�algiris
Apr 6, 03:53 PM
What you and every other non-informed are missing is the Xoom lack of apps is a not really a con for 2 reason.
1. Unlike iOS, ALL APPS, in the android market scale to fit the 1280x800 screen. No x1 or x2 crap. So I can still ENJOY my facebooke app on a larger screen. Nothing is lost. "optimized for tablets" gives me the same information just with a different interface. So long has my twitter app or facebooke or squeezebox app scale so i can see all. I am a happy camper.
2. Unlike iOS i would argue that the xoom needs LESS apps to do functions that take iOS 3 or 4 apps to do. I dont need goodreader or the like because I have a native file system. I dont need skyfire because i have flash. I dont need to open in here, open in there. Every app can have access to each other...
1. Have you seen how those apps "scale" on XOOM? That doesn't make them optimized for tablets, just fit more screen space and even that doesn't work that well.
2. Bull.
1. Unlike iOS, ALL APPS, in the android market scale to fit the 1280x800 screen. No x1 or x2 crap. So I can still ENJOY my facebooke app on a larger screen. Nothing is lost. "optimized for tablets" gives me the same information just with a different interface. So long has my twitter app or facebooke or squeezebox app scale so i can see all. I am a happy camper.
2. Unlike iOS i would argue that the xoom needs LESS apps to do functions that take iOS 3 or 4 apps to do. I dont need goodreader or the like because I have a native file system. I dont need skyfire because i have flash. I dont need to open in here, open in there. Every app can have access to each other...
1. Have you seen how those apps "scale" on XOOM? That doesn't make them optimized for tablets, just fit more screen space and even that doesn't work that well.
2. Bull.
Whyren
Nov 28, 07:06 PM
Sounds like trying to get royalties off of blank CDs by selling "Music CD-Rs" at a higher cost.
Apple could just let them distribute Universal-branded "Music-Ready" iPods that are set at $50 more than any standard iPod. See how well that'll go for 'em.
Apple could just let them distribute Universal-branded "Music-Ready" iPods that are set at $50 more than any standard iPod. See how well that'll go for 'em.
RichP
Jul 14, 07:56 PM
Why is everyone talking about overclocking these machines? To overclock, the MB has to support changing the multipliers (if the chip is unlocked, which they wont be) and/or FSB, along with voltage, etc. I doubt Apple will be providing us with such BIOS/EFI settings.
MyDesktopBroke
Mar 18, 07:16 AM
How many times did Barack Obama attempt to draw a difference between himself and Hillary by saying "I was against the war from the beginning."? Lots.
How many times did he attempt to portray himself as the polar opposite of George Bush, especially his foreign policy? Lots.
How many times did he say that he was going to repair the view of America in the eyes of the Muslim world? Lots.
How many times did he say he would talk to leaders of 'terrorist nations' without preconditions? Lots.
The point is... he talks the talk, but doesn't walk the walk. On foreign policy, he's more of the same. On everything else, especially domestic spending, he's much much worse.
He did say all those things - but none of those make him a military dove, since in his debates with McCain he did extensively paint Afghanistan as the "right war," or the place were America "should have been." How many times did he promise to "find and kill" Bin Laden? Even before the debates he was openly pushing Afghan and Pakistan escalation.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0WOFrEgRu4
According to the Tea Party, he's doing everything he can to appease Muslims, too. While they obviously are using that as an attack, his speeches in the middle east and Egypt after his election showed a marked difference in communication and downplayed American exceptionalism. Plus, so far he hasn't had a request from a terrorist leader to talk, if I'm not mistaken, so that's not really a fair comparison.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_889oBKkNU
(I can't good youtube links for his Turkey speech - the one with the "not a Christian nation remark)
Obviously he's failed on a lot of campaign promises - especially on the front of reversing Bush domestic policies like the PATRIOT act - but I'd argue that people who saw Obama as the anti-war candidate were the ones who didn't pay attention. The last part about spending doesn't really connect to this issue.
How many times did he attempt to portray himself as the polar opposite of George Bush, especially his foreign policy? Lots.
How many times did he say that he was going to repair the view of America in the eyes of the Muslim world? Lots.
How many times did he say he would talk to leaders of 'terrorist nations' without preconditions? Lots.
The point is... he talks the talk, but doesn't walk the walk. On foreign policy, he's more of the same. On everything else, especially domestic spending, he's much much worse.
He did say all those things - but none of those make him a military dove, since in his debates with McCain he did extensively paint Afghanistan as the "right war," or the place were America "should have been." How many times did he promise to "find and kill" Bin Laden? Even before the debates he was openly pushing Afghan and Pakistan escalation.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0WOFrEgRu4
According to the Tea Party, he's doing everything he can to appease Muslims, too. While they obviously are using that as an attack, his speeches in the middle east and Egypt after his election showed a marked difference in communication and downplayed American exceptionalism. Plus, so far he hasn't had a request from a terrorist leader to talk, if I'm not mistaken, so that's not really a fair comparison.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_889oBKkNU
(I can't good youtube links for his Turkey speech - the one with the "not a Christian nation remark)
Obviously he's failed on a lot of campaign promises - especially on the front of reversing Bush domestic policies like the PATRIOT act - but I'd argue that people who saw Obama as the anti-war candidate were the ones who didn't pay attention. The last part about spending doesn't really connect to this issue.
gnasher729
Aug 17, 03:57 AM
[QUOTE=jicon]Lots of stuff on Anandtech about the poor memory performance on the Intel chipset./QUOTE]
FB Dimms are not designed to give maximum bandwidth to one chip, they are designed to give maximum bandwidth to _four_ cores. Instead of having _one_ program running to test memory bandwidth, they should have started four copies of it and see what happens. That is what you have doubled front side bus, buffered memory and two separate memory units for. The biggest criticism in the past against Intel multi-CPU systems was that the memory bandwidth didn't scale; in the Mac Pro, it does.
FB Dimms are not designed to give maximum bandwidth to one chip, they are designed to give maximum bandwidth to _four_ cores. Instead of having _one_ program running to test memory bandwidth, they should have started four copies of it and see what happens. That is what you have doubled front side bus, buffered memory and two separate memory units for. The biggest criticism in the past against Intel multi-CPU systems was that the memory bandwidth didn't scale; in the Mac Pro, it does.
shamino
Jul 22, 12:18 PM
So I read in this thread that Kentsfield and Clovertown ARE compatible with Conroe and Woodcrest sockets (respectively) (Cloverton or Clovertown?)
Well, people here have mentioned it. I haven't seen any sources for these claims, however.
It's worth noting that the Pentium 4 shipped in several different socket packages over the years. The fact that the cores might be electrically compatible does not necessarily mean you're going to be able to perform a chip-swap upgrade on your Mac!
Hope for upgrading an iMac to Quad Core is kindled! At least if Apple releases Conroe iMacs.
And assuming they don't solder the chip to the motherboard, or hardwire the clock-multiplier chips, or hard-wire the voltage regulator settings, etc.
There are a lot of things that can be done to a motherboard to make these kinds of upgrades painful or even impossible.
With any kind of rumor like this, "I'll believe it when I see it" should be your mantra. Sure, these kinds of upgrades would be great, and it may even be possible to perform them on generic PC motherbaords, but this doesn't necessarily mean it will be easy or even possible on the systems Apple ends up shipping.
BTW, In my opinion, one thing a person should never, ever say is some computer has too much power, and that it will never be needed.
"Never" is always too strong a word. But there are plenty of good reasons to say "useless for today's applications" or "not worth the cost".
When applications start demanding more, and when costs come down, then the equations change. As they always do.
When we will be able to download our entire lives, and even conciousness into a computer, as is said to happen in about 40 years (very much looking forward to)...
You're looking forward to this? Let's hope for your sake that Microsoft has nothing to do with the system software.
I don't think it will be possible, even in 40 years, despite what sci-fi authors are predicting. And there's no way I'd ever have such a system installed even if it would be come possible. The possibility of dying or becoming comatose, or even worse, as a result of a software glitch is something I'm not going to allow. To quote McCoy from Star Trek: "Let's see how it scrambles your molecules first."
So as a conclusion to my most recent rant, Please, never tell me a computer is too powerfu, has too many cores, or has too much storage capacity. If it is there to be used, it will be used. It always is.
But do you want to be the first person to have to pay for it?
Well, people here have mentioned it. I haven't seen any sources for these claims, however.
It's worth noting that the Pentium 4 shipped in several different socket packages over the years. The fact that the cores might be electrically compatible does not necessarily mean you're going to be able to perform a chip-swap upgrade on your Mac!
Hope for upgrading an iMac to Quad Core is kindled! At least if Apple releases Conroe iMacs.
And assuming they don't solder the chip to the motherboard, or hardwire the clock-multiplier chips, or hard-wire the voltage regulator settings, etc.
There are a lot of things that can be done to a motherboard to make these kinds of upgrades painful or even impossible.
With any kind of rumor like this, "I'll believe it when I see it" should be your mantra. Sure, these kinds of upgrades would be great, and it may even be possible to perform them on generic PC motherbaords, but this doesn't necessarily mean it will be easy or even possible on the systems Apple ends up shipping.
BTW, In my opinion, one thing a person should never, ever say is some computer has too much power, and that it will never be needed.
"Never" is always too strong a word. But there are plenty of good reasons to say "useless for today's applications" or "not worth the cost".
When applications start demanding more, and when costs come down, then the equations change. As they always do.
When we will be able to download our entire lives, and even conciousness into a computer, as is said to happen in about 40 years (very much looking forward to)...
You're looking forward to this? Let's hope for your sake that Microsoft has nothing to do with the system software.
I don't think it will be possible, even in 40 years, despite what sci-fi authors are predicting. And there's no way I'd ever have such a system installed even if it would be come possible. The possibility of dying or becoming comatose, or even worse, as a result of a software glitch is something I'm not going to allow. To quote McCoy from Star Trek: "Let's see how it scrambles your molecules first."
So as a conclusion to my most recent rant, Please, never tell me a computer is too powerfu, has too many cores, or has too much storage capacity. If it is there to be used, it will be used. It always is.
But do you want to be the first person to have to pay for it?
skunk
Mar 22, 07:22 AM
Oh yeah... and here's a fun little nugget for those who like to tout Obama's coalition:How many of those in the first list have the capability of fielding an airforce? I'm just guessing here, but I imagine that Afghanistan, Albania, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Nicaragua and Uzbekistan would be less than useful contributors.
NoSmokingBandit
Aug 16, 02:18 PM
Shift was good, but i thought it was really easy. Its also very forgiving, you dont need to have a lot of driving skill to finish the top races because drifting is really easy to control, you can enter turns quite a bit faster than you should, and you'll have more money than you know what to do with.
are you rich then? :p
i only hope that GT5 is more realistic then simulated this time..
I drive a Focus, so... no :D
Most people will never be able to afford a ford GT, but most people would be able to save up and buy a WRX and put a little work into it (even if it does take a few years of saving extra money), so i just find it more fun to push a WRX to its limits instead of a GT.
are you rich then? :p
i only hope that GT5 is more realistic then simulated this time..
I drive a Focus, so... no :D
Most people will never be able to afford a ford GT, but most people would be able to save up and buy a WRX and put a little work into it (even if it does take a few years of saving extra money), so i just find it more fun to push a WRX to its limits instead of a GT.
spydr
Mar 31, 10:05 PM
Google is really trying hard to anything but their big motto. :eek:
shk718
Apr 27, 08:52 AM
Your type of apathy in the long term will do more harm than good.
There is a big difference between voluntarily and involuntarily giving out personal information and that's what was at stake here.
Apple admitted error - it's ok - you can admit it might not have been in the best interest of consumers too. Apple won't come and take your iPhone away.
every time you turn on your cell phone you are "involuntarily" giving out information. My comment has noting to do with being indifferent - but rather - about being practical. we live in an age of hard drives and memory chips - any device with these things in it logs what has been done with it. We leave bread crumbs everywhere - it could be a photo taken on a traffic cam or a hair follicle left in a hotel room. We do not live in an age of privacy. we are extremely public and it will get even worse as time goes by. Being upset about a file with data listing cell towers and wifi routers on a cell phone is unrealistic. just my humble opinion.
There is a big difference between voluntarily and involuntarily giving out personal information and that's what was at stake here.
Apple admitted error - it's ok - you can admit it might not have been in the best interest of consumers too. Apple won't come and take your iPhone away.
every time you turn on your cell phone you are "involuntarily" giving out information. My comment has noting to do with being indifferent - but rather - about being practical. we live in an age of hard drives and memory chips - any device with these things in it logs what has been done with it. We leave bread crumbs everywhere - it could be a photo taken on a traffic cam or a hair follicle left in a hotel room. We do not live in an age of privacy. we are extremely public and it will get even worse as time goes by. Being upset about a file with data listing cell towers and wifi routers on a cell phone is unrealistic. just my humble opinion.
KilGil27
Aug 25, 07:39 PM
just because your battery falls within a range of serial numbers doesn't mean it needs to be replaced... if it tells you your laptop qualifies but your battery doesn't, then it was only the first part of the serial number... not the whole thing
shartypants
Mar 25, 10:51 PM
Look forward to seeing what additional features where added since the last developer release.
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.
slb
Aug 26, 07:05 PM
I happen to have a Yonah Macbook, and im a little concerned.
I wonder, if merom does make it into the Macbooks did i make a mistake by buying my computer before i had to (as in next friday is the cutoff)
I wonder if Merom is really that good. *it sucks that macbooks dont have PGA slots*
It'll just be a slightly faster chip with 64-bit (which won't get used until Leopard, and which most people will never need anyway).
The time you'll want to upgrade will be next year after Santa Rosa comes out with its faster FSB to really take advantage of the Core 2 chips. Intel calls these upcoming Meroms an "initial version," a stepping stone for current Yonah users. It'll be interesting to see if Apple does anything with the Robson flash.
That said, the current Core Duo Macs are still really fast and will continue to be so next year, running Leopard fine. I've got no regrets. I expect my iMac to last me for at least a few years.
I wonder, if merom does make it into the Macbooks did i make a mistake by buying my computer before i had to (as in next friday is the cutoff)
I wonder if Merom is really that good. *it sucks that macbooks dont have PGA slots*
It'll just be a slightly faster chip with 64-bit (which won't get used until Leopard, and which most people will never need anyway).
The time you'll want to upgrade will be next year after Santa Rosa comes out with its faster FSB to really take advantage of the Core 2 chips. Intel calls these upcoming Meroms an "initial version," a stepping stone for current Yonah users. It'll be interesting to see if Apple does anything with the Robson flash.
That said, the current Core Duo Macs are still really fast and will continue to be so next year, running Leopard fine. I've got no regrets. I expect my iMac to last me for at least a few years.
mwswami
Jul 21, 05:00 PM
One way to get eight cores is to get 4 Mac Minis (just wait for the lowest model to become dual core), stack them up, and put them on a KVM. You get 8 cores, and 4 optical drives for *cheap*. Just a thought.;)
Sorry, I just noticed that the $599 models doesn't have a SuperDrive. BUT going to the $799 model may still make a lot of sense for you. All the work units are independent of each other and hence easily distributable to the Minis form your existing PowerMac. Hey, you could even figure out how to use XGrid for this. I would love to hear from you if you research this further.
Sorry, I just noticed that the $599 models doesn't have a SuperDrive. BUT going to the $799 model may still make a lot of sense for you. All the work units are independent of each other and hence easily distributable to the Minis form your existing PowerMac. Hey, you could even figure out how to use XGrid for this. I would love to hear from you if you research this further.
Eraserhead
Jul 14, 02:35 PM
As usual though they come with 50% of the necessary RAM :rolleyes:, why Apple can't get this right I don't know.
Also I'm surprised the top model doesn't have Intel's fastest chip, surely Apple want to say they have the fastest possible computers?
Dual Optical drives is OK, good if you want to have a blu-ray drive as well I suppose...
Also I'm surprised the top model doesn't have Intel's fastest chip, surely Apple want to say they have the fastest possible computers?
Dual Optical drives is OK, good if you want to have a blu-ray drive as well I suppose...
cmaier
Apr 20, 09:40 AM
It's ony a problem if the customer can't tell the Samsung is not an Apple device at point of sale.
As for the tablets, I think it'd be pretty hard to confuse a Tab with an iPad, or think that the Tab is made by Apple.
Is it obvious it's not licensed by Apple, though?
In either case, Apple could have to come up with proof that normal consumers are actually confused between the products.
No they wouldn't. They have to prove likelihood of confusion, not actual confusion. Actual confusion is evidence of likelihood of confusion, but it's not necessary.
As for the tablets, I think it'd be pretty hard to confuse a Tab with an iPad, or think that the Tab is made by Apple.
Is it obvious it's not licensed by Apple, though?
In either case, Apple could have to come up with proof that normal consumers are actually confused between the products.
No they wouldn't. They have to prove likelihood of confusion, not actual confusion. Actual confusion is evidence of likelihood of confusion, but it's not necessary.
gnasher729
Aug 26, 04:08 PM
I dont see much change really, the 1.66GHz merom chip will find its way into the mini (they'll scrap the solo model).
The 1.83 & 2.00GHz for iMacs (if they use merom) and MacBooks and the 2.16 and 2.33 for the 15 & 17 MBPs respectively. Its that simple.
Only problem with that is that a 2.33 GHz Merom chip will be fifty percent more expensive than a 2.16 GHz Yonah is today. So do you think Apple will increase prices of the MacBook Pro by $150 to $200 or reduce their profit?
The 1.83 & 2.00GHz for iMacs (if they use merom) and MacBooks and the 2.16 and 2.33 for the 15 & 17 MBPs respectively. Its that simple.
Only problem with that is that a 2.33 GHz Merom chip will be fifty percent more expensive than a 2.16 GHz Yonah is today. So do you think Apple will increase prices of the MacBook Pro by $150 to $200 or reduce their profit?
Bill McEnaney
Mar 3, 03:21 AM
But you ARE trying to control others Bill. It's quite obvious. There are no negative consequences inherent to being gay. I'm a 43 year old man, and quite happy. The only negative consequences I've suffered have been at the hands of people like you, who think you know how everyone should live and try to force your beliefs on us with laws. You absolutely want to control others, or at the very least, impose your punishments on us.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sodomy
Hmm...but did they make any laws against you doing any of those things?
No, but standing on your porch and walking to a restaurant are usually morally indifferent actions.
There are risks inherent in any sexual activity Bill, heterosexual or homosexual. I'm well aware of the risks of both. Apparently, you seem to feel that all gay men engage in sodomy, which is far from the truth. Also, many of these statistics are based on the results of promiscuous behavior. Gay people marrying would discourage promiscuity, which would most likely reduce those statistics. One would think you should be pro gay marriage rights in that case. But hey, we all know that's not what your real concern is. Your concern is to get everyone to conform to your rules.
Lee, first, do me a favor when we correspond with each other, would you? Please don't say "feel" when you mean "believe" or "think." This conversation isn't about emotion. It's about truths and falsehoods.
Second, by the definition of sodomy at the dictionary at Dictionary.Reference.com), same-sex couples do engage in sodomy (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sodomy).
Third, if the Catholic Church is right, I didn't make the rules. God did.
Fourth, again, I say what I believe. Others need to chose what they'll do. I'm not their dictator. I'm not their lawgiver. But if they're doing something they shouldn't do, they may get negative consequences here or hereafter. But I won't give them them those consequences. I won't punish anyone for what he does in his bedroom. I don't have the authority to do that. And I don't want Big Brother to spy on same-sex attracted people when they're in bed together. I'm not going to ask my policeman friend Kurt to batter down your bedroom door if I think you're having sex. Moral rightness or wrongness is one thing. Whether it's prudent to outlaw some potentially immoral action is something else.
Fifth, sure some opposite-sex sex is dangerous, too. Whether a man or a woman is the recipient, anal sex an cause colon leakage. Anal sex kills epithelial cells and semen suppresses the recipient's immune system. It needs to do that during vaginal sex, too, because if it didn't do it, white blood cells would attack the sperm. Vaginas are well-suited for sex partly because they contain a natural lubricant that rectums don't contain. Does anyone notice a hint of natural teleology there, hmm?
Sixth, for people who think I'm trying to control them or punish them, I'll put the shoe one the other foot. How many liberals attack Beck personally when they don't even listen to him? How many try to shout down conservatives or to silence them when they say something that the shouters and the would-be silencers hate to hear? How many generalize hastily about people "like me" when they assume that anyone who thinks "gay" sex is immoral is obviously a hateful homophobe? How many would try to limit my free speech by outlawing my so-called hate speech? How many don't distinguish between condemning a person and condemning an action?
My handicap puts me in a minority full of people who think like Marxists. They'll tell you that they're the innocent, persecuted ones and that everyone else is the evil oppressor. Newsflash: Good and evil are on both sides. The "victims" aren't all good and the "persecutors" aren't all bad.
As I told you guys, I think that moral liberty consists of the ability to adopt the means to do the good. Moral liberty is not license. License causes chaos.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sodomy
Hmm...but did they make any laws against you doing any of those things?
No, but standing on your porch and walking to a restaurant are usually morally indifferent actions.
There are risks inherent in any sexual activity Bill, heterosexual or homosexual. I'm well aware of the risks of both. Apparently, you seem to feel that all gay men engage in sodomy, which is far from the truth. Also, many of these statistics are based on the results of promiscuous behavior. Gay people marrying would discourage promiscuity, which would most likely reduce those statistics. One would think you should be pro gay marriage rights in that case. But hey, we all know that's not what your real concern is. Your concern is to get everyone to conform to your rules.
Lee, first, do me a favor when we correspond with each other, would you? Please don't say "feel" when you mean "believe" or "think." This conversation isn't about emotion. It's about truths and falsehoods.
Second, by the definition of sodomy at the dictionary at Dictionary.Reference.com), same-sex couples do engage in sodomy (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sodomy).
Third, if the Catholic Church is right, I didn't make the rules. God did.
Fourth, again, I say what I believe. Others need to chose what they'll do. I'm not their dictator. I'm not their lawgiver. But if they're doing something they shouldn't do, they may get negative consequences here or hereafter. But I won't give them them those consequences. I won't punish anyone for what he does in his bedroom. I don't have the authority to do that. And I don't want Big Brother to spy on same-sex attracted people when they're in bed together. I'm not going to ask my policeman friend Kurt to batter down your bedroom door if I think you're having sex. Moral rightness or wrongness is one thing. Whether it's prudent to outlaw some potentially immoral action is something else.
Fifth, sure some opposite-sex sex is dangerous, too. Whether a man or a woman is the recipient, anal sex an cause colon leakage. Anal sex kills epithelial cells and semen suppresses the recipient's immune system. It needs to do that during vaginal sex, too, because if it didn't do it, white blood cells would attack the sperm. Vaginas are well-suited for sex partly because they contain a natural lubricant that rectums don't contain. Does anyone notice a hint of natural teleology there, hmm?
Sixth, for people who think I'm trying to control them or punish them, I'll put the shoe one the other foot. How many liberals attack Beck personally when they don't even listen to him? How many try to shout down conservatives or to silence them when they say something that the shouters and the would-be silencers hate to hear? How many generalize hastily about people "like me" when they assume that anyone who thinks "gay" sex is immoral is obviously a hateful homophobe? How many would try to limit my free speech by outlawing my so-called hate speech? How many don't distinguish between condemning a person and condemning an action?
My handicap puts me in a minority full of people who think like Marxists. They'll tell you that they're the innocent, persecuted ones and that everyone else is the evil oppressor. Newsflash: Good and evil are on both sides. The "victims" aren't all good and the "persecutors" aren't all bad.
As I told you guys, I think that moral liberty consists of the ability to adopt the means to do the good. Moral liberty is not license. License causes chaos.
daver969
Sep 13, 11:05 AM
A bit pointless given that no software utilises the extra cores yet. But nice to know, I guess.
I'm still getting used to having two cores in my laptop!
What I couldn't understand - I couldn't see it explained in the article - why is the dual core Mac Pro (i.e. with current Mac Pro with 2 cores disabled) faster in so many tests than the 4 core Mac Pro.
I think part of the reason so many people seem to be hung up on the "software doesn't utilize multiple cores" mantra is because benchmarks tend to test only one software component at a time. If a given app isn't multithreaded, then it doesn't benefit from multiple cores in these tests. But that doesn't mean that multiple cores don't affect the overall system speed.
What we need is some kind of a super benchmark: How fast is my computer when I'm watching a quicktime stream of Steve demoing the latest insanely great stuff, while ripping my CD collection to iTunes, while surfing complex Cnet.com pages (w/animation), and compiling the latest version of my Java app, every once in a while flipping over to Dashboard (dashboard seems to take up a lot of system resources every time I invoke it, not just on startup).
At this point I would rather push towards more cores than more raw speed in a single core, since I don't tend to wait on any single process. If something is taking a long time, like loading a page or compiling code, I switch to something else and come back later. I would much rather have the whole system retain its responsive feel than have one app finish its task a few seconds quicker.
I'm still getting used to having two cores in my laptop!
What I couldn't understand - I couldn't see it explained in the article - why is the dual core Mac Pro (i.e. with current Mac Pro with 2 cores disabled) faster in so many tests than the 4 core Mac Pro.
I think part of the reason so many people seem to be hung up on the "software doesn't utilize multiple cores" mantra is because benchmarks tend to test only one software component at a time. If a given app isn't multithreaded, then it doesn't benefit from multiple cores in these tests. But that doesn't mean that multiple cores don't affect the overall system speed.
What we need is some kind of a super benchmark: How fast is my computer when I'm watching a quicktime stream of Steve demoing the latest insanely great stuff, while ripping my CD collection to iTunes, while surfing complex Cnet.com pages (w/animation), and compiling the latest version of my Java app, every once in a while flipping over to Dashboard (dashboard seems to take up a lot of system resources every time I invoke it, not just on startup).
At this point I would rather push towards more cores than more raw speed in a single core, since I don't tend to wait on any single process. If something is taking a long time, like loading a page or compiling code, I switch to something else and come back later. I would much rather have the whole system retain its responsive feel than have one app finish its task a few seconds quicker.
appleguy123
Feb 28, 08:34 PM
I said "Both cases are untreatable."
Very sorry.
I have dyslexia, so I read sentences in my head, not words. When the words fit, my brain just makes that model of what it thinks the text said.
Sorry for getting mad. :o
Very sorry.
I have dyslexia, so I read sentences in my head, not words. When the words fit, my brain just makes that model of what it thinks the text said.
Sorry for getting mad. :o
ohaithar
Aug 22, 07:37 AM
I bought GT PSP and its as if the developers actively tried to suck all the enjoyment out of the series.
GT for the PSP did suck
GT for the PSP did suck
LagunaSol
Apr 6, 04:13 PM
Isn't it amazing that so many of these XOOM owners also, coincidentally, "own" an iPad/iPad 2, or their spouse/mom/dog/significant other does?
Either there's a lot of exaggerating (astroturfing) going on, or someone's spouse/mom/dog/significant other has a lot more sense. ;)
Why, I own an iPad and a XOOM and a Galaxy Tab and that HP Windows 7 Slate thingy and a Nook and a prototype PlayBook and I can tell you from personal experience that the iPad is like 100x better than all of those! :rolleyes:
Either there's a lot of exaggerating (astroturfing) going on, or someone's spouse/mom/dog/significant other has a lot more sense. ;)
Why, I own an iPad and a XOOM and a Galaxy Tab and that HP Windows 7 Slate thingy and a Nook and a prototype PlayBook and I can tell you from personal experience that the iPad is like 100x better than all of those! :rolleyes:
andiwm2003
Apr 25, 02:50 PM
But that's different from APPLE "EXPLOITING" you, isn't it? Perhaps a dictionary reference will help you "understand it"?
Verb 1. exploit - use or manipulate to one's advantage;
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/exploit
So, pray tell, what's Apple's advantage over you here?
Where did I say Apple is exploiting me?:confused:
Apple did a shoddy programming job by not encrypting the data. Thaty is why Apple is under pressure by the various govenments and rightfully so. Nobody says Apple is using this data in a malicious way. (aside of this lawsuit but that is only here in the USA and stupid and greed driven by lawyers and totally besides the real issue)
Verb 1. exploit - use or manipulate to one's advantage;
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/exploit
So, pray tell, what's Apple's advantage over you here?
Where did I say Apple is exploiting me?:confused:
Apple did a shoddy programming job by not encrypting the data. Thaty is why Apple is under pressure by the various govenments and rightfully so. Nobody says Apple is using this data in a malicious way. (aside of this lawsuit but that is only here in the USA and stupid and greed driven by lawyers and totally besides the real issue)
No comments:
Post a Comment