thejadedmonkey
Jul 18, 09:03 AM
[Fast downloads] would only be viable via streaming, and that won't happen because you can't stream to an iPod.
Therefore, we can expect a big download. I imagine the movies will be the same quality as can be found currently in the store. . .
Not ture. Apple could do a movie stream per rental, and let the CPU capture and convert it into a high-res iPod playable file. This way, after an hour or so you'll have a file playable on your iPod's lower res screen, or you can choose to watch it on the computer with a higher quality right away.
Therefore, we can expect a big download. I imagine the movies will be the same quality as can be found currently in the store. . .
Not ture. Apple could do a movie stream per rental, and let the CPU capture and convert it into a high-res iPod playable file. This way, after an hour or so you'll have a file playable on your iPod's lower res screen, or you can choose to watch it on the computer with a higher quality right away.
AlphaDogg
Feb 20, 10:43 PM
now not to start a ppc vs intel flame war. but if it serves his purposes just fine why would he switch? for example my MDD works amazingly well and if it had a better graphics card it would be my main machine; why? because when you run software that is optimized for ppc (and most pro apps still are) they are blazing fast. as far as i can recall i could run fcp at a speed that rivaled my 13 mbp (before its gfx card died). anyway don't take this personally :P just pointing out a fact.
(if this starts a flame war i will seriously smack myself XD :p)
K. Flame war=over
(if this starts a flame war i will seriously smack myself XD :p)
K. Flame war=over
archer75
Sep 6, 10:03 AM
Not impressed. I could put a Core2duo in my mini myself. I want a better video card in the mini.
termite
Nov 15, 11:23 AM
My Wife and I each have a ton-o-spam to process, and leave our Mail.apps open all the time. Mail.app uses up a full core for a few minutes at a time (G5 2.0GHz). So occasionally the computer is fully loaded just from the suckiness of Mail.app. It's very distruptive to doing anything else on the computer -- watching videos becomes very pretty much impossible. The kids sometimes leave their Safaris pointed at some flashy website which, between the two kids, takes another half-core.
Eight cores makes me think seriously of upgrading.
Eight cores makes me think seriously of upgrading.
Fuzzputer
Jan 3, 02:10 PM
Hi,
I have had a look at Macrumor's buyers guide. Except for the MacBook that is even very new, everything else is apparently only half way through its life cycle. So it would really be surprising if something got updated. Is this even more of a reason to expect someting REALLY NEW??:eek:
I have had a look at Macrumor's buyers guide. Except for the MacBook that is even very new, everything else is apparently only half way through its life cycle. So it would really be surprising if something got updated. Is this even more of a reason to expect someting REALLY NEW??:eek:
Osarkon
Jan 9, 06:54 AM
*offtopic* where are you watching that at?
That would be BBC iPlayer. Wouldn't have thought that episode is still on it now though.
That would be BBC iPlayer. Wouldn't have thought that episode is still on it now though.
jeffu
Nov 29, 09:06 AM
you know, I'm trying to figure out why the Zune is so universally hated, and I can't.
And what's wrong with a larger screen that works in both landscape and portrait? I have a feeling that were the iPod to have gotten this functionality first everyone would be tripping over their credit cards to order one.
I dunno, just seems like everyone is getting overly excited on joining the "trash the zune" bandwagon that they aren't willing to give any credit where it's due.
I agree completely - yes the Zune has some issues and yes it's a bit too big right now and yes I love my Ipod - but I do think the competition is a good thing - the graphics on the Zune are really sweet! Come on, Apple is the graphics champ and looking at the menus for iPod compared to Zune it's easy to see Apple could and should be doing more.
Also the screen - great idea to have it rotate .
Like I said - still love the ipod, but would like to see some of these the enhancements roll over to the apple side.
And what's wrong with a larger screen that works in both landscape and portrait? I have a feeling that were the iPod to have gotten this functionality first everyone would be tripping over their credit cards to order one.
I dunno, just seems like everyone is getting overly excited on joining the "trash the zune" bandwagon that they aren't willing to give any credit where it's due.
I agree completely - yes the Zune has some issues and yes it's a bit too big right now and yes I love my Ipod - but I do think the competition is a good thing - the graphics on the Zune are really sweet! Come on, Apple is the graphics champ and looking at the menus for iPod compared to Zune it's easy to see Apple could and should be doing more.
Also the screen - great idea to have it rotate .
Like I said - still love the ipod, but would like to see some of these the enhancements roll over to the apple side.
iGav
Mar 4, 12:21 PM
Keeping weight down is all-important. Which is why I remain in love with the Lotus Elise. It proves that less weight fixes everything - better handling, acceleration, braking, fuel economy...of course in a hybrid, the battery pack is always the vexed question. Even the best batteries are still expensive and relatively heavy.
But even the Elise isn't immune, it's all relative of course, but it's gained roughly 170kg since the Series 1. :eek:
But along with aerodynamics... it's perhaps the most important factor in, as you say... handling, acceleration, braking, fuel economy... pretty much everything.
When you think how innovative a car like the Audi A2 was, I do find the lack of real progress over the last 12 years particularly sad. 10 years ago, the A2 was a sub 1000kg (sub 900kg in certain trim) proper 4 seater, its 3 cylinder TDI engine could easily achieve 70+mpg imp without even trying (according to Wiki 107.8 mpg & 140 mpg imp were also achieved).
The 1.2 TDI version emitted 81g/km CO2, featured Stop/Start, an Eco mode that disengaged the clutch when the accelerator was released to maximise free wheeling and was rated at 94mpg.
And this was 10 years ago...
In many ways, it's shameful today that we think that 60 or even 70mpg is somehow remarkable for a family car. :(
the Cruze diesel, which may be able to equal or exceed the new Jetta TDI's level of equipment, refinement and pricepoint.
But not the brand image... that could perhaps be the biggest stumbling block of all, it certainly is in Europe anyway.
Personally... I don't think GM have a clue, and that's one of the reasons why they got themselves into one almighty hell of a mess, and only time will tell if they can get themselves out of it. I'm still of the opinion that GM's decision to attempt to introduce Chevrolet into the European market will ultimately prove futile.
Here in the US, the sedan (saloon) is king, even on smaller cars like the Focus and Corolla. That is slowly beginning to change, but Americans still like three-box cars over hatchbacks. Personally I prefer hatchbacks and wagons, though larger cars still look good as sedans.
Have to say my preference is for saloons... occasionally an estate (particularly A4 & A6 allroads, also 159 Sportwagons, that sort of thing), hatches (the bigger ones anyway) & estates can/tend to be a little boomy in my experience. Saloons also often have better body rigidity too.
But even the Elise isn't immune, it's all relative of course, but it's gained roughly 170kg since the Series 1. :eek:
But along with aerodynamics... it's perhaps the most important factor in, as you say... handling, acceleration, braking, fuel economy... pretty much everything.
When you think how innovative a car like the Audi A2 was, I do find the lack of real progress over the last 12 years particularly sad. 10 years ago, the A2 was a sub 1000kg (sub 900kg in certain trim) proper 4 seater, its 3 cylinder TDI engine could easily achieve 70+mpg imp without even trying (according to Wiki 107.8 mpg & 140 mpg imp were also achieved).
The 1.2 TDI version emitted 81g/km CO2, featured Stop/Start, an Eco mode that disengaged the clutch when the accelerator was released to maximise free wheeling and was rated at 94mpg.
And this was 10 years ago...
In many ways, it's shameful today that we think that 60 or even 70mpg is somehow remarkable for a family car. :(
the Cruze diesel, which may be able to equal or exceed the new Jetta TDI's level of equipment, refinement and pricepoint.
But not the brand image... that could perhaps be the biggest stumbling block of all, it certainly is in Europe anyway.
Personally... I don't think GM have a clue, and that's one of the reasons why they got themselves into one almighty hell of a mess, and only time will tell if they can get themselves out of it. I'm still of the opinion that GM's decision to attempt to introduce Chevrolet into the European market will ultimately prove futile.
Here in the US, the sedan (saloon) is king, even on smaller cars like the Focus and Corolla. That is slowly beginning to change, but Americans still like three-box cars over hatchbacks. Personally I prefer hatchbacks and wagons, though larger cars still look good as sedans.
Have to say my preference is for saloons... occasionally an estate (particularly A4 & A6 allroads, also 159 Sportwagons, that sort of thing), hatches (the bigger ones anyway) & estates can/tend to be a little boomy in my experience. Saloons also often have better body rigidity too.
Baseline
Nov 15, 08:41 AM
seriously though, how hard is it to get a program to multi-thread? (if thats the right term; being a complete programming novice, i've no idea)
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.
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.
regandarcy
Apr 19, 11:06 AM
I can't wait! My G5 iMac has officially died and gone to that big computer desk in the sky. It served me well for 5 years, but it's over. Darn thang won't even turn on anymore. I hear the apple start up chime, but the screen stays black and then the iMac just shuts off. But even if I could fix it, it's so old it can't run the latest OSX or even play HD movies. Yup...it's time to buy a new iMac.
I'm hoping that the next update sees i7s across the line...even the 21.5" models. I expect thunderbolt too since the MacBook pros got it. Other things on my wish list would be for them to include that rumored flash start up drive as standard....but I'm not holding my breath. It would be great if the 21.5" model got the same ability as the 27" to be used as an external monitor. That way in 5 years or more when it becomes unable to run the latest software, you can still use it as a second monitor. :-)
I like the 27" features, it's just a tad too big. Actually the rumor about Apple adding a 24" size back to the iMac lineup would be PERFECT. But again...not gonna count on it.
I'm hoping that the next update sees i7s across the line...even the 21.5" models. I expect thunderbolt too since the MacBook pros got it. Other things on my wish list would be for them to include that rumored flash start up drive as standard....but I'm not holding my breath. It would be great if the 21.5" model got the same ability as the 27" to be used as an external monitor. That way in 5 years or more when it becomes unable to run the latest software, you can still use it as a second monitor. :-)
I like the 27" features, it's just a tad too big. Actually the rumor about Apple adding a 24" size back to the iMac lineup would be PERFECT. But again...not gonna count on it.
fr0
Aug 16, 11:43 AM
The Register has an article claiming that Apple Taiwan has come out and denied this claim.
Read it Here (http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/08/16/apple_denies_wireless_ipod_claim/)
Read it Here (http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/08/16/apple_denies_wireless_ipod_claim/)
NebulaClash
Sep 14, 10:37 AM
I think it's a fair question to ask as well. Since all phones have this issue to one degree or another, why is it Apple who got singled out? Because they are the mindshare leaders. If you are Greenpeace and you want to get publicity, call out Apple. If you are Consumer Reports and you want headlines, call out Apple.
When the iPhone 5 comes out, I guarantee there will be stories published about signal issues with it. It's now the standard playbook to use against Apple, and the media goes along with it.
I'm a Consumer Reports subscriber, but I know their tech coverage is spotty at best. Sometimes it's laughably wrong. And too many people take their word as gospel instead of just one more useful data point. Heh, it's funny but as this thread is developing I just got a subscriber email from them asking for a $26 donation to them so they can continue to buy the products they test. I'll pay them $26 because I believe in their non-advertiser supported model.
But I wish they would not feed the anti-Apple FUD playbook. Yes, Apple absolutely should be called out for a design flaw, one that they are going to fix, but let's not blow it out of proportion the way it was. And let's not be hypocritical and call out Apple while giving a pass to everyone else with similar issues. That's the problem I'm focusing on.
When the iPhone 5 comes out, I guarantee there will be stories published about signal issues with it. It's now the standard playbook to use against Apple, and the media goes along with it.
I'm a Consumer Reports subscriber, but I know their tech coverage is spotty at best. Sometimes it's laughably wrong. And too many people take their word as gospel instead of just one more useful data point. Heh, it's funny but as this thread is developing I just got a subscriber email from them asking for a $26 donation to them so they can continue to buy the products they test. I'll pay them $26 because I believe in their non-advertiser supported model.
But I wish they would not feed the anti-Apple FUD playbook. Yes, Apple absolutely should be called out for a design flaw, one that they are going to fix, but let's not blow it out of proportion the way it was. And let's not be hypocritical and call out Apple while giving a pass to everyone else with similar issues. That's the problem I'm focusing on.
Benguitar
Nov 23, 08:04 PM
you planning on treating them rough?
Not really, The reason I spent the money on Oakleys is because from what I've read and seen, Oakley's are tough and will last you years. But also if I travel and don't wish to wear them I want to put them somewhere where they will not be crushed, or drowned, or broken.
I'm also planning on going into the Coast Guard, So if/when I travel or etc, I want to take great care of my equipment & personal belongings.
uh...
that seems awful clunky as a container for a pair of sunglasses...
I got that size because it was the smallest water proof size, I also plan on getting another pair someday.
When I spend $200.00 on a pair of sunglasses, When they are not on my head, I want them put away.
Not really, The reason I spent the money on Oakleys is because from what I've read and seen, Oakley's are tough and will last you years. But also if I travel and don't wish to wear them I want to put them somewhere where they will not be crushed, or drowned, or broken.
I'm also planning on going into the Coast Guard, So if/when I travel or etc, I want to take great care of my equipment & personal belongings.
uh...
that seems awful clunky as a container for a pair of sunglasses...
I got that size because it was the smallest water proof size, I also plan on getting another pair someday.
When I spend $200.00 on a pair of sunglasses, When they are not on my head, I want them put away.
Ktulu
Jan 1, 07:07 PM
Thanks for the insight on the image everyone....You'd thinnk I would have just checked there first.:rolleyes:
puckhead193
Apr 12, 10:23 PM
Would like to see a demo as well as new Mac pros to go with it
vaderhater245
Mar 18, 03:21 PM
I think the E6750 is the cpu? maybe? PPD for my gt 260 is around 4-5k so your PPD sounds about right.
Glad you are here again, we need the points!!
My power was off for about an hour this am for some reason and I didn't get to folding again until now :(
E6750 is an older "65nm" core2duo, 2.66 stock. Good to hear about the ppd. Current info at the moment.
GPU: 548p project running at 5319.91 ppd.
CPU: 225p project running at 295.89 ppd.
Might be time to upgrade the cpu...
Glad you are here again, we need the points!!
My power was off for about an hour this am for some reason and I didn't get to folding again until now :(
E6750 is an older "65nm" core2duo, 2.66 stock. Good to hear about the ppd. Current info at the moment.
GPU: 548p project running at 5319.91 ppd.
CPU: 225p project running at 295.89 ppd.
Might be time to upgrade the cpu...
karsten
Mar 24, 01:18 PM
pleasegodpleasegodpleasegod
aswitcher
Aug 16, 05:24 PM
I really want wireless earphones and a bigger better def screen. I just dont think its goign to happen soon or be cheap.
I would prefer the mythical 7" screen mac that can work fine when closed and weighs less than a kilo...
I would prefer the mythical 7" screen mac that can work fine when closed and weighs less than a kilo...
liamkp
Sep 12, 09:29 AM
Does anybody know how it will fit in a last gen case?
Time Less
Mar 25, 03:41 PM
Can the new GPU even do 1080p?
i would think so since apple says the ipad 2 will output 1080p to a tv. only 720p for iphone 4.
i would think so since apple says the ipad 2 will output 1080p to a tv. only 720p for iphone 4.
G4DP
May 2, 05:12 PM
V-Tech OS anyone?
Shake it till it wobbles children.
Shake it till it wobbles children.
iJohnHenry
Mar 19, 05:49 PM
If we one day figure out how to do fusion, and make electric cars work or something, we wouldn't give a crap about which leader kills eachother there.
Haven't you heard?
Cold fusion is being suppressed, for now, just like the 100 mpg carburettor was. :)
:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
Haven't you heard?
Cold fusion is being suppressed, for now, just like the 100 mpg carburettor was. :)
:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
diamond.g
Mar 24, 01:59 PM
It has too seeing as Intel is pushing DRM protection into the physical CPU.
But the GPU still has to decode what was sent and put it on the screen, which is why I asked if the TB itself can do the encoding. If it can how much overhead will that add (again as it has to happen over the PCIe side)?
Or can you send graphics information over DP that still needs to be processed, ie raw frames?
But the GPU still has to decode what was sent and put it on the screen, which is why I asked if the TB itself can do the encoding. If it can how much overhead will that add (again as it has to happen over the PCIe side)?
Or can you send graphics information over DP that still needs to be processed, ie raw frames?
(marc)
Mar 20, 08:24 AM
I actually think having troops is better. "Firing missles and bombing" from great distances has a "disconnect" between people. When you have actual people fighting and even dying alongside you, both the citizens and the warriors appreciated it more and form more of a bond between people and cultures. It builds a "comraderee" of sorts and helps secure a pschological future between peoples....whereas, in this case, perhaps the only interaction we really have with Lybians is that the generals and politicians might go to meetings. Something the masses never experience for themselves.
After something like this is over without them actually "enduring victory and suffering" with Westerners hugging them, many Lybians will still think...oh yeah, those are the infidels that helped us get Quadafi with their big guns. :p
And even in the eyes of the opposition, it can have a negative effect in that you don't see them face to face when you kill them. It can be seen as a sign of "weakness" and "chickeness". This is what happened with Clinton shooting tomahawks at Bin Laden and then walking away brushing his hands. When you look in their eyes and shoot them, they know you mean business and respect and fear you as a warrior. Then they might think twice before they try to blow up your buildings when you're not looking. ;)
The jets and rockets are there to prevent Gaddafi from killing civilians, not to prevent Gaddafi from winning.
After something like this is over without them actually "enduring victory and suffering" with Westerners hugging them, many Lybians will still think...oh yeah, those are the infidels that helped us get Quadafi with their big guns. :p
And even in the eyes of the opposition, it can have a negative effect in that you don't see them face to face when you kill them. It can be seen as a sign of "weakness" and "chickeness". This is what happened with Clinton shooting tomahawks at Bin Laden and then walking away brushing his hands. When you look in their eyes and shoot them, they know you mean business and respect and fear you as a warrior. Then they might think twice before they try to blow up your buildings when you're not looking. ;)
The jets and rockets are there to prevent Gaddafi from killing civilians, not to prevent Gaddafi from winning.
No comments:
Post a Comment