Josias
Sep 19, 10:20 AM
I think any rumorsite reporting new MBP's after September 1st, should be taken down:p
What I really want for Apple to announce in the MBP is:
68 Wh battery on all (4.5 hrs sucks compared to MacBooks 6 hours)
FW800 on all (really should be there on a pro)
Magnetic latch (so cool!:D)
Merom (of course)
DL SuperDrive (I'm not using it, but I think it is required for a pro machine)
Many people say the X1600 is too slow to take advantage of 256 MB? WTF?:p
So my friends 128 MB Radeon 9000 could just as well be 32 MB?
I think Apple should consider putting 256 MB on all models, X1600 Pro in low end, and X1800 in hi-end.
I'm not saying I need this stuff, but this is what I'd like for Apple to release.
What I really want for Apple to announce in the MBP is:
68 Wh battery on all (4.5 hrs sucks compared to MacBooks 6 hours)
FW800 on all (really should be there on a pro)
Magnetic latch (so cool!:D)
Merom (of course)
DL SuperDrive (I'm not using it, but I think it is required for a pro machine)
Many people say the X1600 is too slow to take advantage of 256 MB? WTF?:p
So my friends 128 MB Radeon 9000 could just as well be 32 MB?
I think Apple should consider putting 256 MB on all models, X1600 Pro in low end, and X1800 in hi-end.
I'm not saying I need this stuff, but this is what I'd like for Apple to release.
Blue Velvet
Mar 23, 06:11 AM
Libya is more like Bosnia than Iraq. A moment of force has the potential to change the scope of the conflict, hopefully for the positive, in a way that a full-blown invasion would merely complicate. That's the central part that fivepoint, who is merely interested in making another partisan screed, is ignoring.
Well exactly. Far easier to tag together some buzzwords, maybe pull something from FoxNews than it is to think critically about the issue. This inane comparison between coalition numbers was also picked up by Steve M.:
Fox Nation huffily declares that "Bush Had 2 Times More Coalition Partners in Iraq Than Obama Has in Libya." Bush's thirty-nation list, of course, included such global powers as Azerbaijan, Estonia, Latvia, and Uzbekistan, and didn't include the likes of, y'know, Germany and France.
But if we're going to play games like this, in the run-up to the war, how many coalition partners did Bush attract per week? The Libyan uprising started just about a month ago and Obama's coalition is fifteen nations. When do you date the start of the "Iraq crisis" the Bushies manufactured? The Axis of Evil speech, fourteen months before the war began? The Battle of Tora Bora, a month before that? The first administration meetings on Iraq regime change, mere days after Bush's inauguration, and more than two years before the Iraq War started? By that standard, Bush barely acquired one coalition partner a month! Obama obtained more than three partners a week!
I'm reminded of the 2000 electoral maps that measured Bush's vote by geography, as if winning a county with more jackrabbits than people was the equivalent of winning a county full of apartment buildings.
http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2011/03/well-if-were-going-to-be-ridiculous.html
Meanwhile, Juan Cole lays out ten reasons why this is not like Iraq:
Here are the differences between George W. Bush�s invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the current United Nations action in Libya:
1. The action in Libya was authorized by the United Nations Security Council. That in Iraq was not. By the UN Charter, military action after 1945 should either come as self-defense or with UNSC authorization. Most countries in the world are signatories to the charter and bound by its provisions.
2. The Libyan people had risen up and thrown off the Qaddafi regime, with some 80-90 percent of the country having gone out of his hands before he started having tank commanders fire shells into peaceful crowds. It was this vast majority of the Libyan people that demanded the UN no-fly zone. In 2002-3 there was no similar popular movement against Saddam Hussein.
3. There was an ongoing massacre of civilians, and the threat of more such massacres in Benghazi, by the Qaddafi regime, which precipitated the UNSC resolution. Although the Saddam Hussein regime had massacred people in the 1980s and early 1990s, nothing was going on in 2002-2003 that would have required international intervention.
4. The Arab League urged the UNSC to take action against the Qaddafi regime, and in many ways precipitated Resolution 1973. The Arab League met in 2002 and expressed opposition to a war on Iraq. (Reports of Arab League backtracking on Sunday were incorrect, based on a remark of outgoing Secretary-General Amr Moussa that criticized the taking out of anti-aircraft batteries. The Arab League reaffirmed Sunday and Moussa agreed Monday that the No-Fly Zone is what it wants).
5. None of the United Nations allies envisages landing troops on the ground, nor does the UNSC authorize it. Iraq was invaded by land forces.
6. No false allegations were made against the Qaddafi regime, of being in league with al-Qaeda or of having a nuclear weapons program. The charge is massacre of peaceful civilian demonstrators and an actual promise to commit more such massacres.
7. The United States did not take the lead role in urging a no-fly zone, and was dragged into this action by its Arab and European allies. President Obama pledges that the US role, mainly disabling anti-aircraft batteries and bombing runways, will last �days, not months� before being turned over to other United Nations allies.
8. There is no sectarian or ethnic dimension to the Libyan conflict, whereas the US Pentagon conspired with Shiite and Kurdish parties to overthrow the Sunni-dominated Baathist regime in Iraq, setting the stage for a prolonged and bitter civil war.
9. The US has not rewarded countries such as Norway for entering the conflict as UN allies, but rather a genuine sense of outrage at the brutal crimes against humanity being committed by Qaddafi and his forces impelled the formation of this coalition. The Bush administration�s �coalition of the willing� in contrast was often brought on board by what were essentially bribes.
10. Iraq in 2002-3 no longer posed a credible threat to its neighbors. A resurgent Qaddafi in Libya with petroleum billions at his disposal would likely attempt to undermine the democratic experiments in Tunisia and Egypt, blighting the lives of millions.
http://www.juancole.com/2011/03/top-ten-ways-that-libya-2011-is-not-iraq-2003.html
Well exactly. Far easier to tag together some buzzwords, maybe pull something from FoxNews than it is to think critically about the issue. This inane comparison between coalition numbers was also picked up by Steve M.:
Fox Nation huffily declares that "Bush Had 2 Times More Coalition Partners in Iraq Than Obama Has in Libya." Bush's thirty-nation list, of course, included such global powers as Azerbaijan, Estonia, Latvia, and Uzbekistan, and didn't include the likes of, y'know, Germany and France.
But if we're going to play games like this, in the run-up to the war, how many coalition partners did Bush attract per week? The Libyan uprising started just about a month ago and Obama's coalition is fifteen nations. When do you date the start of the "Iraq crisis" the Bushies manufactured? The Axis of Evil speech, fourteen months before the war began? The Battle of Tora Bora, a month before that? The first administration meetings on Iraq regime change, mere days after Bush's inauguration, and more than two years before the Iraq War started? By that standard, Bush barely acquired one coalition partner a month! Obama obtained more than three partners a week!
I'm reminded of the 2000 electoral maps that measured Bush's vote by geography, as if winning a county with more jackrabbits than people was the equivalent of winning a county full of apartment buildings.
http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2011/03/well-if-were-going-to-be-ridiculous.html
Meanwhile, Juan Cole lays out ten reasons why this is not like Iraq:
Here are the differences between George W. Bush�s invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the current United Nations action in Libya:
1. The action in Libya was authorized by the United Nations Security Council. That in Iraq was not. By the UN Charter, military action after 1945 should either come as self-defense or with UNSC authorization. Most countries in the world are signatories to the charter and bound by its provisions.
2. The Libyan people had risen up and thrown off the Qaddafi regime, with some 80-90 percent of the country having gone out of his hands before he started having tank commanders fire shells into peaceful crowds. It was this vast majority of the Libyan people that demanded the UN no-fly zone. In 2002-3 there was no similar popular movement against Saddam Hussein.
3. There was an ongoing massacre of civilians, and the threat of more such massacres in Benghazi, by the Qaddafi regime, which precipitated the UNSC resolution. Although the Saddam Hussein regime had massacred people in the 1980s and early 1990s, nothing was going on in 2002-2003 that would have required international intervention.
4. The Arab League urged the UNSC to take action against the Qaddafi regime, and in many ways precipitated Resolution 1973. The Arab League met in 2002 and expressed opposition to a war on Iraq. (Reports of Arab League backtracking on Sunday were incorrect, based on a remark of outgoing Secretary-General Amr Moussa that criticized the taking out of anti-aircraft batteries. The Arab League reaffirmed Sunday and Moussa agreed Monday that the No-Fly Zone is what it wants).
5. None of the United Nations allies envisages landing troops on the ground, nor does the UNSC authorize it. Iraq was invaded by land forces.
6. No false allegations were made against the Qaddafi regime, of being in league with al-Qaeda or of having a nuclear weapons program. The charge is massacre of peaceful civilian demonstrators and an actual promise to commit more such massacres.
7. The United States did not take the lead role in urging a no-fly zone, and was dragged into this action by its Arab and European allies. President Obama pledges that the US role, mainly disabling anti-aircraft batteries and bombing runways, will last �days, not months� before being turned over to other United Nations allies.
8. There is no sectarian or ethnic dimension to the Libyan conflict, whereas the US Pentagon conspired with Shiite and Kurdish parties to overthrow the Sunni-dominated Baathist regime in Iraq, setting the stage for a prolonged and bitter civil war.
9. The US has not rewarded countries such as Norway for entering the conflict as UN allies, but rather a genuine sense of outrage at the brutal crimes against humanity being committed by Qaddafi and his forces impelled the formation of this coalition. The Bush administration�s �coalition of the willing� in contrast was often brought on board by what were essentially bribes.
10. Iraq in 2002-3 no longer posed a credible threat to its neighbors. A resurgent Qaddafi in Libya with petroleum billions at his disposal would likely attempt to undermine the democratic experiments in Tunisia and Egypt, blighting the lives of millions.
http://www.juancole.com/2011/03/top-ten-ways-that-libya-2011-is-not-iraq-2003.html
BJNY
Aug 23, 11:05 AM
If you're willing, you could start up from the Hardware Test disc, and run the test which makes the fans go non-stop except for the rearmost fans.
Temp widget http://www.apple.com/downloads/dashboard/status/istatnano.html
Temp widget http://www.apple.com/downloads/dashboard/status/istatnano.html
Alexsaru
Sep 13, 06:54 AM
I was interested to see that they were unable to max out CPU utilization on all 8 cores in the system. I hope it's due to the software these days not being ready to fully utilize more than one or two cores and not due to OSX's ability to scale to larger core counts. Since that's obviously where we're heading. Does anyone know about the potential for scalability of OSX to large numbers of CPU's/cores? I know some *nix varieties and BSD varieties do this really well, but one wonders if they were thinking this far in the future when they developed OSX. It'll be interesting to see...
xPismo
Jul 20, 07:43 PM
The party just keeps getting better. I'm so ready for the new ultra MBP.
Go WWDC!
Go WWDC!
wizard
Apr 10, 03:44 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
I'm a little confused...why was Avid presenting at a Final Cut Pro User Group's meeting anyway? Do they just come in and are like "Hey, you've all made a mistake!" or something?
No idea, but I just don't get those tactics. I mean, other than being ruthless business people. :p
Just show your stuff without having to strong arm...
It is a users group for FCP what would you expect. Seriously the people running the Supermeet are probably falling all overthemselves to make sure Apple is happy here, FCP is the reason the group exists. This isn't Apple strong arming into a public and more general purpose show, it is rather Apple giving these people exactly what they have been crying for over the last couple of years.
Beyond all of that the vendors that are being displaced will likely get a huge boost from the debut anyway. If the new FCP is that good there will be a buying binge when it comes to hardware. It is a net positive for everybody.
I'm a little confused...why was Avid presenting at a Final Cut Pro User Group's meeting anyway? Do they just come in and are like "Hey, you've all made a mistake!" or something?
No idea, but I just don't get those tactics. I mean, other than being ruthless business people. :p
Just show your stuff without having to strong arm...
It is a users group for FCP what would you expect. Seriously the people running the Supermeet are probably falling all overthemselves to make sure Apple is happy here, FCP is the reason the group exists. This isn't Apple strong arming into a public and more general purpose show, it is rather Apple giving these people exactly what they have been crying for over the last couple of years.
Beyond all of that the vendors that are being displaced will likely get a huge boost from the debut anyway. If the new FCP is that good there will be a buying binge when it comes to hardware. It is a net positive for everybody.
MacSawdust
Aug 26, 10:40 AM
This nows explains why mine is not valid.
edk99
Apr 11, 11:33 AM
If it is going to be a 4g/LTE iPhone then this works for me. I have no complaints with my iPhone 4 so waiting another 4-6 months is fine with me.
Hurda
Apr 27, 08:38 AM
"Calculating a phone's location using just GPS satellite data can take up to several minutes."
Then how is car-navigation working?
Apple - Locating different :D:apple:
Then how is car-navigation working?
Apple - Locating different :D:apple:
Pro31
Apr 6, 02:10 PM
If you bought 2 Xooms would you have a Mazda?
SevenInchScrew
Aug 11, 07:33 PM
i know there have been more 'titles'. but they are not full releases, but i did leave out Gran Turismo for PSP, so they are up to 5 full releases now.
My point is, earlier you were saying that they only have 4 games and they sold 57M copies. If you look at that link, which is right from Polyphony themselves, you will see that if you only count the 4 main games, as you were eluding to, that only totals 46M.
yes i know, but there are more games in that series, and again, it's a different type of racing game.
So, you don't count NFS? Ok then. If I'm understanding you correctly, you are really only comparing GT to 1 other console game; Forza. It is the only other console game of any similar type. But, using your own logic, is it fair to compare GT to Forza, since GT has been out much longer and has many more games in the series? I mean, if we don't get to compare GT to NFS because of that, then surely you shouldn't compare GT to Forza for the same reason.
take a look here: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gran_Turismo_(series)) -{Wikipedia Quote}-
I really like you're choice of quoting.
Largest Number of cars in a Racing game
...of which about 1/3 of them are various Civics, Skylines and Imprezas.
Highest Selling PlayStation Game
...ok, that one is good. That says something.
Oldest Car in a Racing Game
...that no one ever drove, because it couldn't even get up the hilly parts of some tracks. Total waste.
Largest Instruction Guide for a Racing Game
...really? Oldest car and Largest guide?? REALLY?? Yikes.
GT by Citro�n (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GT_by_Citro�n).
granted, only 6 were made, but still, it's a real car. its not a fake one
Um, according to your OWN link, the car was cancelled. And really, that isn't surprising. It is a concept car, plain and simple. So again I ask, what REAL cars have ever ACTUALLY been made just to be in this game??
My point is, earlier you were saying that they only have 4 games and they sold 57M copies. If you look at that link, which is right from Polyphony themselves, you will see that if you only count the 4 main games, as you were eluding to, that only totals 46M.
yes i know, but there are more games in that series, and again, it's a different type of racing game.
So, you don't count NFS? Ok then. If I'm understanding you correctly, you are really only comparing GT to 1 other console game; Forza. It is the only other console game of any similar type. But, using your own logic, is it fair to compare GT to Forza, since GT has been out much longer and has many more games in the series? I mean, if we don't get to compare GT to NFS because of that, then surely you shouldn't compare GT to Forza for the same reason.
take a look here: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gran_Turismo_(series)) -{Wikipedia Quote}-
I really like you're choice of quoting.
Largest Number of cars in a Racing game
...of which about 1/3 of them are various Civics, Skylines and Imprezas.
Highest Selling PlayStation Game
...ok, that one is good. That says something.
Oldest Car in a Racing Game
...that no one ever drove, because it couldn't even get up the hilly parts of some tracks. Total waste.
Largest Instruction Guide for a Racing Game
...really? Oldest car and Largest guide?? REALLY?? Yikes.
GT by Citro�n (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GT_by_Citro�n).
granted, only 6 were made, but still, it's a real car. its not a fake one
Um, according to your OWN link, the car was cancelled. And really, that isn't surprising. It is a concept car, plain and simple. So again I ask, what REAL cars have ever ACTUALLY been made just to be in this game??
OutThere
Apr 27, 09:22 AM
Can you really blame them? They won't have a purpose in life without Birtherism.
Si Dieu n'existait pas, il faudrait l'inventer.
Si Dieu n'existait pas, il faudrait l'inventer.
Sikh
Apr 11, 01:03 PM
Ive had my 3GS since launch and my contract will end same date in june i got my phone.
I was hoping to wait MAYBE a month or 2, but if this holds up true, and they dont tell us at WDDC, they just expect us to wait, I will GLADLY go with a HTC Dual Core Android or Samsung Galaxy Dual Core Android because my 3GS is @ 512 cycles and its barely starting to hold 7 hours anymore, I need a new phone but Im waiting.
Also whats ironic is, apple care ends at the same time, and I was hoping that apple would keep the 2 year cycle going so every 2 years you just "rotate" out. Dad had a 3G, next year I got a 3GS, next year he got a 4, this year I was gonna get a 5. If they **** up that cycle, ill call it quits on Apple.
I love the iPhone, but im not going 2 1/2 years with a phone that wont hold a charge in a few months.
They better give us an explanation, or im done with apple.
I was hoping to wait MAYBE a month or 2, but if this holds up true, and they dont tell us at WDDC, they just expect us to wait, I will GLADLY go with a HTC Dual Core Android or Samsung Galaxy Dual Core Android because my 3GS is @ 512 cycles and its barely starting to hold 7 hours anymore, I need a new phone but Im waiting.
Also whats ironic is, apple care ends at the same time, and I was hoping that apple would keep the 2 year cycle going so every 2 years you just "rotate" out. Dad had a 3G, next year I got a 3GS, next year he got a 4, this year I was gonna get a 5. If they **** up that cycle, ill call it quits on Apple.
I love the iPhone, but im not going 2 1/2 years with a phone that wont hold a charge in a few months.
They better give us an explanation, or im done with apple.
shawnce
Aug 18, 10:14 PM
So You are saying 10 seconds from OFF to the Grey Apple then 5 more seconds to the desktop? With 3 GB of New Egg + 2GB RAM? That's still very fast. Quad G5 is almost as fast as that though.
A little random trivia I learned at WWDC 06...
- When you see the Apple symbol on an Intel Mac that means EFI boot loader is active.
- When you see the spinning progress indicator that means the kernel has taken over from EFI boot loader.
- When you see the the switch to blue with progress dialog then the logininwindow is active (launchd has been loading required boot time services by this point).
If you hold down option while booting and get into the traditional boot disk selection screen on a Intel based Mac you can add and remove storage devices and they will appear/disappear automatically (EFI allows for much faster scanning and dynamic add/remove of devices). Additionally they will use the volume icon if one is found and for fun you can use your IR remote to make your boot selection.
A little random trivia I learned at WWDC 06...
- When you see the Apple symbol on an Intel Mac that means EFI boot loader is active.
- When you see the spinning progress indicator that means the kernel has taken over from EFI boot loader.
- When you see the the switch to blue with progress dialog then the logininwindow is active (launchd has been loading required boot time services by this point).
If you hold down option while booting and get into the traditional boot disk selection screen on a Intel based Mac you can add and remove storage devices and they will appear/disappear automatically (EFI allows for much faster scanning and dynamic add/remove of devices). Additionally they will use the volume icon if one is found and for fun you can use your IR remote to make your boot selection.
TsMkLg068426
Apr 25, 03:23 PM
OH ****! GOOGLE AND MICROSOFT FANBOYS ARE MAD! U MUST SUE APPLE NOW! LOL!:p:apple:
Dan==
Jul 31, 09:35 AM
I think that the bigger issue with Dan=='s design (full credit and kudos for the idea!) is that the Mac Mini is so small that it only uses laptop components. If you want to have a full-size optical drive or a full-size hard drive, you need to use a larger form factor. This is part of the reason for the size of my design.
Here's a comparison in sizes (I've also changed the floor because my wife thought that the reflection was confusing...)
http://www.ghwphoto.com/3MacsFrontSm.png
http://www.ghwphoto.com/3MacsBackSm.png
Cheers!
Now you've got some skills. I especially like the shadowing, reflections and detail on the back side. Very nice.
I agree with your size assessment.
Actually, our designs are quite close, differing primarily in cosmetics. What I'm refering to is my earlier design, (which I suspect you missed) not boncellis'. boncellis wished to see a wider, flatter version for use in home entertainment, so I conjured that 2nd one up for visualization. While that form factor has grown on me somewhat, I still like the taller version, as I had done earlier, and you've shown here, as well.
Here's my initial design, from earlier in this thread.
http://img92.imageshack.us/img92/9648/macandmacminipx9.jpg
The size of mine is a little smaller (narrower) - I wanted the whole thing less than 8" wide, though it could go back a little deeper, i.e. not necessarily square.
Also, see possible/hoped for product specs earlier in the thread.
Personally, I think I still prefer the smoother Mini-like skin than the perforated look of the Pro, but I'm just quibbling.
Thanks for the imagery.
-Dan
Here's a comparison in sizes (I've also changed the floor because my wife thought that the reflection was confusing...)
http://www.ghwphoto.com/3MacsFrontSm.png
http://www.ghwphoto.com/3MacsBackSm.png
Cheers!
Now you've got some skills. I especially like the shadowing, reflections and detail on the back side. Very nice.
I agree with your size assessment.
Actually, our designs are quite close, differing primarily in cosmetics. What I'm refering to is my earlier design, (which I suspect you missed) not boncellis'. boncellis wished to see a wider, flatter version for use in home entertainment, so I conjured that 2nd one up for visualization. While that form factor has grown on me somewhat, I still like the taller version, as I had done earlier, and you've shown here, as well.
Here's my initial design, from earlier in this thread.
http://img92.imageshack.us/img92/9648/macandmacminipx9.jpg
The size of mine is a little smaller (narrower) - I wanted the whole thing less than 8" wide, though it could go back a little deeper, i.e. not necessarily square.
Also, see possible/hoped for product specs earlier in the thread.
Personally, I think I still prefer the smoother Mini-like skin than the perforated look of the Pro, but I'm just quibbling.
Thanks for the imagery.
-Dan
DoFoT9
Aug 17, 10:48 PM
I drive a Focus, so... no :D
:rolleyes: thats ok i drive a lancer ;)
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.
im a Subie boy at heart. ill eventually get an STi and play around with it.
:rolleyes: thats ok i drive a lancer ;)
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.
im a Subie boy at heart. ill eventually get an STi and play around with it.
LagunaSol
Apr 6, 03:47 PM
Real tablet OS, Full internet, True multitasking - the list's expanding fast :D
Google did have to take Open off the talking points list... ;)
Google did have to take Open off the talking points list... ;)
MacRumors
Apr 19, 01:21 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/19/analysis-of-apples-lawsuit-against-samsung-includes-ios-device-sales-numbers/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/19/142014-apple_samsung_lawsuit.jpg
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/19/142014-apple_samsung_lawsuit.jpg
Multimedia
Aug 18, 06:50 PM
So what apps will saturate all four cores or at least get close to it, on either a quad G5 or quad xeon? Are there any?
Are there any apps that really take advantage of four cores on their own?Toast 7.1 UB can use more than two cores. In my test at the Apple stopre last Saturday I saw Toast 7.1 UB use more than 3 - between 2.3 and 3.1 cores all the time on the Mac Pro. It also uses more than two on the Quad G5 - just barely. Handbrake is not yet optimized for Mac Pro and uses a little less than two on both. That use of two is negatively impacted as soon as you start doiong something else especially both Toast and Handbrake at once.
But in future it will use all four. The problem with that "test" you so highly value, is that the testers didn't have a Quad to compare to, so they didn't even search out applications that are already "Quad Core Ready" - that would make a nice bullet on a software package wouldn't it?
Better yet: "MultiCore Ready".
If you don't think you are going to ever use more than one thing at a time, then you are right. But I think most of us here have 10-15 things open at once and do all sorts of things at once. That's the reason for "Spaces" in Loepard.
Are there any apps that really take advantage of four cores on their own?Toast 7.1 UB can use more than two cores. In my test at the Apple stopre last Saturday I saw Toast 7.1 UB use more than 3 - between 2.3 and 3.1 cores all the time on the Mac Pro. It also uses more than two on the Quad G5 - just barely. Handbrake is not yet optimized for Mac Pro and uses a little less than two on both. That use of two is negatively impacted as soon as you start doiong something else especially both Toast and Handbrake at once.
But in future it will use all four. The problem with that "test" you so highly value, is that the testers didn't have a Quad to compare to, so they didn't even search out applications that are already "Quad Core Ready" - that would make a nice bullet on a software package wouldn't it?
Better yet: "MultiCore Ready".
If you don't think you are going to ever use more than one thing at a time, then you are right. But I think most of us here have 10-15 things open at once and do all sorts of things at once. That's the reason for "Spaces" in Loepard.
azentropy
Mar 31, 03:16 PM
Honeycomb is still not released as far as I know. When it's released and the code is not available, then we can talk.
The Motorola Xoom ships with Honeycomb. It has been released. You miss that???
The Motorola Xoom ships with Honeycomb. It has been released. You miss that???
63dot
Apr 25, 02:21 PM
Prove it.
It may be hard to prove and the burden of proof is on the plaintiff, but the mere appearance of the technology allowing the possibility to be tracked is enough for the feds to get something out of Apple.
It may be hard to prove and the burden of proof is on the plaintiff, but the mere appearance of the technology allowing the possibility to be tracked is enough for the feds to get something out of Apple.
slackpacker
Apr 25, 02:42 PM
Not guilty until proven guilty ... your turn to proof that they have the data. There is zero evidence for that, no matter how often you repeat the claim.
Its not that Apple is using this data its how its being used by others. Its Apples job to protect us not allow our private info to be used against us.
SEE >>>> www.cellebrite.com (http://www.cellebrite.com/forensic-products/ufed-physical-pro.html) - forensic-products
Its not that Apple is using this data its how its being used by others. Its Apples job to protect us not allow our private info to be used against us.
SEE >>>> www.cellebrite.com (http://www.cellebrite.com/forensic-products/ufed-physical-pro.html) - forensic-products
Eidorian
Aug 27, 09:50 AM
Are you sure that discount applies to the NEW Merom based Macs - I don't think so?The Mac Pro was added into the Major In Mac promo. Considering it was released 2 months after the promo started.
No comments:
Post a Comment