HyperZboy
Apr 8, 01:22 AM
I also don't think brick and mortar stores are dying, just certain types that are easy to purchase same product online like movies, toys, known products that don't need to be checked out.
The average person buying a computer is still not that computer bright like the average Macrumors member.
And there will always be people looking to check out and play with new technology in person.
When Amazon can pull that rabbit out of a hat then I'll admit brick & mortar is done. So far brick and mortar is only done for content sales which can be checked out online and various new ways.
I don't think anybody's going to be buying a lawn tractor or big screen TV on Amazon anytime soon.
Hell, even my success rate buying computers on Ebay has always been sketchy even. About 30% of the time, the items showed up damaged in shipping due to poor packaging. That's why I believe most general consumers will always go brick and mortar for more expensive things that could easily be damaged in shipping.
The average person buying a computer is still not that computer bright like the average Macrumors member.
And there will always be people looking to check out and play with new technology in person.
When Amazon can pull that rabbit out of a hat then I'll admit brick & mortar is done. So far brick and mortar is only done for content sales which can be checked out online and various new ways.
I don't think anybody's going to be buying a lawn tractor or big screen TV on Amazon anytime soon.
Hell, even my success rate buying computers on Ebay has always been sketchy even. About 30% of the time, the items showed up damaged in shipping due to poor packaging. That's why I believe most general consumers will always go brick and mortar for more expensive things that could easily be damaged in shipping.
Silentwave
Aug 26, 04:48 PM
You're screwing up, intel. We don't want 300 trillion transistors on a 1 nm die. We want longer battery life. Idiots.
But there's no die size change here....
and doesn't transitioning to a smaller process usually mean improvements in that department anyways?
Next die change is the 45nm Intel Core Microarchitecture "Penryn" core for mobile- mid-2007 or thereabouts.
But there's no die size change here....
and doesn't transitioning to a smaller process usually mean improvements in that department anyways?
Next die change is the 45nm Intel Core Microarchitecture "Penryn" core for mobile- mid-2007 or thereabouts.
icookbook
Aug 7, 06:02 PM
So, the time machine will allow you to selectively restore files which have been deleted, yet as of present the trash can will not allow you to selectively undelete a file?
Might as well just delete the file, then restore it with the time machine!!!!
... I have a feeling the trash can may see some changes, ha
Might as well just delete the file, then restore it with the time machine!!!!
... I have a feeling the trash can may see some changes, ha
nicroma
Apr 27, 08:38 AM
Since I'm neither a criminal nor paranoid, I thought it was kind of cool/interesting too.
For myself, it was interesting to find that there were many locations that were WAY off. A good majority were up to 100 miles off, just as Apple has said. None of the locations mapped would let anyone pinpoint where my house or work actually are because they were so inaccurate.
For myself, it was interesting to find that there were many locations that were WAY off. A good majority were up to 100 miles off, just as Apple has said. None of the locations mapped would let anyone pinpoint where my house or work actually are because they were so inaccurate.
M-Life
Apr 7, 11:12 PM
Doesn't really matter, Best Buy is going the way of Blockbuster and Borders anyway. They will be gone within a few years, once all their media turns digital.
Durendal
Apr 5, 07:16 PM
YES!!! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eyqUj3PGHv4)
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgEKQmiY78WU_r9yd8lM1v2c6pwvxrQsUjGRNAP7MiZ44NadFAIrhvHtyMaaJiN7-VXEnlxMgdlG7qASvea6yRGSQQLuT4-Dj_z7vlpjGT_RcHPzQVdthOk9x9tzVi-dToWEv1Dke2EukTU/s400/wtf.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgEKQmiY78WU_r9yd8lM1v2c6pwvxrQsUjGRNAP7MiZ44NadFAIrhvHtyMaaJiN7-VXEnlxMgdlG7qASvea6yRGSQQLuT4-Dj_z7vlpjGT_RcHPzQVdthOk9x9tzVi-dToWEv1Dke2EukTU/s400/wtf.jpg
ppnkg
Jul 27, 07:07 PM
With those frequent speed bumps I begin to worry that my G5 imac will not be fast enough to run Leopard...
.jpg "singer Christina Aguilera,")
zero2dash
Sep 18, 01:44 PM
Plenty of people ran NT on their desktops.
Admission of your mistakes is a good step in becoming a better person.
Key word being DESKTOPS.
MP machines were server based long before they were included in desktops. I'd like to see where people had dual Xeon based DESKTOPS 'cause I've never seen it. It's not impossible but it's also not a good cost-based answer either. :p
The server/desktop division with Windows - as with OS X - is one of marketing, not software. Windows "Workstation" and Windows "Server" use the same codebase.
I never said otherwise.
The hardware they run on is where it differentiates.
Most people/corporations run server-based OS on servers and workstation-based OS on desktops (or "workstations" in the business world). It's not impossible to run a server OS on a desktop or a workstation OS on a server but it is incredibly stupid.
Well, if you can't find evidence of Windows running on well on machine with >2 processors, or of the significant low-level changes Microsoft have made to ensure it does, you aren't looking very hard.
Bad dual core support? Citations please. I think this is a case where a Mac fan is simply speaking out of ignorance of their "enemy" platform.
I erronously bundled in "dual core" with "sketchy 64-bit support". Don't know why. From what I hear, 64-bit support in XP64 is sketchy because of device driver issues (and drivers not being natively 64-bit). I don't have any true 'dual core' systems myself but my P4 3.0C HT works fine in XP Pro. I apologize for lumping in "dual core" in.
Similarly, if you're one of the "Vista is just XP with a fancy skin" crowd, you've obviously not done much research. The changes in Vista are on par with the scale of changes Apple made to NeXT to get OS X.
User Account Protection is a big change. I've seen the list of "new features" and it doesn't do anything for me. UAP is nice...it's just really late. I'm sure there's changes "under the hood" like the ones implemented in XP sp2 to prevent buffer/stack overflows, etc. and I'm sure that's what you're referring to.
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.
So - are you inferring that Windows 2000 or Windows XP never blue screen? Because (if you are) that's a load of crap. I've seen blue screens in both OS's. Granted it's usually tied to hardware only, but it still happens. I've had an external USB drive blue screen in XP every time I turned it on, tried on 3 XP computers. Hardware fault, no doubt. Lately my HP Laptop dvd drive has been causing XP Pro to blue screen every other time I insert a dvd-r. Again - hardware fault.
Otherwise are both OS's stable? Damn straight. But problems do occur and I hope you're not suggesting otherwise. No OS is without its flaws.
Admission of your mistakes is a good step in becoming a better person.
Key word being DESKTOPS.
MP machines were server based long before they were included in desktops. I'd like to see where people had dual Xeon based DESKTOPS 'cause I've never seen it. It's not impossible but it's also not a good cost-based answer either. :p
The server/desktop division with Windows - as with OS X - is one of marketing, not software. Windows "Workstation" and Windows "Server" use the same codebase.
I never said otherwise.
The hardware they run on is where it differentiates.
Most people/corporations run server-based OS on servers and workstation-based OS on desktops (or "workstations" in the business world). It's not impossible to run a server OS on a desktop or a workstation OS on a server but it is incredibly stupid.
Well, if you can't find evidence of Windows running on well on machine with >2 processors, or of the significant low-level changes Microsoft have made to ensure it does, you aren't looking very hard.
Bad dual core support? Citations please. I think this is a case where a Mac fan is simply speaking out of ignorance of their "enemy" platform.
I erronously bundled in "dual core" with "sketchy 64-bit support". Don't know why. From what I hear, 64-bit support in XP64 is sketchy because of device driver issues (and drivers not being natively 64-bit). I don't have any true 'dual core' systems myself but my P4 3.0C HT works fine in XP Pro. I apologize for lumping in "dual core" in.
Similarly, if you're one of the "Vista is just XP with a fancy skin" crowd, you've obviously not done much research. The changes in Vista are on par with the scale of changes Apple made to NeXT to get OS X.
User Account Protection is a big change. I've seen the list of "new features" and it doesn't do anything for me. UAP is nice...it's just really late. I'm sure there's changes "under the hood" like the ones implemented in XP sp2 to prevent buffer/stack overflows, etc. and I'm sure that's what you're referring to.
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.
So - are you inferring that Windows 2000 or Windows XP never blue screen? Because (if you are) that's a load of crap. I've seen blue screens in both OS's. Granted it's usually tied to hardware only, but it still happens. I've had an external USB drive blue screen in XP every time I turned it on, tried on 3 XP computers. Hardware fault, no doubt. Lately my HP Laptop dvd drive has been causing XP Pro to blue screen every other time I insert a dvd-r. Again - hardware fault.
Otherwise are both OS's stable? Damn straight. But problems do occur and I hope you're not suggesting otherwise. No OS is without its flaws.
faroZ06
Apr 8, 12:53 AM
I am in the Geek Squad at a Best Buy, and at least at my store there is no such thing happening, nor have we ever been instructed to tell a customer that we don't have a certain product, unless it's unreleased such as new movies etc,,, but once something is released, if we have it we sell it.
I agree, this rumor is sketchy. It looks like they have one unreliable source. Still, I don't see why BB is good for Apple stuff unless the Apple store is too crowded.
I agree, this rumor is sketchy. It looks like they have one unreliable source. Still, I don't see why BB is good for Apple stuff unless the Apple store is too crowded.
whatever
Sep 13, 12:41 PM
All the people that just coughed up $3k for a quad core MacPro.
I'm one of those people who dropped $4K for a quad core MacPro and basically I'm happy that I did. It blows away everything else that is out there today and will be the top performing Mac until 2007. Apple will not be releasing an upgrade to the Mac Pro this year. No matter what anyone says.
Why you might ask, well they don't need to!
But what if the competition releases these super fast machines, won't Apple be left behind. No! What OS will these machines be running, Windows XP. One of the things that seperates Apple from everyone else is their OS. They have an OS which takes full advantage (important word is full) of the hardware. It's the big advantage that they have over Dell and HP, they create the software that runs on the computer.
So if I want to run Final Cut Pro as fast as possible on an optiomized machine, then I'll have to run it on a Mac. Alright, that's a bad example, but in a way it's not, because a lot of the people buying Mac Pros also live in Apple's Pro apps.
The next new computer we'll see from Apple anytime soon will be the MacBook Pro which will be redesigned (featuring the MacBook's keyboard), upgrades to the MacBook won't happen until January (however Apple may try to get them out in December).
Apple's goal is to have everything 64-Bit before Leopard is uncaged.
I'm one of those people who dropped $4K for a quad core MacPro and basically I'm happy that I did. It blows away everything else that is out there today and will be the top performing Mac until 2007. Apple will not be releasing an upgrade to the Mac Pro this year. No matter what anyone says.
Why you might ask, well they don't need to!
But what if the competition releases these super fast machines, won't Apple be left behind. No! What OS will these machines be running, Windows XP. One of the things that seperates Apple from everyone else is their OS. They have an OS which takes full advantage (important word is full) of the hardware. It's the big advantage that they have over Dell and HP, they create the software that runs on the computer.
So if I want to run Final Cut Pro as fast as possible on an optiomized machine, then I'll have to run it on a Mac. Alright, that's a bad example, but in a way it's not, because a lot of the people buying Mac Pros also live in Apple's Pro apps.
The next new computer we'll see from Apple anytime soon will be the MacBook Pro which will be redesigned (featuring the MacBook's keyboard), upgrades to the MacBook won't happen until January (however Apple may try to get them out in December).
Apple's goal is to have everything 64-Bit before Leopard is uncaged.
SevenInchScrew
Sep 1, 09:50 AM
So i'm wondering, if the standard cars are indeed copy/pasted from GT4, then what about the new standard cars they will be adding (like updated models from the past 5 years)? Obviously the ps3 can handle higher poly models, so surely they wouldn't build new models then scale them down to match gt4... That would be idiotic.
As I understand it, all of the Standard� cars are using the models from GT4 and GT PSP. The models used in those 2 games are basically the same. GT PSP had well over 800 cars itself, and came out just last year, so it has quite a few newer models. So, subtract a few from the lists of those 2 games for the cars that have been updated to Premium� status, and you could still have well over 800 Standard� cars, as they say it will have. To me, that seems like the most likely solution that they've done.
As I understand it, all of the Standard� cars are using the models from GT4 and GT PSP. The models used in those 2 games are basically the same. GT PSP had well over 800 cars itself, and came out just last year, so it has quite a few newer models. So, subtract a few from the lists of those 2 games for the cars that have been updated to Premium� status, and you could still have well over 800 Standard� cars, as they say it will have. To me, that seems like the most likely solution that they've done.
tortoise
Aug 22, 05:19 PM
The next Xeon is Clovertown, which is just Woodcrest scaled to 4 cores with a few changes in clock and FSB etc. Tigerton comes next, also 4 cores but MP capable (3+ chips possible) and with a possibility of increased FSB speed, bigger L2 cache and so on.
This will likely suck, because the interconnect Intel is using is just too damn slow. Putting four cores in the same package will just make the situation worse, because a lot of applications are significantly limited by memory performance.
The Woodcrest processors have been put through their paces pretty well on the supercomputing lists, and their Achille's heal is the memory subsystem. Current generation AMD Opterons still clearly outscale Woodcrest in real-world memory bandwidth with only two cores. Unless Intel pulls a rabbit out of their hat with their memory architecture issues when the quad core is released, AMDs quad core is going to embarrass them because of the memory bottleneck. And AMD is already starting to work on upgrading their already markedly superior memory architecture.
This will likely suck, because the interconnect Intel is using is just too damn slow. Putting four cores in the same package will just make the situation worse, because a lot of applications are significantly limited by memory performance.
The Woodcrest processors have been put through their paces pretty well on the supercomputing lists, and their Achille's heal is the memory subsystem. Current generation AMD Opterons still clearly outscale Woodcrest in real-world memory bandwidth with only two cores. Unless Intel pulls a rabbit out of their hat with their memory architecture issues when the quad core is released, AMDs quad core is going to embarrass them because of the memory bottleneck. And AMD is already starting to work on upgrading their already markedly superior memory architecture.
DocNo
Apr 11, 10:18 AM
Uh, iMovie was botched?
To people who resist change - which is pretty much everyone, myself included -just to varying degrees depending on how much it affects me.
The initial reaction will be negative - what a shocker! The key will be that if Apple does nail the new paradigm and it makes sense, the anger, shock and grief will be displaced with enthusiasm and acceptance. There is nothing new here, it's human nature in motion.
They key is for Apple getting it right. They have a pretty good track record (not perfect, mind you) of anticipating and getting things right.
And even if you hate every single decision Apple has made, you still can't deny that we all benefit since they are pretty much the only entity pushing any significant innovation - and they have been the primary pusher for some time now.
To people who resist change - which is pretty much everyone, myself included -just to varying degrees depending on how much it affects me.
The initial reaction will be negative - what a shocker! The key will be that if Apple does nail the new paradigm and it makes sense, the anger, shock and grief will be displaced with enthusiasm and acceptance. There is nothing new here, it's human nature in motion.
They key is for Apple getting it right. They have a pretty good track record (not perfect, mind you) of anticipating and getting things right.
And even if you hate every single decision Apple has made, you still can't deny that we all benefit since they are pretty much the only entity pushing any significant innovation - and they have been the primary pusher for some time now.
citizenzen
Mar 23, 03:03 PM
"Lying" implies intent. Are you accusing them of lying, or getting it wrong?
OMG. They definitely lied.
Just like Clinton.
They looked right into the camera and lied to the world.
Only their lies had more at stake than some blowjobs.
OMG. They definitely lied.
Just like Clinton.
They looked right into the camera and lied to the world.
Only their lies had more at stake than some blowjobs.
Evangelion
Aug 12, 03:51 AM
Is it possible for Apple to release a phone sold in their stores that would work on all networks? Or have several versions of the phone that will work for Verizon, Cingular...
I'll never be ceased at just how retarded the phone-system is outside Finland (or Scandinavia). I just buy a phone, and I get a SIM-card, and boom, it just works. I can replace the SIM at will, and it will just work. No hassle, no worries that "but this phone wotn work with that operator!". Unsatisfied with your current operator? It takes maybe ten minutes to get a new operator, and you get to keep your old number, AND your phone (it is YOUR phone, after all!).
I think that the scheme where the phones are tied to certain operator is just plain retarded. This is a perfect example as to why that is so. And I'm REALLY surprised that you folks (the rest of the world that is) hasn't seen the light on this issue. You just happily accept a scheme that limits choice and competition.
I'll never be ceased at just how retarded the phone-system is outside Finland (or Scandinavia). I just buy a phone, and I get a SIM-card, and boom, it just works. I can replace the SIM at will, and it will just work. No hassle, no worries that "but this phone wotn work with that operator!". Unsatisfied with your current operator? It takes maybe ten minutes to get a new operator, and you get to keep your old number, AND your phone (it is YOUR phone, after all!).
I think that the scheme where the phones are tied to certain operator is just plain retarded. This is a perfect example as to why that is so. And I'm REALLY surprised that you folks (the rest of the world that is) hasn't seen the light on this issue. You just happily accept a scheme that limits choice and competition.
jeanlain
Apr 12, 12:10 PM
You open it from Compressor, in the top right corner. Then, if you have a cluster (set up in Qmaster) it will show on top of "Your computer"
Here you can monitor your render progress and see how many cores are used.
See attached screen shot
I have not set up a cluster, so I only see "my computer" in the list.
Here you can monitor your render progress and see how many cores are used.
See attached screen shot
I have not set up a cluster, so I only see "my computer" in the list.
Silentwave
Jul 14, 04:54 PM
ONLY DDR2-667?!? :confused:
Come on Apple, you'd BETTER use DDR2-800 or I'll be pissed! :mad:
Actually I'm surprised Aidenshaw didn't pick up on this.
The specs provided are
CLEARLY FAKE!
You'd think they'd at least get the RAM right.
Woodcrest requires the use of FB-DIMM (fully-buffered DIMM) RAM, dual channel, available at 533 or 667mhz speeds. ECC built in. Though technically this is using DDR2 chips, it is referenced as a distinct type, including in Intel's publications. It does not use plain DDR like the low end spec posted in the article (and will transition to DDR3 as those become available).
(edit: toned down the sizes, they were hurting my eyes :) )
Come on Apple, you'd BETTER use DDR2-800 or I'll be pissed! :mad:
Actually I'm surprised Aidenshaw didn't pick up on this.
The specs provided are
CLEARLY FAKE!
You'd think they'd at least get the RAM right.
Woodcrest requires the use of FB-DIMM (fully-buffered DIMM) RAM, dual channel, available at 533 or 667mhz speeds. ECC built in. Though technically this is using DDR2 chips, it is referenced as a distinct type, including in Intel's publications. It does not use plain DDR like the low end spec posted in the article (and will transition to DDR3 as those become available).
(edit: toned down the sizes, they were hurting my eyes :) )
East
Jun 15, 03:03 PM
I went to my radio shack i was the only one to come in and pre order it but i didn't get a pin but they took my name down and said they would get them in Thursday but want sell them til Friday and that they would call me
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... :)
domness
Apr 25, 02:14 PM
I think this IS a privacy issue. That data could end up in the wrong hands. Does anyone store a text document on their iPhone with a list of their bank details and passwords? No, because it could end up in the wrong hands. So could this data that's being collected.
This data shouldn't be recorded without permission, no matter what's being done with it.
Location data == bank details and passwords? -- I think not.
This data shouldn't be recorded without permission, no matter what's being done with it.
Location data == bank details and passwords? -- I think not.
BaldiMac
Mar 22, 02:52 PM
I wasn't thinking straight, big deal.
And Thankfully I'm more successful in life than you'll ever be. Thanks.
I guess that's as close to an apology as one can expect on this forum.
And Thankfully I'm more successful in life than you'll ever be. Thanks.
I guess that's as close to an apology as one can expect on this forum.
TripHop
Jun 18, 06:30 AM
He said they gave up and that corporate is just going to send out whatever allocation next week not based on any PIN numbers since most stores give-up trying to get them. :rolleyes:
NJRonbo
Jun 14, 07:50 PM
Puggles,
Exactly my plan.
Exactly my plan.
blackcrayon
Mar 22, 09:56 PM
Christ I am so sick of them taking fantastic hardware and absolutely ruining it by using proprietary file formats and frankenstein versions of Android. I do get a kick out of their 10.1" model being both thinner and lighter than the 9.7" Ipad2 though. That will undoubtedly have the apple apologists out en masse.
Yes 2 tenths of a millimeter thinner and 6 - 12 grams of weight difference... I'm sure the "apple apologists" are losing a lot of sleep over that one :rolleyes:
Yes 2 tenths of a millimeter thinner and 6 - 12 grams of weight difference... I'm sure the "apple apologists" are losing a lot of sleep over that one :rolleyes:
