yg17
Feb 28, 12:54 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.
Why do you care what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their own home?
Why do you care what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their own home?
peskaa
Apr 28, 06:15 AM
Wow, this thread and the ridiculous nature of this issue are hilarious. Seriously, you wonder why the US is going down the pan when the entire nation seems to get caught up in a fight over a bloody birth certificate?
ergle2
Sep 13, 01:58 PM
The only limit with Windows is they keep the low end XP home to 2 processors on the same die. There is probably an architectural limit on both OSX and XP and if it's not 8 it's 16. It's probably 8.
There's a bunch of HP Superdome 64-way Itanium systems around running Windows Server mostly for MS SQL work.
Windows XP 64bit is based on the same core. Given the license is per-socket, not per-processor (currently, anyway) and the Pro editions support two sockets, it should in theory support the 8-way setup as described by Anandtech.
Whether it recognises quad-core CPUs as such may of course be a different matter.
There's a bunch of HP Superdome 64-way Itanium systems around running Windows Server mostly for MS SQL work.
Windows XP 64bit is based on the same core. Given the license is per-socket, not per-processor (currently, anyway) and the Pro editions support two sockets, it should in theory support the 8-way setup as described by Anandtech.
Whether it recognises quad-core CPUs as such may of course be a different matter.
QCassidy352
Aug 26, 07:20 PM
The only change is likely to be the cpu. The rest of the MBP will probably be kept the same and if you look at the yonah vs merom benchmarks at places like AnandTech, it probably isn't worth sending it back.
I'm sure the GPU will also be bumped, at the very least. The MBP will probably also see some things that the MB has like a user-removable hard drive and magnetic latch. The CPU and GPU alone make it worth getting the new one, IMO.
Also, I'll say it one last time (yea right) - the imac should not and will not get a mobile processor. It only got Yonah because there was no alternative. It had a real desktop processor when one was available on the PPC side (G5), and it will have a real desktop processor now that one is available on the intel side (Conroe). Leave merom for what it was meant for - laptops.
I'm sure the GPU will also be bumped, at the very least. The MBP will probably also see some things that the MB has like a user-removable hard drive and magnetic latch. The CPU and GPU alone make it worth getting the new one, IMO.
Also, I'll say it one last time (yea right) - the imac should not and will not get a mobile processor. It only got Yonah because there was no alternative. It had a real desktop processor when one was available on the PPC side (G5), and it will have a real desktop processor now that one is available on the intel side (Conroe). Leave merom for what it was meant for - laptops.
ifjake
Nov 29, 12:25 AM
here's my 2� without reading the rest of the thread:
maybe if they set aside the funds for cultivating new, compellingly good music from upandcoming artists. kinda like how the big movie studios own independent-esque branches. something nice. something a little more risky than your usual cookie-cutter pop-hit. i dunno maybe that's already there sort of. maybe.
maybe if they set aside the funds for cultivating new, compellingly good music from upandcoming artists. kinda like how the big movie studios own independent-esque branches. something nice. something a little more risky than your usual cookie-cutter pop-hit. i dunno maybe that's already there sort of. maybe.
Multimedia
Sep 13, 12:15 PM
So the question I have is can the latest iMac be CPU upgraded like the MacPro?Only to 2.33GHz Merom C2D which is the forseeable top speed. :(
chrmjenkins
Apr 11, 12:58 PM
This is bunk. Apple will not miss Christmas. Period, end of discussion.
If the 5 launches a short while before Christmas, the supply constraints would be 10x worse than they are for the iPad right now.
The only thing this rumor proves is that bloggers, speculators, and analysts are getting irritated with the lack of solid info compared to this time last year.
I agree. I'm going to have a good laugh if WWDC intros the iPhone 5 to be available within a month, just like the last 3 years have been.
If the 5 launches a short while before Christmas, the supply constraints would be 10x worse than they are for the iPad right now.
The only thing this rumor proves is that bloggers, speculators, and analysts are getting irritated with the lack of solid info compared to this time last year.
I agree. I'm going to have a good laugh if WWDC intros the iPhone 5 to be available within a month, just like the last 3 years have been.
faroZ06
Apr 27, 08:43 AM
And once again people give Apple a pass for something that is clearly an issue.
You mean to tell me that Apple, a company that seems to release fairly solid software, "neglected" to test that when disabling an option called LOCATION SERVICES, that it actually disabled location checking properly? Are some of you really so Jobsian?
Call a spade a spade. There's no possible chance this was a mistake. They got caught. They should not be given a pass over it. If a user opts to disable Location Services, they were working under the false impression that their location was no longer being tracked. Seems mighty shifty to me. Doesn't matter how much data might have been user-identifiable. This sounds like something Google would do, not Apple.
Not really. Although location services does not delete the log when you turn it off, it does cease to record to it. I don't see what the problem with that is.
You mean to tell me that Apple, a company that seems to release fairly solid software, "neglected" to test that when disabling an option called LOCATION SERVICES, that it actually disabled location checking properly? Are some of you really so Jobsian?
Call a spade a spade. There's no possible chance this was a mistake. They got caught. They should not be given a pass over it. If a user opts to disable Location Services, they were working under the false impression that their location was no longer being tracked. Seems mighty shifty to me. Doesn't matter how much data might have been user-identifiable. This sounds like something Google would do, not Apple.
Not really. Although location services does not delete the log when you turn it off, it does cease to record to it. I don't see what the problem with that is.
Amazing Iceman
Mar 23, 08:45 AM
Is MacRumors branching out to coverage of all tablets and media players now? I can't speak for everyone who visits the site but I come here to read about Apple products, not the competition's knock-offs.
True, but it's always good to know about what's out there to avoid 'falling for temptation'.
When the iPad came out, I thought it was just a toy, and was excited about the 'other' tablets coming out, which in the end never saw the light of day.
It was on part due to my regular visits to the MacRumors website and forums that I got the incentive to go buy an iPad, under the premises that ifnI didn't like, I would return it. And I still haven't.
I have been able to see other tablets too, but none really catched my attention. Some felt like cheap plastic, others had a display that was too small, etc. So far, I want an iPad2, but while I wait for it to become easily available, I don't mind reading and trying other tablets. So far all that keeps showing how great the iPad is.
True, but it's always good to know about what's out there to avoid 'falling for temptation'.
When the iPad came out, I thought it was just a toy, and was excited about the 'other' tablets coming out, which in the end never saw the light of day.
It was on part due to my regular visits to the MacRumors website and forums that I got the incentive to go buy an iPad, under the premises that ifnI didn't like, I would return it. And I still haven't.
I have been able to see other tablets too, but none really catched my attention. Some felt like cheap plastic, others had a display that was too small, etc. So far, I want an iPad2, but while I wait for it to become easily available, I don't mind reading and trying other tablets. So far all that keeps showing how great the iPad is.
ImNoSuperMan
Aug 26, 01:11 PM
Thank God Apple had shut down Indian Support centre before this happened. Otherwise all the web community would be blaming Indian Call Center for degrading Apple support service even if they were not at fault.
tripleanica
Nov 29, 01:29 PM
real music lovers buy their music in order the support great artists. i don't buy crap from the people at universal. nor do i expect to give them money when i buy an ipod.
janstett
Sep 15, 07:48 AM
The Today show is an embarrassment. The US major tv networks do not have any real morning news programs. How to trim your dog's ears and an inside look into American Idol contestants is NOT NEWS. It is an entertainment talk show.
The network morning "news" shows have always been fluff. What's worse is that the so-called "hard news" shows are just as bad, and not just in the morning -- CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News all run mindless fluff instead of news. And don't get me started with MSNBC airing Eye-Puss in the Morning.
The network morning "news" shows have always been fluff. What's worse is that the so-called "hard news" shows are just as bad, and not just in the morning -- CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News all run mindless fluff instead of news. And don't get me started with MSNBC airing Eye-Puss in the Morning.
Reach9
Apr 11, 02:35 PM
Why would you when android has at the moment passed apple on every standard out there?
Android hasn't passed Apple on every standard. Please give me an example of that.
But, Android phones are better smartphones than the iPhone, imo.
Android hasn't passed Apple on every standard. Please give me an example of that.
But, Android phones are better smartphones than the iPhone, imo.
SevenInchScrew
Dec 9, 06:38 PM
GT5 is a game for people who love cars. Not people who only love fast cars. People who love all cars.
But, I DO love all types of cars. I just don't think they all have a place in a RACING game.
I'm sure you'd be happy if everyone started with a Zonda in their garage, but for people who like to drive something fresh and fun the exhaustive list in GT5 is perfect.
The game doesn't have to be only 700hp exotics, that isn't what I'm saying. There have been PLENTY of wildly varied cars throughout history that would be fun to drive, on a track, in a racing game. The VW K�belwagen and Citro�n DS, for example, aren't some of them.
But, I DO love all types of cars. I just don't think they all have a place in a RACING game.
I'm sure you'd be happy if everyone started with a Zonda in their garage, but for people who like to drive something fresh and fun the exhaustive list in GT5 is perfect.
The game doesn't have to be only 700hp exotics, that isn't what I'm saying. There have been PLENTY of wildly varied cars throughout history that would be fun to drive, on a track, in a racing game. The VW K�belwagen and Citro�n DS, for example, aren't some of them.
technicolor
Sep 19, 10:15 PM
Why do you care?
Why shouldnt I?
Why shouldnt I?
feelthefire
Aug 7, 08:35 AM
We already have a Mac Pro line of products, we are also the owners of AppleLocks, and MacMice. The Tiger thing was silly.
According to a quick search, you have an application in for a service mark in the name of "Mac Pro" (which, by the way, is a service mark belonging to a cosmetics retailer which was granted in 2001) but no trademark on the name mac pro appears in your name. Apple's application states a number of hardware outside of computers, so if you don't already have a trademark to apply to your product line (and I couldn't find one) Apple may be coming after you, and not the other way around.
I'll happily retract my observation if you can document that you own the TRADEMARK and not an application for a service mark.
According to a quick search, you have an application in for a service mark in the name of "Mac Pro" (which, by the way, is a service mark belonging to a cosmetics retailer which was granted in 2001) but no trademark on the name mac pro appears in your name. Apple's application states a number of hardware outside of computers, so if you don't already have a trademark to apply to your product line (and I couldn't find one) Apple may be coming after you, and not the other way around.
I'll happily retract my observation if you can document that you own the TRADEMARK and not an application for a service mark.
RedTomato
Sep 13, 12:36 PM
I read the link above about the ZFS filesystem.
Hmm this could remove a lot of the pain I currently have juggling disks on the cheap.
(I hold a lot of footage of deaf people signing for a project, and don't really have any budget to pay for disk storage. I currently have about 200 GB left on a 1 TB RAID5 system inside a Powermac G3)
It seems the concept of individual volumes will vanish, and instead ZFS creates a common pool of filespace and looks after the checksums etc itself. New drives can just be thrown into the array and ZFS will look after optimising the array I/O.
Mixing 15k rpm speed demon drives with 5400rpm storage hog drives mmmm...
I look forwards to being able to buy a cheap chassis with just a power unit and space for 10 drives, and being able to put that next to my G3, and having ZFS sort out what to do with the 8-9 drives in there.
Something like that hooked up to a Cloverton should give significant HD speedup. Not as much as a ramdisk tho :)
One thing, the article says ZFS can cope with drives being removed from the pool. I'd like to see more detail on that. It surely copes with 1 out of 4 drives failing - what about 3 out of 4? What if 3 x 20GB 15k rpm drives fail and the 1x750GB 5400rpm drive is still up?
Hmm this could remove a lot of the pain I currently have juggling disks on the cheap.
(I hold a lot of footage of deaf people signing for a project, and don't really have any budget to pay for disk storage. I currently have about 200 GB left on a 1 TB RAID5 system inside a Powermac G3)
It seems the concept of individual volumes will vanish, and instead ZFS creates a common pool of filespace and looks after the checksums etc itself. New drives can just be thrown into the array and ZFS will look after optimising the array I/O.
Mixing 15k rpm speed demon drives with 5400rpm storage hog drives mmmm...
I look forwards to being able to buy a cheap chassis with just a power unit and space for 10 drives, and being able to put that next to my G3, and having ZFS sort out what to do with the 8-9 drives in there.
Something like that hooked up to a Cloverton should give significant HD speedup. Not as much as a ramdisk tho :)
One thing, the article says ZFS can cope with drives being removed from the pool. I'd like to see more detail on that. It surely copes with 1 out of 4 drives failing - what about 3 out of 4? What if 3 x 20GB 15k rpm drives fail and the 1x750GB 5400rpm drive is still up?
BJNY
Aug 23, 09:38 AM
My Quad G5 is silent as well, unlike Dual 2.7's which rev frequently.
I was concerned that the fans at the rear ports never spin, even during the Apple Hardware Test, but I've noticed that in other Quads as well. CPU temps are 50 to 60 degrees celcius.
Multimedia, would you confirm both with your Quad G5, please?
I was concerned that the fans at the rear ports never spin, even during the Apple Hardware Test, but I've noticed that in other Quads as well. CPU temps are 50 to 60 degrees celcius.
Multimedia, would you confirm both with your Quad G5, please?
Multimedia
Jul 21, 12:20 PM
It really depends on your application.
On the desktop, if you're a typical user that's just interested in web surfing, playing music files, organizing your photo collection, etc., more than two cores will probably not be too useful. For these kinds of users, even two cores may be overkill, but two are useful for keeping a responsive UI when an application starts hogging all the CPU time.
If you start using higher-power applications (like video work - iMovie/iDVD, for instance) then more cores will speed up that kind of work (assuming the app is properly multithreaded, of course.) 4-core systems will definitely benefit this kind of user.
With current applications, however, I don't think more than 4 cores will be useful. The kind of work that will make 8 cores useful is the kinds that requires expensive professional software - which most people don't use...
Cluster computing has similar benefits. With 8 cores in each processor, it is almost as good as having 8 times as many computers in the cluster, and a lot less expensive. This concept will scale up as the number of cores increases, assuming motherbaords can be designed with enough memory and FSB bandwidth to keep them all busy.
I think we might see a single quad-core chip in consumer systems, like the iMac. I think it is likely that we'll see them in Pro systems, like the Mac Pro (including a high-end model with two quad-core chips.)
I think processors with more than 4 cores will never be seen outside of servers - Xserves and maybe some configurations of Mac Pro. Mostly because that's where there is a need for this kind of power.I strongly disagree. I could use 16 cores right now for notihng more than simple consumer electronics video compression routines. There will be a Mac Pro with 8 cores this Winter 2007.
You are completely blind to the need for many cores right now for very simple stupid work. All I want to do is run 4 copies of Toast while running 4 copies of Handbrake simultaneously. Each wants 2 cores or more. So you are not thinking of the current need for 16 cores already.
This is not even beginning to discuss how many Final Cut Studio Editors need 16 Cores. Man, I can't believe you wrote that. I think you are overlooking the obvious - the need to run multiple copies of today's applicaitons simultaneously.
So as long as the heat issue can be overcome, I don't see why 8 Cores can't belong inside an iMac by the end of 2008.
I apologize if I read a little hot. But I find the line of thought that 4 or 8 Cores are enough or more than enough to really annoy me. They are not nearly enough for those of us who see the problem of not enough cores EVERY DAY. The rest of you either have no imagination or are only using your Macs for word processing, browsing and email.
I am sincerely frustrated by not having enough cores to do simple stupid work efficiently. Just look at how crippled this G5 Quad is already only running three things. They can't even run full speed due to lack of cores.
On the desktop, if you're a typical user that's just interested in web surfing, playing music files, organizing your photo collection, etc., more than two cores will probably not be too useful. For these kinds of users, even two cores may be overkill, but two are useful for keeping a responsive UI when an application starts hogging all the CPU time.
If you start using higher-power applications (like video work - iMovie/iDVD, for instance) then more cores will speed up that kind of work (assuming the app is properly multithreaded, of course.) 4-core systems will definitely benefit this kind of user.
With current applications, however, I don't think more than 4 cores will be useful. The kind of work that will make 8 cores useful is the kinds that requires expensive professional software - which most people don't use...
Cluster computing has similar benefits. With 8 cores in each processor, it is almost as good as having 8 times as many computers in the cluster, and a lot less expensive. This concept will scale up as the number of cores increases, assuming motherbaords can be designed with enough memory and FSB bandwidth to keep them all busy.
I think we might see a single quad-core chip in consumer systems, like the iMac. I think it is likely that we'll see them in Pro systems, like the Mac Pro (including a high-end model with two quad-core chips.)
I think processors with more than 4 cores will never be seen outside of servers - Xserves and maybe some configurations of Mac Pro. Mostly because that's where there is a need for this kind of power.I strongly disagree. I could use 16 cores right now for notihng more than simple consumer electronics video compression routines. There will be a Mac Pro with 8 cores this Winter 2007.
You are completely blind to the need for many cores right now for very simple stupid work. All I want to do is run 4 copies of Toast while running 4 copies of Handbrake simultaneously. Each wants 2 cores or more. So you are not thinking of the current need for 16 cores already.
This is not even beginning to discuss how many Final Cut Studio Editors need 16 Cores. Man, I can't believe you wrote that. I think you are overlooking the obvious - the need to run multiple copies of today's applicaitons simultaneously.
So as long as the heat issue can be overcome, I don't see why 8 Cores can't belong inside an iMac by the end of 2008.
I apologize if I read a little hot. But I find the line of thought that 4 or 8 Cores are enough or more than enough to really annoy me. They are not nearly enough for those of us who see the problem of not enough cores EVERY DAY. The rest of you either have no imagination or are only using your Macs for word processing, browsing and email.
I am sincerely frustrated by not having enough cores to do simple stupid work efficiently. Just look at how crippled this G5 Quad is already only running three things. They can't even run full speed due to lack of cores.
MacinDoc
Aug 26, 12:45 AM
Yep. My serial falls into the range and the website still won't accept it. I guess I will have to sit on hold Monday morning.
According to some people who have spoken with Apple customer service reps, some batteries within the listed ranges were not manufactured by Sony, which is why they don't qualify for replacement. Apparently, there is no easy way for the consumer to identify whether his/her battery is a Sony or not.
I suspect that because of all of the confusion, Apple will end up replacing all of the batteries in the listed ranges, whether they are Sony-manufactured or not, to avoid the wrath of customers who believe they are being ripped off if their batteries don't qualify. In the past, Apple has gone beyond what was required to correct situations that just looked bad.
Maybe this whole thing would have been easier if the serial numbers on the batteries somehow indicated their manufacturer (of course, that's just hindsight, but I hope Apple remembers this in the future).
According to some people who have spoken with Apple customer service reps, some batteries within the listed ranges were not manufactured by Sony, which is why they don't qualify for replacement. Apparently, there is no easy way for the consumer to identify whether his/her battery is a Sony or not.
I suspect that because of all of the confusion, Apple will end up replacing all of the batteries in the listed ranges, whether they are Sony-manufactured or not, to avoid the wrath of customers who believe they are being ripped off if their batteries don't qualify. In the past, Apple has gone beyond what was required to correct situations that just looked bad.
Maybe this whole thing would have been easier if the serial numbers on the batteries somehow indicated their manufacturer (of course, that's just hindsight, but I hope Apple remembers this in the future).
Arcus
Apr 25, 03:33 PM
because as we know, there's no end to the absurd lengths people will declare their rights trod upon.
I do agree with you that this whole thing is a big 'ole waste of time and money, I would have appreciated it if Apple told me that this file existed. I certainly know they knew where I was at any given moment. I remember when old cell phones had the ability to turn off the 911 location option, I always turned mine on.
It would have been nice to know about the file and had the option to delete it if I want.
This is waaaayy overblown now.
I do agree with you that this whole thing is a big 'ole waste of time and money, I would have appreciated it if Apple told me that this file existed. I certainly know they knew where I was at any given moment. I remember when old cell phones had the ability to turn off the 911 location option, I always turned mine on.
It would have been nice to know about the file and had the option to delete it if I want.
This is waaaayy overblown now.
Silentwave
Jul 14, 05:34 PM
It's worth noting that Intel has shipped P4-series chips at 3.4GHz. But the new chips (Woodcrest and Conroe) aren't being sold at speeds above 3GHz.
Pay attention. The answer is "sooner than you think".
Quarter 4 this year will see the X6900 conroe extreme at 3.2GHz.
So when will we start seeing 8 chips in a computer? Perhaps this will become the new measurement...not processor speeds, but the number of processors (or cores).
There have already been technology briefings from Intel that talk about 4-core chips in early and 32-core chips by 2010. Similar offerings are expected from AMD.
And the Xeon-MP series processors (which will, of course, eventually get all this tech) are designed with 8-way SMP in mind. A theoretical Xeon-MP based on this 32-core tech would produce a system with 256 cores. Of course, it is doubtful that anything other than a large server would be able to take proper advantage of this, so I wouldn't ever expect to find one on a desktop.
8 core should be out sometime between end of 2006 and beginning of 2007 with the quad core Clovertown processors (based on woodcrest) available in dual chip configurations. And it'll only get better from there.
Which reminds me, though slightly OT... this is a good reason why iMac may well get Conroe now or perhaps get Merom now but transition to a desktop chip by the time Santa Rosa comes out. The new chipset/socket means new logic board, and by the time that comes out the Kenstfield quad core chips on the consumer desktop end will start arriving. I don't yet know how far kentsfield will be scaling either up or down as far as clock speed/heat, but if quad core starts moving into the consumer dekstop market, they will need a very powerful processor: either Conroe or Kentsfield.
Pay attention. The answer is "sooner than you think".
Quarter 4 this year will see the X6900 conroe extreme at 3.2GHz.
So when will we start seeing 8 chips in a computer? Perhaps this will become the new measurement...not processor speeds, but the number of processors (or cores).
There have already been technology briefings from Intel that talk about 4-core chips in early and 32-core chips by 2010. Similar offerings are expected from AMD.
And the Xeon-MP series processors (which will, of course, eventually get all this tech) are designed with 8-way SMP in mind. A theoretical Xeon-MP based on this 32-core tech would produce a system with 256 cores. Of course, it is doubtful that anything other than a large server would be able to take proper advantage of this, so I wouldn't ever expect to find one on a desktop.
8 core should be out sometime between end of 2006 and beginning of 2007 with the quad core Clovertown processors (based on woodcrest) available in dual chip configurations. And it'll only get better from there.
Which reminds me, though slightly OT... this is a good reason why iMac may well get Conroe now or perhaps get Merom now but transition to a desktop chip by the time Santa Rosa comes out. The new chipset/socket means new logic board, and by the time that comes out the Kenstfield quad core chips on the consumer desktop end will start arriving. I don't yet know how far kentsfield will be scaling either up or down as far as clock speed/heat, but if quad core starts moving into the consumer dekstop market, they will need a very powerful processor: either Conroe or Kentsfield.
RebootD
Apr 12, 04:49 PM
The truly sad part about this is going to be when Apple doesn't deliver on our rumored promises.
I REALLY HOPE that Apple does what that article says, and does it WELL, with no bugs or issues that render the entire system useless, within a price point that's reasonable ($1500 --> $2500 for what's described).
Otherwise, it's going to make whatever update we do get for FCP moot.
Well everything outside of no tape capture option. I don't have a professional rig for video so I guess that would mean sticking with CS5. (As in I don't own a capture card, just use FW)
I REALLY HOPE that Apple does what that article says, and does it WELL, with no bugs or issues that render the entire system useless, within a price point that's reasonable ($1500 --> $2500 for what's described).
Otherwise, it's going to make whatever update we do get for FCP moot.
Well everything outside of no tape capture option. I don't have a professional rig for video so I guess that would mean sticking with CS5. (As in I don't own a capture card, just use FW)
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 11, 03:22 PM
Who wants to go through the trouble of doing a software change to unlock their phone.
It is a code you are given to unlock the cell. NOT a software change, unless the carrier changes the entire phone software.
It is a code you are given to unlock the cell. NOT a software change, unless the carrier changes the entire phone software.
No comments:
Post a Comment