance at the same clockspeed. Cache size may make a difference, but the Conroe models starting at 2.4 GHz all have the large 4 MB cache. So a single 2.66 GHz Woodcrest will be substantially slower than a 2.93 GHz Conroe. Not that it matters; the 2.93 GHz Conroe is extremely overpriced and unlikely to be used in any Macintosh.
I personally would expect 2.0GHz Conroe, 2.66 GHz Conroe, 2 x 2 GHz Woodcrest and 2 x 2.66 GHz Woodcrest for a wide range from cheap to maximum performance.
Merom, Conroe and Woodcrest all use Intel's new "Core Microarchitecture" (a bit confusing: Core Duo does _not_ use "Core Microarchitecture", it is basically an improved Pentium III. The Core 2 Duo chips use Core Microarchitecture).
All three chips produce the same performance at the same clockspeed. Cache size may make a difference, but the Conroe models starting at 2.4 GHz all have the large 4 MB cache. So a single 2.66 GHz Woodcrest will be substantially slower than a 2.93 GHz Conroe. Not that it matters; the 2.93 GHz Conroe is extremely overpriced and unlikely to be used in any Macintosh.
I personally would expect 2.0GHz Conroe, 2.66 GHz Conroe, 2 x 2 GHz Woodcrest and 2 x 2.66 GHz Woodcrest for a wide range from cheap to maximum performance.
BeefUK
Jul 27, 09:59 AM
Merom in a macbook is all I want, add in 2GB of RAM, and that'll do me. Although they'll be released in the MBP first............looks like more waiting for my first mac!!!:(
PLEASE PLEASE hurry, I wanna get rid of my PC. The case in like a wind turbine and the CRT monitor is like a heater!
PLEASE PLEASE hurry, I wanna get rid of my PC. The case in like a wind turbine and the CRT monitor is like a heater!
fatfish
Aug 7, 09:18 PM
I had hoped for the ability to link files and folders with contacts in my address book, I can only hope this is one of those top secret items.
I would also have liked some way of sharing my appointments in ical with the windows people I am meeting, to date ical will send them an email with an ical attachment, but they are unable to do anything with it.
Someone please tell me I can already do these things or that I have a chance of doing them in X.5
I would also have liked some way of sharing my appointments in ical with the windows people I am meeting, to date ical will send them an email with an ical attachment, but they are unable to do anything with it.
Someone please tell me I can already do these things or that I have a chance of doing them in X.5
gnasher729
Aug 17, 12:59 PM
The interesting thing to note from the Anandtech review is that to saturate a 2 core setup, all you need is one program. To saturate a quad, you need to be doing a bit more at the same time. To saturate an octo, you need to be doing a hell of a lot of things at the same time.
No, you only need software that doesn't think multiple processors = two processors. Early versions of Handbrake used only two processors, new version uses four. Photoshop will use as many processors as there are. Other applications will follow.
No, you only need software that doesn't think multiple processors = two processors. Early versions of Handbrake used only two processors, new version uses four. Photoshop will use as many processors as there are. Other applications will follow.
DStaal
Sep 13, 09:35 AM
It would be nice if 10.5 would allow a more 'blind' method to utilize these cores, versus having programmers specificly program for multi-core. Now that would be extremely helpful and allow a more simultanous workflow.
How much more 'blind' do you want it? All the programmer has to do at this point is use multiple threads. Even if they don't, multiple cores will be automatically used for system and other processes.
Splitting one thread so that it ran cocurent with itself is a recipie for massive trouble. Mac OS X is about as blind as any system out there for the programmer. There may be some more optimizations that the system could make in it's own handling of multiprocessing, but from a programmer's perspective it doesn't matter how many cores the system has. (Unless you really want it to.)
How much more 'blind' do you want it? All the programmer has to do at this point is use multiple threads. Even if they don't, multiple cores will be automatically used for system and other processes.
Splitting one thread so that it ran cocurent with itself is a recipie for massive trouble. Mac OS X is about as blind as any system out there for the programmer. There may be some more optimizations that the system could make in it's own handling of multiprocessing, but from a programmer's perspective it doesn't matter how many cores the system has. (Unless you really want it to.)
ctachme
Jul 27, 10:50 AM
MBPs the end of august? I START school in the end of august.
ughghghghghghg
Me too. I'm just going to hang onto my aging iBook G4 until they come out. I really would kick myself if I bought a MacBook Pro now so close to them being updated. I'm just hoping I can order soon, and then they will arrive at the end of August... just in time for school. *crosses fingers*
ughghghghghghg
Me too. I'm just going to hang onto my aging iBook G4 until they come out. I really would kick myself if I bought a MacBook Pro now so close to them being updated. I'm just hoping I can order soon, and then they will arrive at the end of August... just in time for school. *crosses fingers*
rdowns
Apr 27, 02:46 PM
Really guys? We're going to argue it may be a forgery now. :rolleyes:
mightymike107
Aug 26, 09:06 PM
when will the Apple retail stores reflect the changes to the product line?
-mike
-mike
Details Matter
Mar 31, 03:48 PM
Let the Apple fanboys begin patting each other on the back, and taking something and running wild with it.
By the end of this thread, it'll be impossible to decipher what the original story was about.
Ironic. You took the thread off-topic to complain about people taking the thread off-topic. Thanks for the giggle.
By the end of this thread, it'll be impossible to decipher what the original story was about.
Ironic. You took the thread off-topic to complain about people taking the thread off-topic. Thanks for the giggle.
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.
mcrain
Mar 22, 08:26 AM
Are you suggesting that Obama has gotten comparable treatment from the media as compared to Bush? The double standard is hilariously transparent... Obama justified, Bush not. Obama builds strong coalition, Bush doesn't. Obama trying to save people, Bush going after the oil. Obama savior, Bush satan.
The hypocrisy coming from the left in the media on this issue is palpable... all the talk about Obama's great coalition and how its a justifiable war.
Wait a second. Wait a second. You are trying to compare the media's portrayal of GWB over about SEVEN years, TWO wars, and HOW MANY lies to Libya and less then ONE WEEK. The Lybia thing has been going on for about a day or so. In the FIRST days of the Afghanistan war, did you hear ANY mainstream media criticizing GWB? In the FIRST days of the Iraq war, did you hear ANY mainstream media criticizing GWB? Democrats were falling all over themselves to support the President and the need to get those WMDs, which is why after almost 6 years, it was a defining issue of the presidential campaign. The candidates 5 years later were all explaining why they supported one war then, but not now after all the lies were exposed, or how they were against it all along. Not to mention Afghanistan after 7 years. There were a few, unlike now, where there are a lot.
This is THE FIRST WEEK of this thing, and NBC nightly news had their entire story about: criticism from congress; inability of white house to deal with that problem, partly because in Brazil; late involvement; involvement here but not in Somalia, Congo, etc..., risk that Ghaddafi would survive this and remain in power; lack of real Arab support and weak coalition; and fact that opposition is disorganized, poorly armed and leaderless, and probably won't be able to win without military support on the ground.
That's pretty hard reporting, and I'm very happy Congress is being critical. Almost everything Fivepoint, the GOP and the Democrats who are speaking out have said is a valid concern. They should have done this during week ONE of Afghanistan, and Iraq. I know I don't want another one of those.
(edit) Yesterday, NPR was talking about Candidate Obama vs. President Obama, and pointed out Candidate Obama's statements about ONLY CONGRESS CAN DECLARE WAR. They discussed, at length, prior presidents assumption of power, Obama's use of it and how guest couldn't imagine a new president opposed to a power like this giving it up. So, maybe you should watch some NBC, ABC, CBS and listen to some NPR. Mind you, in FPs defense, I spent 16 hours in the car since this all started, so I've probably heard every story...
If you actually want change, vote for Ron Paul, vote for fiscal responsibility, vote for small government and non intervention. Vote for the destruction bailouts, stimulus, subsidies, and all other forms of crony-capitalism. I can't imagine him being nominated to run for president by the GOP. Did you see that "ghostwritten" pamphlet put out by his campaign? I'm sure he never approved of it, but against the 1st black president? With a son who tripped all over the Civil Rights Act? I hope he mounts a third party campaign. With Palin as VP, or better yet, Palin as a fourth party candidate.
Oh yeah... and here's a fun little nugget for those who like to tout Obama's coalition: I know, I don't get it either. But, again this is the first week. The only ones "touting" are the white house, and it's already falling on deaf ears and criticism. Already!
The hypocrisy coming from the left in the media on this issue is palpable... all the talk about Obama's great coalition and how its a justifiable war.
Wait a second. Wait a second. You are trying to compare the media's portrayal of GWB over about SEVEN years, TWO wars, and HOW MANY lies to Libya and less then ONE WEEK. The Lybia thing has been going on for about a day or so. In the FIRST days of the Afghanistan war, did you hear ANY mainstream media criticizing GWB? In the FIRST days of the Iraq war, did you hear ANY mainstream media criticizing GWB? Democrats were falling all over themselves to support the President and the need to get those WMDs, which is why after almost 6 years, it was a defining issue of the presidential campaign. The candidates 5 years later were all explaining why they supported one war then, but not now after all the lies were exposed, or how they were against it all along. Not to mention Afghanistan after 7 years. There were a few, unlike now, where there are a lot.
This is THE FIRST WEEK of this thing, and NBC nightly news had their entire story about: criticism from congress; inability of white house to deal with that problem, partly because in Brazil; late involvement; involvement here but not in Somalia, Congo, etc..., risk that Ghaddafi would survive this and remain in power; lack of real Arab support and weak coalition; and fact that opposition is disorganized, poorly armed and leaderless, and probably won't be able to win without military support on the ground.
That's pretty hard reporting, and I'm very happy Congress is being critical. Almost everything Fivepoint, the GOP and the Democrats who are speaking out have said is a valid concern. They should have done this during week ONE of Afghanistan, and Iraq. I know I don't want another one of those.
(edit) Yesterday, NPR was talking about Candidate Obama vs. President Obama, and pointed out Candidate Obama's statements about ONLY CONGRESS CAN DECLARE WAR. They discussed, at length, prior presidents assumption of power, Obama's use of it and how guest couldn't imagine a new president opposed to a power like this giving it up. So, maybe you should watch some NBC, ABC, CBS and listen to some NPR. Mind you, in FPs defense, I spent 16 hours in the car since this all started, so I've probably heard every story...
If you actually want change, vote for Ron Paul, vote for fiscal responsibility, vote for small government and non intervention. Vote for the destruction bailouts, stimulus, subsidies, and all other forms of crony-capitalism. I can't imagine him being nominated to run for president by the GOP. Did you see that "ghostwritten" pamphlet put out by his campaign? I'm sure he never approved of it, but against the 1st black president? With a son who tripped all over the Civil Rights Act? I hope he mounts a third party campaign. With Palin as VP, or better yet, Palin as a fourth party candidate.
Oh yeah... and here's a fun little nugget for those who like to tout Obama's coalition: I know, I don't get it either. But, again this is the first week. The only ones "touting" are the white house, and it's already falling on deaf ears and criticism. Already!
xxBURT0Nxx
Apr 7, 09:26 AM
ok don't be as ass! back-lit keyboard on the 13' but not the 11' would be heartbreaking for those of us who wants the 11 and will make the decision making between the two even harder..
yes posting DREAM spec's for a machine that he really knows absolutely nothing about makes him an ass because it is not your dream spec sheet:confused: some people these days... smh:rolleyes:
yes posting DREAM spec's for a machine that he really knows absolutely nothing about makes him an ass because it is not your dream spec sheet:confused: some people these days... smh:rolleyes:
Dan==
Jul 27, 04:53 PM
Very nice, indeed... (of course, i expect that Apple release something much more beautiful than waht you did :D :p :D)
Thanks, and yes, me too. I just hope they do something to fill that headless hole between the mini and pro. And I hope the innards are more accessible than the mini.
Thanks, and yes, me too. I just hope they do something to fill that headless hole between the mini and pro. And I hope the innards are more accessible than the mini.
skunk
Mar 22, 07:30 PM
Don't tell me a flagship armed with 100 Tomahawk missiles and full targeting information just happened to be passing.
EagerDragon
Aug 25, 06:38 PM
When I read a lot of posts where people complain about Apple service, it seems that it is offten from non-US. Is this my imagination or does Apple need to kick the Arse of their international support groups?
:D
:D
J-R-P
Apr 10, 09:19 AM
It is Gretzky not Gretsky.
NJRonbo
Jun 14, 11:40 AM
BTW...
Quick question...
How does Radio Shack know what your upgrade
price will be?
I mean, I know already I am not eligible for a
discount and will have to pay $399 or $499.
Does Radio Shack have access to your AT&T
account to determine your upgrade price?
Quick question...
How does Radio Shack know what your upgrade
price will be?
I mean, I know already I am not eligible for a
discount and will have to pay $399 or $499.
Does Radio Shack have access to your AT&T
account to determine your upgrade price?
clockworksaulo
Jun 8, 07:40 PM
That's me!
Nearest Apple Store is 90 minutes away. Nearest Authorized AT&T store that would carry the iPhone is like 60. Radio shack is just 10 minutes.
I'm wondering though, what would be the advantages/disadvantages to buying it at Radio Shack vs AT&T vs The Apple Store? Once I have the item purchased, will I notice any sort of difference what-so-ever?
Cheers.
I used to work at radioshack too and the resources there suck. Activation will take longer than usual and they can mess up your account/credit. I hated activating phones cause it was a hassle since we were not connected directly with carriers.
I bought my 3Gs from ATT store and my girlfriends at Apple Store. Mine began freezing within the first 15 days. Went to ATT and they gave me so much trouble when trying to exchange it. They ended up not wanting to exchange it for me and said they don't take returns on iPhones, when it says the customer has a 30 day (BY LAW) return policy. SO then i went to apple store, even though i bought it from ATT, they quickly opened up a new one and gave me a brand new one, no questions asked (just their standard serial number checks). Went to get 3 more iphones for family plan at Apple, fast easy and great service. Point is ATT = no good and Apple = better.
Now for Radioshack. Brother-in-Law goes and his credit gets run twice by child who works at Radioshack and signs him up to expensive plan. So they have to call their 3rd party service provider and the manager there and employee make a big mess of his ATT account and turns out the phone they had was from a customer return, not even brand new. He ends up just getting bad credit after 4 hrs in the stuffy dusty shack. We go to apple next week, now he has to put deposit cause his credit was messed up but guess what? thats right apple waived it as they saw the mistake and he gets a brand new phone. :) Radioshack = worse place to get any phone Apple = smart well trained employees
I just talked about these cases closest to me but I'll tell you those Radioshack employees are the worst to buy any cellphone from. you take a risk with your credit, used phone possibly, long activations, and bad locale. Radioshack is closest to me, then ATT, then Apple, then Best Buy and Walmart. I would take the long trip to apple before i try the first two stores. And if your other options are real far away i would recommend just ordering it on apple's website direct. Shipping is free and you know what plan youre adding. I've heard good stuff about BestBuy and dont have a clue how Walmart goes, just know RADIOSHACK IS THE WORSE, unless of course they get it right and phone works without a flaw the first 30days.
Nearest Apple Store is 90 minutes away. Nearest Authorized AT&T store that would carry the iPhone is like 60. Radio shack is just 10 minutes.
I'm wondering though, what would be the advantages/disadvantages to buying it at Radio Shack vs AT&T vs The Apple Store? Once I have the item purchased, will I notice any sort of difference what-so-ever?
Cheers.
I used to work at radioshack too and the resources there suck. Activation will take longer than usual and they can mess up your account/credit. I hated activating phones cause it was a hassle since we were not connected directly with carriers.
I bought my 3Gs from ATT store and my girlfriends at Apple Store. Mine began freezing within the first 15 days. Went to ATT and they gave me so much trouble when trying to exchange it. They ended up not wanting to exchange it for me and said they don't take returns on iPhones, when it says the customer has a 30 day (BY LAW) return policy. SO then i went to apple store, even though i bought it from ATT, they quickly opened up a new one and gave me a brand new one, no questions asked (just their standard serial number checks). Went to get 3 more iphones for family plan at Apple, fast easy and great service. Point is ATT = no good and Apple = better.
Now for Radioshack. Brother-in-Law goes and his credit gets run twice by child who works at Radioshack and signs him up to expensive plan. So they have to call their 3rd party service provider and the manager there and employee make a big mess of his ATT account and turns out the phone they had was from a customer return, not even brand new. He ends up just getting bad credit after 4 hrs in the stuffy dusty shack. We go to apple next week, now he has to put deposit cause his credit was messed up but guess what? thats right apple waived it as they saw the mistake and he gets a brand new phone. :) Radioshack = worse place to get any phone Apple = smart well trained employees
I just talked about these cases closest to me but I'll tell you those Radioshack employees are the worst to buy any cellphone from. you take a risk with your credit, used phone possibly, long activations, and bad locale. Radioshack is closest to me, then ATT, then Apple, then Best Buy and Walmart. I would take the long trip to apple before i try the first two stores. And if your other options are real far away i would recommend just ordering it on apple's website direct. Shipping is free and you know what plan youre adding. I've heard good stuff about BestBuy and dont have a clue how Walmart goes, just know RADIOSHACK IS THE WORSE, unless of course they get it right and phone works without a flaw the first 30days.
treblah
Aug 5, 03:40 PM
Displays?
Lord Blackadder
Mar 22, 10:19 PM
The U.N. Security Council perhaps, but not the entire assembly. It would have been interesting to open that issue up to debate and seen how all the members would have voted.
The security council, not the general assembly, is the organ tasked with authorizing UN military action. The point of the security council is to enable the UN to make rapid strategic decisions without a general debate. It's an imperfect system to be sure, but I don't think requiring a full debate in the general assembly would be an efficient way to respond to this sort of situation.
What I always wonder is what diplomatic efforts were used to pressure Qaddafi? There were no (as far as I know) threats of economic embargoes, freezing of assets, or other less violent methods to coerce Qaddafi. We didn't need to convince him to step dow. We simply needed to convince him that he needed to tone down, defend himself against the armed insurrection, but not cast a wider and violent campaign against innocent civilians.
We could have responded simply with economic sanctions.
Based on Gaddafi's treatment of the initial protests (not to mention his tendencies over 40 years of autocratic rule), I strongly question whether economic sanctions are going to apply sufficient pressure to Gaddafi to relinquish power. Like Mubarak, he is a political strongman who is not easily cowed by threats.
I need a clearer demonstration that serious steps were taken before resorting to war. War should be used as the last resort and only when it's clear that all other options have failed.
I agree that war should be considered a last resort. I also think that the US government is generally too quick to undertake armed intervention. But in this case we took sides in a war that was already in progress. The UN's choices were either non-intervention, non-military intervention, or direct military intervention in some form.
I suppose the point at which "all other options have failed" is a debatable one, since everyone has different opinions on what constitutes a valid option. There are many questions without simple answers. How do we judge failure? Is the purpose of the intervention (military or otherwise) to aid the rebels? Or is it merely to prevent Gaddafi killing civilians? If the latter is the case, does allowing him to remain in power serve that cause? If not, what should we do about it?
At the bottom of all this though, the goal of current foreign intervention (military or otherwise) is clear to me - to remove Gaddafi from power and recognize the rebel transitional government as the legitimate government of Libya.
The security council, not the general assembly, is the organ tasked with authorizing UN military action. The point of the security council is to enable the UN to make rapid strategic decisions without a general debate. It's an imperfect system to be sure, but I don't think requiring a full debate in the general assembly would be an efficient way to respond to this sort of situation.
What I always wonder is what diplomatic efforts were used to pressure Qaddafi? There were no (as far as I know) threats of economic embargoes, freezing of assets, or other less violent methods to coerce Qaddafi. We didn't need to convince him to step dow. We simply needed to convince him that he needed to tone down, defend himself against the armed insurrection, but not cast a wider and violent campaign against innocent civilians.
We could have responded simply with economic sanctions.
Based on Gaddafi's treatment of the initial protests (not to mention his tendencies over 40 years of autocratic rule), I strongly question whether economic sanctions are going to apply sufficient pressure to Gaddafi to relinquish power. Like Mubarak, he is a political strongman who is not easily cowed by threats.
I need a clearer demonstration that serious steps were taken before resorting to war. War should be used as the last resort and only when it's clear that all other options have failed.
I agree that war should be considered a last resort. I also think that the US government is generally too quick to undertake armed intervention. But in this case we took sides in a war that was already in progress. The UN's choices were either non-intervention, non-military intervention, or direct military intervention in some form.
I suppose the point at which "all other options have failed" is a debatable one, since everyone has different opinions on what constitutes a valid option. There are many questions without simple answers. How do we judge failure? Is the purpose of the intervention (military or otherwise) to aid the rebels? Or is it merely to prevent Gaddafi killing civilians? If the latter is the case, does allowing him to remain in power serve that cause? If not, what should we do about it?
At the bottom of all this though, the goal of current foreign intervention (military or otherwise) is clear to me - to remove Gaddafi from power and recognize the rebel transitional government as the legitimate government of Libya.
Consultant
Mar 22, 01:46 PM
It won�t sell because the iPad lines will block the view in store.
Exactly. And that the overpriced 7" RIM playbook basically tried to emulate the Samsung tab.
Exactly. And that the overpriced 7" RIM playbook basically tried to emulate the Samsung tab.
Full of Win
Mar 22, 01:29 PM
Lack of Flash support is the achilles heel of iPad. I hope Jobs gets off his high horse and relents.
Don't hold your breath. There are many words that one can use to describe Steve Jobs, contrite or compromising not being one of them.
Don't hold your breath. There are many words that one can use to describe Steve Jobs, contrite or compromising not being one of them.
No comments:
Post a Comment