leekohler
Apr 28, 04:28 PM
Well he's obviously American! Just look at him! ;)
Yeah, I wanna know why he is "obviously" born in the US, and Obama isn't/couldn't be.
Yeah, I wanna know why he is "obviously" born in the US, and Obama isn't/couldn't be.
silverblue3
Aug 25, 04:24 PM
Granted, there are problems with the mac hardware. but till date, I've found apple tech support excellent. They have always replaced my hardware with no questions asked. In fact, they replaced my whole LCD screen on my 3 year old powerbook just because of a white spot.
netdog
Aug 11, 02:51 PM
I really think the time is coming soon where any phone that does not have Wifi that is easy to switch on and off will be considered obsolete.
Funkymonk
Apr 19, 01:32 PM
I'm surprised to see iPhones have outsold iPod Touches by so much; I've never really considered the figures but just assumed that there would be way more iPod Touches around than iPhones.
why? iphones outselling itouches by so much makes sense to me.
why? iphones outselling itouches by so much makes sense to me.
relimw
Sep 13, 01:00 PM
A bit pointless given that no software utilises the extra cores yet. But nice to know, I guess.
Hehe, everybody else cited you, I suppose I will as well.
It's not that those cores won't be used. The average Joe user won't need them, it won't help you type letters any faster, and it'll do very little to help you websurf any faster (unless people keep putting bloat-ware browsers out there).
What it will help with, is people using HPC apps (BLAST comes to mind), or multi-threaded apps.
Hehe, everybody else cited you, I suppose I will as well.
It's not that those cores won't be used. The average Joe user won't need them, it won't help you type letters any faster, and it'll do very little to help you websurf any faster (unless people keep putting bloat-ware browsers out there).
What it will help with, is people using HPC apps (BLAST comes to mind), or multi-threaded apps.
nukiduz
Aug 7, 05:15 PM
From Vista Help:
"Previous versions of files and folders are copies that Windows automatically saves as part of a restore point. Any file or folder that was modified since the last restore point was made (usually 24 hours earlier) is saved and made available as a previous version. You can use previous versions of files to restore files that you accidentally modified or deleted, or that were damaged."
I can use this now but without childish animations. Simple right-click the folder and select "restore previous versions".
For me the Leopard preview was a big disappointment. No innovative features but silly Vista bashing all the time. Come on, Apple!
What about flash drives? Meta data organisation in Finder? Media streams over local networks? Better window management? Spaces is the next answere to the incomplete Dockbar-conception (Expos� was the first and Time Maschine is a next interface ornateness).
Preview and network-wide search in Spotlight? Who is copying here?
I can't believe that: but now Vista looks innovativ!
i completely agree. just hope that the top secret thing makes us think other way.
"Previous versions of files and folders are copies that Windows automatically saves as part of a restore point. Any file or folder that was modified since the last restore point was made (usually 24 hours earlier) is saved and made available as a previous version. You can use previous versions of files to restore files that you accidentally modified or deleted, or that were damaged."
I can use this now but without childish animations. Simple right-click the folder and select "restore previous versions".
For me the Leopard preview was a big disappointment. No innovative features but silly Vista bashing all the time. Come on, Apple!
What about flash drives? Meta data organisation in Finder? Media streams over local networks? Better window management? Spaces is the next answere to the incomplete Dockbar-conception (Expos� was the first and Time Maschine is a next interface ornateness).
Preview and network-wide search in Spotlight? Who is copying here?
I can't believe that: but now Vista looks innovativ!
i completely agree. just hope that the top secret thing makes us think other way.
ergle2
Sep 15, 12:50 PM
More pedantic details for those who are interested... :)
NT actually started as OS/2 3.0. Its lead architect was OS guru Dave Cutler, who is famous for architecting VMS for DEC, and naturally its design influenced NT. And the N-10 (Where "NT" comes from, "N" "T"en) Intel RISC processor was never intended to be a mainstream product; Dave Cutler insisted on the development team NOT using an X86 processor to make sure they would have no excuse to fall back on legacy code or thought. In fact, the N-10 build that was the default work environment for the team was never intended to leave the Microsoft campus. NT over its life has run on X86, DEC Alpha, MIPS, PowerPC, Itanium, and x64.
IBM and Microsoft worked together on OS/2 1.0 from 1985-1989. Much maligned, it did suck because it was targeted for the 286 not the 386, but it did break new ground -- preemptive multitasking and an advanced GUI (Presentation Manager). By 1989 they wanted to move on to something that would take advantage of the 386's 32-bit architecture, flat memory model, and virtual machine support. Simultaneously they started OS/2 2.0 (extend the current 16-bit code to a 16-32-bit hybrid) and OS/2 3.0 (a ground up, platform independent version). When Windows 3.0 took off in 1990, Microsoft had second thoughts and eventually broke with IBM. OS/2 3.0 became Windows NT -- in the first days of the split, NT still had OS/2 Presentation Manager APIs for it's GUI. They ripped it out and created Win32 APIs. That's also why to this day NT/2K/XP supported OS/2 command line applications, and there was also a little known GUI pack that would support OS/2 1.x GUI applications.
All very true, but beyond that -- if you've ever looked closely VMS and at NT, you'll notice, it's a lot more than just "influenced". The core design was pretty much identical -- the way I/O worked, its interrupt handling, the scheduler, and so on -- they're all practically carbon copies. Some of the names changed, but how things work under the hood hadn't. Since then it's evolved, of course, but you'd expect that.
Quite amusing, really... how a heavyweight enterprise-class OS of the 80's became the desktop of the 00's :)
Those that were around in the dim and distant will recall that VMS and Unix were two of the main competitors in many marketplaces in the 80's and early 90's... and today we have OS X, Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris, etc. vs XP, W2K3 Server and (soon) Vista -- kind of ironic, dontcha think? :)
Of course, there's a lot still running VMS to this very day. I don't think HP wants them to tho' -- they just sent all the support to India, apparently, to a team with relatively little experience...
NT actually started as OS/2 3.0. Its lead architect was OS guru Dave Cutler, who is famous for architecting VMS for DEC, and naturally its design influenced NT. And the N-10 (Where "NT" comes from, "N" "T"en) Intel RISC processor was never intended to be a mainstream product; Dave Cutler insisted on the development team NOT using an X86 processor to make sure they would have no excuse to fall back on legacy code or thought. In fact, the N-10 build that was the default work environment for the team was never intended to leave the Microsoft campus. NT over its life has run on X86, DEC Alpha, MIPS, PowerPC, Itanium, and x64.
IBM and Microsoft worked together on OS/2 1.0 from 1985-1989. Much maligned, it did suck because it was targeted for the 286 not the 386, but it did break new ground -- preemptive multitasking and an advanced GUI (Presentation Manager). By 1989 they wanted to move on to something that would take advantage of the 386's 32-bit architecture, flat memory model, and virtual machine support. Simultaneously they started OS/2 2.0 (extend the current 16-bit code to a 16-32-bit hybrid) and OS/2 3.0 (a ground up, platform independent version). When Windows 3.0 took off in 1990, Microsoft had second thoughts and eventually broke with IBM. OS/2 3.0 became Windows NT -- in the first days of the split, NT still had OS/2 Presentation Manager APIs for it's GUI. They ripped it out and created Win32 APIs. That's also why to this day NT/2K/XP supported OS/2 command line applications, and there was also a little known GUI pack that would support OS/2 1.x GUI applications.
All very true, but beyond that -- if you've ever looked closely VMS and at NT, you'll notice, it's a lot more than just "influenced". The core design was pretty much identical -- the way I/O worked, its interrupt handling, the scheduler, and so on -- they're all practically carbon copies. Some of the names changed, but how things work under the hood hadn't. Since then it's evolved, of course, but you'd expect that.
Quite amusing, really... how a heavyweight enterprise-class OS of the 80's became the desktop of the 00's :)
Those that were around in the dim and distant will recall that VMS and Unix were two of the main competitors in many marketplaces in the 80's and early 90's... and today we have OS X, Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris, etc. vs XP, W2K3 Server and (soon) Vista -- kind of ironic, dontcha think? :)
Of course, there's a lot still running VMS to this very day. I don't think HP wants them to tho' -- they just sent all the support to India, apparently, to a team with relatively little experience...
Multimedia
Jul 20, 04:50 PM
So We May Be Seeing A Very Short Life For What Steve Introduces August 7. If true, this looks like Steve may be able to claim an all Quad Core plus Oct Core on top Mac Pro line PLUS Quad Core iMacs at his annual SF MacWorld SteveNote January 9,2007 perhaps with Leopard on board as well. Wouldn't that be a Merry belated Christmas and a Happiest of New Years? :eek: :D :p :cool: ;) :)
freeny
Aug 11, 02:06 PM
If Apple pick a carrier, I hope is not Cingular. But from past situations, that's very likely.
All carriers suck in one way or another. If you are unhappy with one you just switch to another. There is a constant migration from carrier to carrier because of this...
The carriers dont give a crap if you leave them because there is always a group of unhappy consumers who hate the competitor and are ready to move to their service.
This is why it takes forever to cancell a cellular account, they will try as hard as possible to not let you or talk you out of it. Its their only ammunition. My wife and I spent 2 hours on the phone with Sprint last week trying to cancel our extra phone we usually give our nanny. They were giving the most rediculous excuses as to why we shoud keep it when we no longer had any use for it. They wouldnt take no for an answer. It wasnt until we threatend to cancel all three of our accounts that they "graciously" cancelled the account.
This is also why there are such high cancelation fees. apparently people are willing to pay hundreds of dollars to get away from any of the providers...
Bottom line; it doesnt matter what provider it would be, youll be screwed anyway.
All carriers suck in one way or another. If you are unhappy with one you just switch to another. There is a constant migration from carrier to carrier because of this...
The carriers dont give a crap if you leave them because there is always a group of unhappy consumers who hate the competitor and are ready to move to their service.
This is why it takes forever to cancell a cellular account, they will try as hard as possible to not let you or talk you out of it. Its their only ammunition. My wife and I spent 2 hours on the phone with Sprint last week trying to cancel our extra phone we usually give our nanny. They were giving the most rediculous excuses as to why we shoud keep it when we no longer had any use for it. They wouldnt take no for an answer. It wasnt until we threatend to cancel all three of our accounts that they "graciously" cancelled the account.
This is also why there are such high cancelation fees. apparently people are willing to pay hundreds of dollars to get away from any of the providers...
Bottom line; it doesnt matter what provider it would be, youll be screwed anyway.
EagerDragon
Aug 27, 03:08 PM
That is interesting because I ordered a Macbook on Tuesday (the 22nd) and mine is also scheduled to ship on the 31st. It is suspiciously strange and hopefully it means that we'll get Meroms because I was waiting for the Merom MBP when I decided to just order a Yonah MB.
Maybe, but remember that they are having a hard time filling the orders due to the large number of people buying the systems.
Apple needs to is not likely to upgrade the MacBooks before Jan. The MacBook pro likely Monday or Mid Sept.
Maybe, but remember that they are having a hard time filling the orders due to the large number of people buying the systems.
Apple needs to is not likely to upgrade the MacBooks before Jan. The MacBook pro likely Monday or Mid Sept.
Silentwave
Aug 26, 10:47 PM
This is interesting, BUT, from what I know, Intel announced the desktop (Conroe) Core 2 Duo proccessor on July 27, and as far as I know, no Conroe systems are shipping right now, almost a month later.
Dell has announced some Conroe systems that you can order, but as far as I know they aren't readily shipping yet.
I believe Intel has been having trouble getting the required chipsets out on time to the desktop market.
You can get the chips themselves without much trouble- the retail versions are available at Newegg for the 1.86, 2.13, 2.66, and 2.93 Extreme Core 2 Duo chips, with the sole out of stock chip being the 2.4GHz chip, with an estimated time of arrival being Sept. 1st at 2:30PM.
Dell has announced some Conroe systems that you can order, but as far as I know they aren't readily shipping yet.
I believe Intel has been having trouble getting the required chipsets out on time to the desktop market.
You can get the chips themselves without much trouble- the retail versions are available at Newegg for the 1.86, 2.13, 2.66, and 2.93 Extreme Core 2 Duo chips, with the sole out of stock chip being the 2.4GHz chip, with an estimated time of arrival being Sept. 1st at 2:30PM.
NoSmokingBandit
Aug 19, 07:28 AM
I'm 100% sure the GT site says all the cars were remodeled for the ps3, as in not the ps2 cars.
The massive lineup of cars from past Gran Turismo games has been beautifully recreated through the latest technology and the Playstation 3’s cutting-edge graphics.
http://us.gran-turismo.com/us/news/d5247.html
recreated
As in not copypasta'd over from gt4.
The massive lineup of cars from past Gran Turismo games has been beautifully recreated through the latest technology and the Playstation 3’s cutting-edge graphics.
http://us.gran-turismo.com/us/news/d5247.html
recreated
As in not copypasta'd over from gt4.
jaxstate
Aug 11, 02:43 PM
My phone just happens to work in europe, but I wouldn't care if it didn't.
A phone that works in most of the world is better for many of us. Who wants a phone that won't work in Europe for instance?
A phone that works in most of the world is better for many of us. Who wants a phone that won't work in Europe for instance?
macfan881
Aug 11, 12:29 AM
Just saw on the video preview for amazon.com that this will have the Top Gears track i thought that was pretty awesome cant wait for this to finally come out. Wasn't this game a original Launch game?
Blue Fox
Apr 25, 01:35 PM
Only Apple? The Android system does the same thing, AND sends the information off to Google. The iPhone/iPad just logs the data to a file. Seems a bit unfair to me, but we'll see.
NoSmokingBandit
Dec 9, 04:11 PM
The car list, while huge, is FILLED with cars that I have absolutely no desire to drive in a racing game. I get Kaz's intention, bringing in cars from many eras and different parts of the automotive spectrum to see them, and maybe appreciate them more. But this is a racing game at its core, and I don't ever want to race a VW Kombi.
I love racing my VW Bus. I also love racing the Vauxhall Tigra, which has about 96hp iirc. If all you want to do it buy an F1 and drive as quickly as possible dont even bother looking in GT5's direction. I get bored when i get to the faster races because you get stuck with the same dull cars every game. Woohoo, lets all buy a 458 Italia, F1, or Murcielago... :rolleyes:
I like the early races where i can tune up a Cappucino and get at most 200hp out of it.
GT5 is a game for people who love cars. Not people who only love fast cars. People who love all cars.
I'm sure you'd be happy if everyone started with a Zonda in their garage, but for people who like to drive something fresh and fun the exhaustive list in GT5 is perfect.
I love racing my VW Bus. I also love racing the Vauxhall Tigra, which has about 96hp iirc. If all you want to do it buy an F1 and drive as quickly as possible dont even bother looking in GT5's direction. I get bored when i get to the faster races because you get stuck with the same dull cars every game. Woohoo, lets all buy a 458 Italia, F1, or Murcielago... :rolleyes:
I like the early races where i can tune up a Cappucino and get at most 200hp out of it.
GT5 is a game for people who love cars. Not people who only love fast cars. People who love all cars.
I'm sure you'd be happy if everyone started with a Zonda in their garage, but for people who like to drive something fresh and fun the exhaustive list in GT5 is perfect.
NoSmokingBandit
Dec 7, 05:43 PM
Keep that Lotus, you can use it for the British Lightweight race.
I've already done it with a....
300 kW TVR
:D
I love my TVR and my B-Spec driver actually knows how to handle it, so i've been using it as often as appropriate.
I try not to sell any cars unless they are junk (like a 97 Civic or whatever it is. Worst beginner's prize car ever) or if i have two of the same kind.
I've already done it with a....
300 kW TVR
:D
I love my TVR and my B-Spec driver actually knows how to handle it, so i've been using it as often as appropriate.
I try not to sell any cars unless they are junk (like a 97 Civic or whatever it is. Worst beginner's prize car ever) or if i have two of the same kind.
azzurri000
Sep 18, 11:30 PM
I went ahead and bought my MacBook Pro because I can't do my schoolwork without a laptop. So, I'm really not paying much attention these days about future announcements :)
Is that irony?
I'm also a student, and I don't think I could wait any longer than a month for these long-overdue MacBook Pros to ship... so a possible late November arrival is worrying to say the least.
Is that irony?
I'm also a student, and I don't think I could wait any longer than a month for these long-overdue MacBook Pros to ship... so a possible late November arrival is worrying to say the least.
bedifferent
Apr 27, 11:07 AM
It clearly is an issue if they have a federal lawsuit on it. The fact that Apple are rolling out an update that changes the way it works alone shows that there is clearly a problem. Apple vary rarely roll out updates that change things, even if consumers are screaming for it (mouse acceleration in OS X for example).
You refuse to accept there is a problem. You refuse to see the breech of privacy. Why? The government and Apple have clearly accepted it.
Is this the same government that allowed warrantless wire tapping? The same federal government that allowed Halliburton no bid contracts in Iraq? Interesting how some cherry pick (this is not referring to you at all, just a general statement, not meant to be personal :) ), "government is bad, social healthcare is bad, but wait, federal lawsuits have merit, government is right".
A lot of federal lawsuits have no merit and there has been no ruling. Thus if a lawsuit is federal = all federal lawsuits are valid TRUE, doesn't make sense. Perhaps waiting this out for more information would be prudent instead of jumping down each others' throats. (again, this is not directed at you, just clarifying so no one thinks I'm "taking this to the mattresses" lol)
I do not understand why every thread on MacRumors turns into a free-for-all. It should be called "MacFeuders"… ;)
You refuse to accept there is a problem. You refuse to see the breech of privacy. Why? The government and Apple have clearly accepted it.
Is this the same government that allowed warrantless wire tapping? The same federal government that allowed Halliburton no bid contracts in Iraq? Interesting how some cherry pick (this is not referring to you at all, just a general statement, not meant to be personal :) ), "government is bad, social healthcare is bad, but wait, federal lawsuits have merit, government is right".
A lot of federal lawsuits have no merit and there has been no ruling. Thus if a lawsuit is federal = all federal lawsuits are valid TRUE, doesn't make sense. Perhaps waiting this out for more information would be prudent instead of jumping down each others' throats. (again, this is not directed at you, just clarifying so no one thinks I'm "taking this to the mattresses" lol)
I do not understand why every thread on MacRumors turns into a free-for-all. It should be called "MacFeuders"… ;)
daneoni
Aug 27, 05:54 PM
I was just checking out the CD vs C2D comparison at Anandtech, pretty interesting stuff.
My question is this, is Santa Rosa strictly the mobile platform? I'm a student holding off for an iMac revision, and am wondering if apple utilizes Conroe in the iMac, will the faster FSB's be supported? Is an updated platform already available for Conroe? (I guess I had more than one question )
Thanks
Santa Rosa is for mobile platforms only. As far as i can tell the Conroe chips already have a rich FSB by default 1066MHz i think. Apple may use conroe and may use merom but conroe is looking to be the slated candidate.
My question is this, is Santa Rosa strictly the mobile platform? I'm a student holding off for an iMac revision, and am wondering if apple utilizes Conroe in the iMac, will the faster FSB's be supported? Is an updated platform already available for Conroe? (I guess I had more than one question )
Thanks
Santa Rosa is for mobile platforms only. As far as i can tell the Conroe chips already have a rich FSB by default 1066MHz i think. Apple may use conroe and may use merom but conroe is looking to be the slated candidate.
Mike84
Apr 25, 03:47 PM
Being sued and breaking the law are two different things. I can sue you for killing the tree between our yards. You didnt break any law, but I can still sue.
I kinda see where he is a bit right. If I turn off or say no to allowing the apps to use my location this might suggest to the user that it is not tracking and storing this data. I do not think that it is a stretch to make that connection.
I do agree this is way out of hand though.
Then it would be a frivolous lawsuit and it would be dismissed.
So, there really isn't a point buddy. :D
I kinda see where he is a bit right. If I turn off or say no to allowing the apps to use my location this might suggest to the user that it is not tracking and storing this data. I do not think that it is a stretch to make that connection.
I do agree this is way out of hand though.
Then it would be a frivolous lawsuit and it would be dismissed.
So, there really isn't a point buddy. :D
gibbz
Apr 27, 08:13 AM
This is a lie
Keeping a database of our general location is logging our location. :mad:
No it isn't. They say they are not logging your location. This is correct. If it were incorrect, they would be keeping a database of your phone's exact GPS location. Instead, as they state, they are keeping a cache of the cell towers and wifi hotspots in order to aid the A-GPS system. So, no, they are not logging your (and by your, I mean an identifiable log) exact locations and beaming it home to watch you like big brother.
As has been stated a million times, there is a likely bug that wasn't culling the cache. It was also a dumb oversight to backup the file and to do so unencrypted.
The overlord hyperbole is really silly.
Keeping a database of our general location is logging our location. :mad:
No it isn't. They say they are not logging your location. This is correct. If it were incorrect, they would be keeping a database of your phone's exact GPS location. Instead, as they state, they are keeping a cache of the cell towers and wifi hotspots in order to aid the A-GPS system. So, no, they are not logging your (and by your, I mean an identifiable log) exact locations and beaming it home to watch you like big brother.
As has been stated a million times, there is a likely bug that wasn't culling the cache. It was also a dumb oversight to backup the file and to do so unencrypted.
The overlord hyperbole is really silly.
bagelche
Apr 5, 09:31 PM
I think it won't be released yet, but they've got it to a strong showable point. Underlying architecture probably relies on a few features tied to Lion (QT stuff and more?). Maybe we'd need to upgrade to Lion for it. Ready to go in June or whenever Lion actually hits.
GooMan
Apr 13, 02:26 PM
Please explain this. You'd buy an iPhone 5 with HSPA+, but not one with LTE ? Why ? Makes no sense at all.
Because if Apple release an iPhone 5 with LTE, it will cost more and won't be backwards compatible... right... :rolleyes:
Obviously not a factor.
1) I'm perfectly happy with the data speeds I get on AT&T 3G. I would guess the new 4G phones will suffer in battery life. I don't want to give up battery life for network speed I don't really need. If I had to choose I would choose battery life every time.
2) It's not the cost of the phone, its the cost of the data plan. I would guess it will be like the iPhone 3G launch where AT&T forced you into a 3G plan even if you didn't have 3G coverage in your area. Remember the original $20 iPhone unlimited data plan and how it went away when the new hardware was released?
3) I currently have unlimited data with AT&T which I would like to keep although I've never used > 1.5GB in a month. I doubt very seriously this will be an option with the new "4G" network plans.
4) I can wait for a "4G" phone until there is decent "4G" coverage.
Because if Apple release an iPhone 5 with LTE, it will cost more and won't be backwards compatible... right... :rolleyes:
Obviously not a factor.
1) I'm perfectly happy with the data speeds I get on AT&T 3G. I would guess the new 4G phones will suffer in battery life. I don't want to give up battery life for network speed I don't really need. If I had to choose I would choose battery life every time.
2) It's not the cost of the phone, its the cost of the data plan. I would guess it will be like the iPhone 3G launch where AT&T forced you into a 3G plan even if you didn't have 3G coverage in your area. Remember the original $20 iPhone unlimited data plan and how it went away when the new hardware was released?
3) I currently have unlimited data with AT&T which I would like to keep although I've never used > 1.5GB in a month. I doubt very seriously this will be an option with the new "4G" network plans.
4) I can wait for a "4G" phone until there is decent "4G" coverage.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario