Scottsdale
Apr 6, 11:38 AM
clock speed is not everything... a 1.4ghz sb processor will kill anything you are doing with a 2.4ghz c2d. There are many other factors in a processor than just clock speed so i wouldn't be worried. There is no doubt that the sb will be a much faster processor than the ancient c2d.
Also, I would say 50% less graphics is a bit of a stretch. Haven't personally ran any benchmarks but was reading a thread the other day and in the benchmarks and graphics they were showing that the 320m averages about 5-10 extra fps over the 3000.
here is a thread you can look at and compare for yourself.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1103257
Sure the integrated graphics are going to be slightly worse, but at least you will have a nice new processor. Can't always have your cake and eat it too, especially in an ultraportable.
When the mba was refreshed everyone was complaining about the outdated processor, now rumors of a processor upgrade and people bitch about the integrated graphics. Guess you can't please everyone but jesus, sometimes it just seems like people find anything they can to complain about.
Here's a simple solution for all of you, if you want the "slightly" better graphics go buy a macbook air right now, it's not like apple has stopped selling them. If you'd rather have a sandy bridge processor, wait it out. Seems simple but i guess that's just me?!?!?!:eek:
Sure clock speed isn't everything. But you better go read up some more on Tue Intel HD3000 IGP. You're using facts from the STD voltage SB IGP and applying them to the ULV SB IGP. Go read about the graphics on the Samsung Series 9 laptops. The 13" model uses this very chip cited. It shows greater than a 50% drop in graphics performance from the 320m to ULV IGP used in SB.
This has been the problem all along with everyone. They're attributing facts that are actually fallacies to this Intel IGP.
Also, I would say 50% less graphics is a bit of a stretch. Haven't personally ran any benchmarks but was reading a thread the other day and in the benchmarks and graphics they were showing that the 320m averages about 5-10 extra fps over the 3000.
here is a thread you can look at and compare for yourself.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1103257
Sure the integrated graphics are going to be slightly worse, but at least you will have a nice new processor. Can't always have your cake and eat it too, especially in an ultraportable.
When the mba was refreshed everyone was complaining about the outdated processor, now rumors of a processor upgrade and people bitch about the integrated graphics. Guess you can't please everyone but jesus, sometimes it just seems like people find anything they can to complain about.
Here's a simple solution for all of you, if you want the "slightly" better graphics go buy a macbook air right now, it's not like apple has stopped selling them. If you'd rather have a sandy bridge processor, wait it out. Seems simple but i guess that's just me?!?!?!:eek:
Sure clock speed isn't everything. But you better go read up some more on Tue Intel HD3000 IGP. You're using facts from the STD voltage SB IGP and applying them to the ULV SB IGP. Go read about the graphics on the Samsung Series 9 laptops. The 13" model uses this very chip cited. It shows greater than a 50% drop in graphics performance from the 320m to ULV IGP used in SB.
This has been the problem all along with everyone. They're attributing facts that are actually fallacies to this Intel IGP.
slabbius
Sep 13, 10:44 PM
you know what? since my dinosaur of a desktop (3yr old :rolleyes: 3Ghz P4 HT that can't even run a retail 3DSMax without me getting fatal exception blue screen of death errors on winxpsp2) the time value of money says that a new Mac Pro Quad Core machine is still worth more now than a Mac Pro Octo Core machine in the future. Reason is I need a much more viable means of work NOW, not later. I can always upgrade, and besides, the new chips will probably be rather pricey, therefore causing a rise in the current mac pro price? I'm no analyst so don't flame me if i'm wrong. ;)
Besides I'm a young full sail student that just got an educational loan to purchase a computer and a camera.... and maybe an ipod :) Don't try to give me the "if you wait" lecture, either.
Besides I'm a young full sail student that just got an educational loan to purchase a computer and a camera.... and maybe an ipod :) Don't try to give me the "if you wait" lecture, either.
TripHop
Jun 9, 12:38 AM
This is a huge story. I don't understand why it wasn't posted on page 1 especially since learning of the Radio Shack Trade-In program. I think the Doctor should reconsider not putting this on Page 1. :confused:
MattSepeta
Apr 27, 02:13 PM
1. You opened it in Illustrator, not InDesign.
2. After I opened it in Illustrator like you did it did reveal some interesting things. It seems that fields #20 and #22 are on individual layers.
http://img163.imageshack.us/img163/6643/picture1hz.png (http://img163.imageshack.us/i/picture1hz.png/)
Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)
I am fairly confident that rather than pointing to a conspiracy, this simply shows that when scanned, the operator had enabled some sort of "auto-text" option that attempted to read and convert then embed the raw text info in the PDF, as to make the text "selectable" in preview programs.
It only worked on certain text, as is par for the course.
2. After I opened it in Illustrator like you did it did reveal some interesting things. It seems that fields #20 and #22 are on individual layers.
http://img163.imageshack.us/img163/6643/picture1hz.png (http://img163.imageshack.us/i/picture1hz.png/)
Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)
I am fairly confident that rather than pointing to a conspiracy, this simply shows that when scanned, the operator had enabled some sort of "auto-text" option that attempted to read and convert then embed the raw text info in the PDF, as to make the text "selectable" in preview programs.
It only worked on certain text, as is par for the course.
Mattie Num Nums
Apr 19, 02:46 PM
Are you talking about the Newton, troll?
http://www.thocp.net/hardware/pictures/pda/apple_newton_sml.jpg
I had a Casio Personal Diary in the late 80's that had the exact same grid.
Im not a troll either without Apple I wouldn't have a job.
http://www.thocp.net/hardware/pictures/pda/apple_newton_sml.jpg
I had a Casio Personal Diary in the late 80's that had the exact same grid.
Im not a troll either without Apple I wouldn't have a job.
Macinthetosh
Mar 22, 12:59 PM
Blackberry playbook = The IPad 2 killer - you heard it here first.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Specifications are not everything.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Specifications are not everything.
iGary
Feb 28, 05:14 PM
A same-sex attracted person is living a "gay lifestyle" when he or she dates people of the same sex, "marries" people of the same sex, has same-sex sex, or does any combination of these things. I think that if same-sex attracted people are going to live together, they need to do that as though they were siblings, not as sex partners. In my opinion, they should have purely platonic, nonsexual relationships with one another.
Heterosexual couples need to reserve sex for opposite-sex monogamous marriage. If I had a girlfriend, I might kiss her. But I wouldn't do that to deliberately arouse either of us. If either of us felt tempted to have sex with each other, the kissing would stop right away. I know of a woman who gave an excellent answer when men asked her why saved sex for marriage. She said, "I"m worth waiting for." She lived by her Catholic convictions, and she wouldn't risk letting any man use her as a mere object, as a mere tool.
Some may say, "I have sex with my girlfriend to show her that I love her." If I had a girlfriend, I would hope I would love her enough to protect her from the physical and psychological risks that come with non-marital sex. The best way for me to do that is for my hypothetical girlfriend and me to be celibate before marriage.
Sacramentally same-sex "marriage" isn't marriage. Neither is merely civil marriage of any sort. If I understand what the Catholic Church's teachings about marriage merely civil, it teaches non-sacramental marriage, whether same-sex or opposite-sex, is legal fornication.
Whatever crutch gets you through life.
Heterosexual couples need to reserve sex for opposite-sex monogamous marriage. If I had a girlfriend, I might kiss her. But I wouldn't do that to deliberately arouse either of us. If either of us felt tempted to have sex with each other, the kissing would stop right away. I know of a woman who gave an excellent answer when men asked her why saved sex for marriage. She said, "I"m worth waiting for." She lived by her Catholic convictions, and she wouldn't risk letting any man use her as a mere object, as a mere tool.
Some may say, "I have sex with my girlfriend to show her that I love her." If I had a girlfriend, I would hope I would love her enough to protect her from the physical and psychological risks that come with non-marital sex. The best way for me to do that is for my hypothetical girlfriend and me to be celibate before marriage.
Sacramentally same-sex "marriage" isn't marriage. Neither is merely civil marriage of any sort. If I understand what the Catholic Church's teachings about marriage merely civil, it teaches non-sacramental marriage, whether same-sex or opposite-sex, is legal fornication.
Whatever crutch gets you through life.
Vegasman
Apr 27, 08:43 AM
I think is quite conceivable that keeping those logs forever, not encrypting them, maintaining them despite an opt out, and not removing the timestamps was done in the spirit of: "Let's keep the data, maybe they will be useful at some point, and why bother do encrypt them, that is just some extra lines of code to write."
And it is this spirit which is somehow worrying.
This is the most likely explanation for me (too).
And it is this spirit which is somehow worrying.
This is the most likely explanation for me (too).
Chris Bangle
Aug 11, 11:43 AM
I agree at least since the iPod. As an investor, I hope Apple executes their plan well. The mobile phone business is getting crowded all of a sudden e.g. Best Buy, Disney, ESPN etc. I think it will come down to design e.g. Razr.
Cinch
I think the main reason the razr's such a sucess is beacuse it soo cheap. It so easy to get one free with your contract in the UK. Not only does it look alrite but its massivly affordable
Cinch
I think the main reason the razr's such a sucess is beacuse it soo cheap. It so easy to get one free with your contract in the UK. Not only does it look alrite but its massivly affordable
balamw
Apr 6, 04:22 PM
He's still using that 2,000,000 Tabs "shipped", adding it to iPads sold in the same period, and finding the Tab's number is 30% of the total. Very..."smooth", could I say?
These would be the very same Tabs I see pallets of at Costco, while everyone else is sold out of iPad 2s. Got it.
B
These would be the very same Tabs I see pallets of at Costco, while everyone else is sold out of iPad 2s. Got it.
B
ehoui
Apr 19, 01:59 PM
wow @ post 2.
apple will have a hard time fighting this in court.
And which one was shown to the public first? And why is there a ton of articles calling it an "iPhone clone"?
apple will have a hard time fighting this in court.
And which one was shown to the public first? And why is there a ton of articles calling it an "iPhone clone"?
SeaFox
Aug 5, 06:04 PM
I can't believe it's only two days away, how time flies.
I'll be expecting the new Mac Pro to show up (order now, shipping in 6-8 weeks) and new displays (to match the Mac Pro's new enclosure, and becuase they haven't been updated in waaaay too long).
I don't think anything iPod-related will happen, but I'd really like them to update the Shuffle if they're going to.
I'll be expecting the new Mac Pro to show up (order now, shipping in 6-8 weeks) and new displays (to match the Mac Pro's new enclosure, and becuase they haven't been updated in waaaay too long).
I don't think anything iPod-related will happen, but I'd really like them to update the Shuffle if they're going to.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 22, 10:19 PM
The U.N. Security Council perhaps, but not the entire assembly. It would have been interesting to open that issue up to debate and seen how all the members would have voted.
The security council, not the general assembly, is the organ tasked with authorizing UN military action. The point of the security council is to enable the UN to make rapid strategic decisions without a general debate. It's an imperfect system to be sure, but I don't think requiring a full debate in the general assembly would be an efficient way to respond to this sort of situation.
What I always wonder is what diplomatic efforts were used to pressure Qaddafi? There were no (as far as I know) threats of economic embargoes, freezing of assets, or other less violent methods to coerce Qaddafi. We didn't need to convince him to step dow. We simply needed to convince him that he needed to tone down, defend himself against the armed insurrection, but not cast a wider and violent campaign against innocent civilians.
We could have responded simply with economic sanctions.
Based on Gaddafi's treatment of the initial protests (not to mention his tendencies over 40 years of autocratic rule), I strongly question whether economic sanctions are going to apply sufficient pressure to Gaddafi to relinquish power. Like Mubarak, he is a political strongman who is not easily cowed by threats.
I need a clearer demonstration that serious steps were taken before resorting to war. War should be used as the last resort and only when it's clear that all other options have failed.
I agree that war should be considered a last resort. I also think that the US government is generally too quick to undertake armed intervention. But in this case we took sides in a war that was already in progress. The UN's choices were either non-intervention, non-military intervention, or direct military intervention in some form.
I suppose the point at which "all other options have failed" is a debatable one, since everyone has different opinions on what constitutes a valid option. There are many questions without simple answers. How do we judge failure? Is the purpose of the intervention (military or otherwise) to aid the rebels? Or is it merely to prevent Gaddafi killing civilians? If the latter is the case, does allowing him to remain in power serve that cause? If not, what should we do about it?
At the bottom of all this though, the goal of current foreign intervention (military or otherwise) is clear to me - to remove Gaddafi from power and recognize the rebel transitional government as the legitimate government of Libya.
The security council, not the general assembly, is the organ tasked with authorizing UN military action. The point of the security council is to enable the UN to make rapid strategic decisions without a general debate. It's an imperfect system to be sure, but I don't think requiring a full debate in the general assembly would be an efficient way to respond to this sort of situation.
What I always wonder is what diplomatic efforts were used to pressure Qaddafi? There were no (as far as I know) threats of economic embargoes, freezing of assets, or other less violent methods to coerce Qaddafi. We didn't need to convince him to step dow. We simply needed to convince him that he needed to tone down, defend himself against the armed insurrection, but not cast a wider and violent campaign against innocent civilians.
We could have responded simply with economic sanctions.
Based on Gaddafi's treatment of the initial protests (not to mention his tendencies over 40 years of autocratic rule), I strongly question whether economic sanctions are going to apply sufficient pressure to Gaddafi to relinquish power. Like Mubarak, he is a political strongman who is not easily cowed by threats.
I need a clearer demonstration that serious steps were taken before resorting to war. War should be used as the last resort and only when it's clear that all other options have failed.
I agree that war should be considered a last resort. I also think that the US government is generally too quick to undertake armed intervention. But in this case we took sides in a war that was already in progress. The UN's choices were either non-intervention, non-military intervention, or direct military intervention in some form.
I suppose the point at which "all other options have failed" is a debatable one, since everyone has different opinions on what constitutes a valid option. There are many questions without simple answers. How do we judge failure? Is the purpose of the intervention (military or otherwise) to aid the rebels? Or is it merely to prevent Gaddafi killing civilians? If the latter is the case, does allowing him to remain in power serve that cause? If not, what should we do about it?
At the bottom of all this though, the goal of current foreign intervention (military or otherwise) is clear to me - to remove Gaddafi from power and recognize the rebel transitional government as the legitimate government of Libya.
SuperCachetes
Mar 1, 04:36 PM
But they are treated equal, any gay man can marry a woman and any lesbian woman can marry a man just as any heterosexual man can marry a woman and any heterosexual woman can marry a man
And yet, not. :rolleyes:
Not being able to marry the human being you are attracted to, love, and want to spend the rest of your life with? Doesn't sound too equal to me.
Glad most of the other civil rights issues are taken care of - you would be the one claiming "But people in a wheelchair are treated equally! They have every right to use the same stairs as ambulatory people!" Good grief.
And yet, not. :rolleyes:
Not being able to marry the human being you are attracted to, love, and want to spend the rest of your life with? Doesn't sound too equal to me.
Glad most of the other civil rights issues are taken care of - you would be the one claiming "But people in a wheelchair are treated equally! They have every right to use the same stairs as ambulatory people!" Good grief.
marksman
Mar 31, 09:09 PM
I neither agree or disagree with this statement, I'm just very curious as to whether or not it is true. Anyone have an data that can prove/disprove this?
I have just tried to find some information on this, and the only information I can find are two seperate quarters where a blackberry phone was number 1 for that particular quarter. The 3G was second in that quarter. In another instance, Blackberry was #1 for a quarter, and the 3GS was #2 and the 3G was #4.
There is a lack of data actually listing the top selling individual smartphones out there.
The interesting thing is I suspect the other top selling phones are all Blackberry devices. Maybe the Droid would be in there, but I suspect if you did a top 10 only one android device would be there.
I have just tried to find some information on this, and the only information I can find are two seperate quarters where a blackberry phone was number 1 for that particular quarter. The 3G was second in that quarter. In another instance, Blackberry was #1 for a quarter, and the 3GS was #2 and the 3G was #4.
There is a lack of data actually listing the top selling individual smartphones out there.
The interesting thing is I suspect the other top selling phones are all Blackberry devices. Maybe the Droid would be in there, but I suspect if you did a top 10 only one android device would be there.
ClimbingTheLog
Jul 20, 12:56 PM
Anyone else think this is getting out of hand? Two cores, great improvement. Four cores, ehh it's faster but Joe can't tell. Eight cores, now thats just stupid.
Let me guess it will only come with 512mb of Ram :p (ok it will be at least a GB).
Have you ever owned a machine that hasn't been CPU bound? I know I haven't.
you need to do your math better, extra core = 1.5x - 1.8x speed increase. but still the same power usage as a normal core!
Where do you get these magical free electrons to drive the second core? That's some fancy silicon that uses 0W.
eight cores + Tiger = Octopussy?!?
Even Apple isn't that cool. Alas, I fear "Mac Pro 8x3.2"
How fast do you want mail to go? The main reasons you need good processors is not for browsing, e-mail, text, and such and such. I highly doubt someone who does all these things on a five year old computer will be much slower than someone on a 16 GB RAM top of the line Powermac
Have you ever done a search on a large volume of mail with AppleMail? That can eat my CPU for hours on a large IMAP mailstore on a 1.5 year old Mac. How about using Firefox with a number of useful extensions? CPU pegged for minutes when loading up the day's news stories from my RSS reader, and that's with a 2-year old Mac.
Bring the speed.
Let me guess it will only come with 512mb of Ram :p (ok it will be at least a GB).
Have you ever owned a machine that hasn't been CPU bound? I know I haven't.
you need to do your math better, extra core = 1.5x - 1.8x speed increase. but still the same power usage as a normal core!
Where do you get these magical free electrons to drive the second core? That's some fancy silicon that uses 0W.
eight cores + Tiger = Octopussy?!?
Even Apple isn't that cool. Alas, I fear "Mac Pro 8x3.2"
How fast do you want mail to go? The main reasons you need good processors is not for browsing, e-mail, text, and such and such. I highly doubt someone who does all these things on a five year old computer will be much slower than someone on a 16 GB RAM top of the line Powermac
Have you ever done a search on a large volume of mail with AppleMail? That can eat my CPU for hours on a large IMAP mailstore on a 1.5 year old Mac. How about using Firefox with a number of useful extensions? CPU pegged for minutes when loading up the day's news stories from my RSS reader, and that's with a 2-year old Mac.
Bring the speed.
Hallivand
Mar 25, 10:34 PM
Since the release of Leopard, the subsequent releases haven't had the wow factor of before.
Just what I think anyway.
Just what I think anyway.
rerelease
Apr 11, 03:58 PM
A 4" screen at the current 3:2 ratio would look absolutely hideous with the general iPhone design (which I doubt they change) and not very sensible in the age where tablets are squeezing themselves between laptops and smartphones (a philosophy which Apple is a strong supporter of).
I'd rather have a more sleek, compact smartphone that fits in my pocket and where the screen doesn't suck the battery dry within a few hours and I expect (and/or hope) to see Apple deliver just that.
I'd rather have a more sleek, compact smartphone that fits in my pocket and where the screen doesn't suck the battery dry within a few hours and I expect (and/or hope) to see Apple deliver just that.
DMann
Aug 7, 03:23 PM
The new HW is fine, but Leopard is exciting! I'll look forward to this as I have all the big cats.
In nine months or less......... we'll have those
Top Secret features in our machines - too bad
for Redmond they won't be revealed until then.
Core graphics and Quartz Extreme will be amazing.
Love Time Machine, Spaces, etc.
In nine months or less......... we'll have those
Top Secret features in our machines - too bad
for Redmond they won't be revealed until then.
Core graphics and Quartz Extreme will be amazing.
Love Time Machine, Spaces, etc.
balamw
Apr 8, 06:26 AM
I wonder if this has more to do with reward zone coupons and 18 month no interest financing.
Have you ever seen an RZ coupon that didn't say "excludes Apple products" along with Bose and a number of other carveouts. Financing may be a different issue.
B
Have you ever seen an RZ coupon that didn't say "excludes Apple products" along with Bose and a number of other carveouts. Financing may be a different issue.
B
jonharris200
Aug 7, 03:42 PM
I can exclusively reveal that the top top secret feature of Leopard will be... inbuilt photocopying! :D
rickjs
Apr 6, 03:19 PM
did you feel dorky typing XOOM so many times. I would, because its dorky. It's the same reasons that everything in "Xenon: Girl of the 21st Century" was dorky
Yeah but it kinda grows on you. I really don't like iPad 2 as a name very much, but it kinda grows on you too.
Yeah but it kinda grows on you. I really don't like iPad 2 as a name very much, but it kinda grows on you too.
aricher
Sep 13, 09:56 AM
Clovertown is a 64-bit CPU.
Ask your PC-loving IT guy if he uses Windows XP64 and more than 4 gigabytes of RAM. If not, then 32-bit processors are apparently okay for him, too.
hee hee - thanks.
Ask your PC-loving IT guy if he uses Windows XP64 and more than 4 gigabytes of RAM. If not, then 32-bit processors are apparently okay for him, too.
hee hee - thanks.
Sydde
Mar 17, 01:48 PM
Ultra FAIL fear mongering. Libertarian ≠ Anarchist. Small government ≠ no government. Limiting government with constitutional constraints ≠ destruction of government.
He's a common sense constitutional conservative, enemy of tyranny everywhere, and an unfailing defender of fundamental human liberty.
OK, I confess, "shut down" was a slight exaggeration. But as the paragon of neo-liberalism, Paul would wholly gut every little regulatory agency that provides any kind of buffer that protects people and businesses from the depredations of corporate interests, instead electing to enact policies that would protect corporations from the depredations of people. That would be the net effect of his idealism, and if you take five minutes to read the article I linked to, it will become evident that Paul's lasseiz-faire ideals have been proven to fail miserably (unless you are already loaded). Heck, we have seen parallels in the lingering devastation caused by Reagan's policies.
He's a common sense constitutional conservative, enemy of tyranny everywhere, and an unfailing defender of fundamental human liberty.
OK, I confess, "shut down" was a slight exaggeration. But as the paragon of neo-liberalism, Paul would wholly gut every little regulatory agency that provides any kind of buffer that protects people and businesses from the depredations of corporate interests, instead electing to enact policies that would protect corporations from the depredations of people. That would be the net effect of his idealism, and if you take five minutes to read the article I linked to, it will become evident that Paul's lasseiz-faire ideals have been proven to fail miserably (unless you are already loaded). Heck, we have seen parallels in the lingering devastation caused by Reagan's policies.
No comments:
Post a Comment