swingerofbirch
Aug 26, 07:40 PM
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 agree with you wholeheartedly.
But, I guess they COULD have put a pentium d in them...didnt they have dual cores?
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 agree with you wholeheartedly.
But, I guess they COULD have put a pentium d in them...didnt they have dual cores?
mactree
Apr 25, 04:40 PM
I'm sure they're re-writting their next big unveiling keynote as we speak, since this was probably part of some amazing new feature we would have all stood up and cheered for :apple:
intlplby
Nov 28, 09:05 PM
the way i see it, MP3 players have been the single biggest factor in increasing sales of music (as well as song piracy) so in a way the ipod is driving the purchase of CDs, not CDs driving the purchase of iPods
both items feed each other
Music increases iPod sales and iPod sales increase music sales... it's a feedback loop
Universal owes Apple money on the same logic......
both items feed each other
Music increases iPod sales and iPod sales increase music sales... it's a feedback loop
Universal owes Apple money on the same logic......
SevenInchScrew
Aug 12, 01:15 AM
its kind of like comparing two different beasts imo.
I know they are fundamentally two different types of games in a similar genre, but he brought up the sales of the series, so I offered up another racing game series with much higher sales.
let's see, my original post:
{quote of your incorrect original post}
noticed i said, "not including demos". which all other versions are, except for the psp game. granted, the last demo, or prologue, is a PS3 greatest hits.
I don't really care if you count the Prologues as full releases or not. The fact remains...
GT1 + GT2 + GT3 + GT4 = 46M
...not 57M like you originally, and incorrectly, said.
...but if we go off number of sales (since you seem to think b/c i mentioned it, it's the only thing i take into consideration)...i'd say GT5 stacks up very well with NFS, considering everything. again, just looking at sales here
You brought up sales, not me. And last I checked, objectively, 100 is more than 57, regardless of how you subjectively look at it.
that's still not the point. having that many cars adds to the game, and adds up in data on that one disk. i'm sure many players drive those same cars in real life
No, the only thing that adds to is a stat point on the back of the box. I mean, hooray, someone's 87 CRX is in a racing game. YAY!! :rolleyes:
That is the problem with GT these days. Too much fluff, and lacking in the racing. I mean, whatever, they can make whatever kind of game they want. If they want to fill the game with 1000 cars, 800 of which most people never touch, they can do that. To me, though, they are losing what made the series great years ago.
GT5 is only on playstation.
NO WAY!!! I never knew that. :rolleyes:
with so many cars, and so many races, some need a guide. some races are very difficult.
Sure, but a "Guinness Record" for it? Again, to much fluff.
but again, it still is a real car. and the intention of producing 6 of these cars was for this game. that is clear.
No, it is a concept car that Citro�n paraded around at car shows. Lots of concept cars get built with the fake intention of going into production. But you know what? Almost none of them do. This Citro�n is no different.
I know they are fundamentally two different types of games in a similar genre, but he brought up the sales of the series, so I offered up another racing game series with much higher sales.
let's see, my original post:
{quote of your incorrect original post}
noticed i said, "not including demos". which all other versions are, except for the psp game. granted, the last demo, or prologue, is a PS3 greatest hits.
I don't really care if you count the Prologues as full releases or not. The fact remains...
GT1 + GT2 + GT3 + GT4 = 46M
...not 57M like you originally, and incorrectly, said.
...but if we go off number of sales (since you seem to think b/c i mentioned it, it's the only thing i take into consideration)...i'd say GT5 stacks up very well with NFS, considering everything. again, just looking at sales here
You brought up sales, not me. And last I checked, objectively, 100 is more than 57, regardless of how you subjectively look at it.
that's still not the point. having that many cars adds to the game, and adds up in data on that one disk. i'm sure many players drive those same cars in real life
No, the only thing that adds to is a stat point on the back of the box. I mean, hooray, someone's 87 CRX is in a racing game. YAY!! :rolleyes:
That is the problem with GT these days. Too much fluff, and lacking in the racing. I mean, whatever, they can make whatever kind of game they want. If they want to fill the game with 1000 cars, 800 of which most people never touch, they can do that. To me, though, they are losing what made the series great years ago.
GT5 is only on playstation.
NO WAY!!! I never knew that. :rolleyes:
with so many cars, and so many races, some need a guide. some races are very difficult.
Sure, but a "Guinness Record" for it? Again, to much fluff.
but again, it still is a real car. and the intention of producing 6 of these cars was for this game. that is clear.
No, it is a concept car that Citro�n paraded around at car shows. Lots of concept cars get built with the fake intention of going into production. But you know what? Almost none of them do. This Citro�n is no different.
guzhogi
Jul 20, 10:07 AM
First of all, you assume that it is possible to make "one big core equal in processing power to the 8 cores". I don't think it is possible to do this (at least not with the x86 architecture using today's technology.)
But assuming such a chip exists, the answer depends on what kind of efficiency you're thinking of.
If you mean computational efficiency (meaning the most useful processing per clock-tick), then a single big core will do better. This is because single-threaded apps will be able to use the full power (whereas multiple threads are needed to take advantagte of multiple cores.) Also, the operating system can get rid of the overhead that is needed to keep software running on the multiple cores from stepping on each other.
If you mean energy efficiency (amount of processing per watt of electricity consumed), then it could go either way, depending on how the chips are made. But given today's manufacturing processes and the non-linear power curve that we see as clock speeds are increased, the multiple-core solution will almost definitely use less power.
I remember hearing about how it is possible to make multiple cores act like one (Idon't remember where I heard this). Anyways, whether 8 cores acting separately or together like 1 big processor has an advantage depends on the program you use. If the program is multi-threaded, then the cores acting separately might have the advantage while single threaded apps will have an advantage if the cores are acting like one. However, many apps today won't see that much improvement either way (like a simple calculator, or solitare and word processing).
But assuming such a chip exists, the answer depends on what kind of efficiency you're thinking of.
If you mean computational efficiency (meaning the most useful processing per clock-tick), then a single big core will do better. This is because single-threaded apps will be able to use the full power (whereas multiple threads are needed to take advantagte of multiple cores.) Also, the operating system can get rid of the overhead that is needed to keep software running on the multiple cores from stepping on each other.
If you mean energy efficiency (amount of processing per watt of electricity consumed), then it could go either way, depending on how the chips are made. But given today's manufacturing processes and the non-linear power curve that we see as clock speeds are increased, the multiple-core solution will almost definitely use less power.
I remember hearing about how it is possible to make multiple cores act like one (Idon't remember where I heard this). Anyways, whether 8 cores acting separately or together like 1 big processor has an advantage depends on the program you use. If the program is multi-threaded, then the cores acting separately might have the advantage while single threaded apps will have an advantage if the cores are acting like one. However, many apps today won't see that much improvement either way (like a simple calculator, or solitare and word processing).
Tomaz
Aug 7, 04:30 PM
If you were picking on Mail.app's Stationery I'd probably agree with you.
None of the things that Time Machine have been compared to seem even close to what they are planning to do. Including my own VMS file versioning analogies. System Restore is not capable of restoring a single file, and particularly not within a running application. It seems kind of more like a system wide undo function when it comes to files...
B
I'm not comparing it to system restore but to Volume Shadow Copy from Windows Server 2003. File-by-file snapshot by MS 3 years ago!
I think Time Machine looks and probably is good, but after having seen all the pictures of the banners at WWDC mocking Vista, I expected someting REALLY NEW, not just warmed up. If they can't show the super super secret new stuff yet, then they shouldn't have used those banners. I find that arrogant...
None of the things that Time Machine have been compared to seem even close to what they are planning to do. Including my own VMS file versioning analogies. System Restore is not capable of restoring a single file, and particularly not within a running application. It seems kind of more like a system wide undo function when it comes to files...
B
I'm not comparing it to system restore but to Volume Shadow Copy from Windows Server 2003. File-by-file snapshot by MS 3 years ago!
I think Time Machine looks and probably is good, but after having seen all the pictures of the banners at WWDC mocking Vista, I expected someting REALLY NEW, not just warmed up. If they can't show the super super secret new stuff yet, then they shouldn't have used those banners. I find that arrogant...
shawnce
Aug 16, 11:21 PM
Still waiting for game benchmarks...
I think you will be happy with rather amazing performance boost you will see from WoW in the near future when running on a Mac Pro (it isn't all a result of just hardware either). Expect other games to improve as well.
I think you will be happy with rather amazing performance boost you will see from WoW in the near future when running on a Mac Pro (it isn't all a result of just hardware either). Expect other games to improve as well.
iJohnHenry
Mar 21, 02:38 PM
It is in fact somewhat problematic. At present, the government is basically run by moneyed interests that supply the funding needed for the candidates to get into office
Exactly, he's doing the best he can, given the situation he is in.
Perhaps sysiphus could do a better job, without being a broken man as a result? ;)
Exactly, he's doing the best he can, given the situation he is in.
Perhaps sysiphus could do a better job, without being a broken man as a result? ;)
Ommid
Apr 25, 01:38 PM
Wounded, Apple will go on strike and remove all GPS from future devices now. ;)
pdjudd
Mar 31, 03:18 PM
The Motorola Xoom ships with Honeycomb. It has been released. You miss that???
The source hasn't been released. It's the source code that people are talking about. The source code that Google has always released up till now.
The source hasn't been released. It's the source code that people are talking about. The source code that Google has always released up till now.
Bill McEnaney
Mar 1, 09:25 AM
Good to hear. Can we now assume you support marriage rights for gay people?
Lee, you should already know my answer to that question. It's an emphatic "no." Nor do I support the gay rights movement.
I don't tell others what to do, but that doesn't mean I think it's all right for them do everything they want to do. I'll share my opinions with others if they're willing to hear them. I don't want to control anyone, and I will not be a codependent caregiver. I refuse to protect others from negative consequences when they need to learn from them.
My parents, especially my Mom, hated to see me do some foolish things when I was a boy. They let me walk the half mile to the steakhouse when they knew that I probably would have been too tired to walk back home. They let me stand outdoors in the winter when I tried to run away from home in the winter. The front porch was too icy for me to stand on, so I couldn't walk down the steps.
I believe that people with same-sex attractions are endangering themselves at least physically when they have sex with each other. So I'll post a link to some evidence for my opinion (http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/homosexuality/ho0075.html). Notice, the document's author is a medical doctor.
Lee, you should already know my answer to that question. It's an emphatic "no." Nor do I support the gay rights movement.
I don't tell others what to do, but that doesn't mean I think it's all right for them do everything they want to do. I'll share my opinions with others if they're willing to hear them. I don't want to control anyone, and I will not be a codependent caregiver. I refuse to protect others from negative consequences when they need to learn from them.
My parents, especially my Mom, hated to see me do some foolish things when I was a boy. They let me walk the half mile to the steakhouse when they knew that I probably would have been too tired to walk back home. They let me stand outdoors in the winter when I tried to run away from home in the winter. The front porch was too icy for me to stand on, so I couldn't walk down the steps.
I believe that people with same-sex attractions are endangering themselves at least physically when they have sex with each other. So I'll post a link to some evidence for my opinion (http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/homosexuality/ho0075.html). Notice, the document's author is a medical doctor.
deconai
Aug 11, 03:47 PM
Yes. EVERYONE. If you dont believe me, maybe you believe the economist:
http://www.economist.com/printedition/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID=4351974
Please note that the graph is about three years old. Nowadays a lot more of the countries are over 100%.
That is insane! It's interesting to note the number of people with multiple phones...
http://www.economist.com/printedition/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID=4351974
Please note that the graph is about three years old. Nowadays a lot more of the countries are over 100%.
That is insane! It's interesting to note the number of people with multiple phones...
Bilbo63
Apr 19, 06:03 PM
According to Wikipedia It was released in Feb before the iPhone was released..
The iPhone was revealed on January 9th 2007. It didn't ship until June due to regulatory approval.
The iPhone was revealed on January 9th 2007. It didn't ship until June due to regulatory approval.
iliketyla
Mar 31, 08:21 PM
Has LTD ever posted anything not pro-Apple?
I'll give it to you dude, you're very articulate and you have a way of spinning things to sound like you're right, but you are blatantly against anything that encourages competition or threatens Apple in any way.
I'll give it to you dude, you're very articulate and you have a way of spinning things to sound like you're right, but you are blatantly against anything that encourages competition or threatens Apple in any way.
toddybody
Apr 19, 02:53 PM
The First Commercial GUI
http://img62.imageshack.us/img62/5659/star1vg.gif
Xerox's Star workstation was the first commercial implementation of the graphical user interface. The Star was introduced in 1981 and was the inspiration for the Mac and all the other GUIs that followed.
http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/7892/leopardpreviewdesktop4.jpghttp://img714.imageshack.us/img714/5733/xerox8010star.gif
Fantastic UI for the day
http://img62.imageshack.us/img62/5659/star1vg.gif
Xerox's Star workstation was the first commercial implementation of the graphical user interface. The Star was introduced in 1981 and was the inspiration for the Mac and all the other GUIs that followed.
http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/7892/leopardpreviewdesktop4.jpghttp://img714.imageshack.us/img714/5733/xerox8010star.gif
Fantastic UI for the day
Durendal
Apr 5, 07:16 PM
YES!!! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eyqUj3PGHv4)
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjefIiWyrURJ33FZ1JOeihyphenhyphenJJw4-DjNsmNJPlkpooHcGoQfYVQU3Am4wPUYvf8qq_1q4v3emIw2uOe4rQ3ysM2zSK8hCFOGk6tSam6FWorvWMIP_5-9kzlbpAInNvlOq4K6WAj4NbRI9lHu/s400/wtf.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjefIiWyrURJ33FZ1JOeihyphenhyphenJJw4-DjNsmNJPlkpooHcGoQfYVQU3Am4wPUYvf8qq_1q4v3emIw2uOe4rQ3ysM2zSK8hCFOGk6tSam6FWorvWMIP_5-9kzlbpAInNvlOq4K6WAj4NbRI9lHu/s400/wtf.jpg
tortoise
Aug 23, 03:04 PM
Do you have a reference showing that this translates to better performance in real-world application tests in a head to head competition?
Not handy, since a lot of this happened on mailing lists.
The short version is that the memory performance scales in a very sub-linear fashion as a function of the number of cores being used, whereas Opteron scalability is almost linear up to a large number of cores. The good news is that for single dual-core processors the memory performance is on par with dual-core Opterons and their in-cache performance can be better. The bad news is that this performance does not hold as you scale cores in a system. So for some applications (e.g. those that live mostly in cache) the Woodcrest processors will be mildly faster than Opterons, but for most the performance is about even in real app benchmarks.
I've seen fairly comprehensive benchmarks for both databases and scientific computing applications, both of which thoroughly exercise the memory subsystem. Even though a single Intel core theoretically has more bandwidth, the high latency means that the real bandwidth is about the same as the slower Opterons (which have real bandwidth that approaches theoretical) and the cross-sectional bandwidth of Opterons when you get up to 4 cores and higher is much higher since the scaling is almost linear with the number of cores. For Intel, I think it was the case that a bigger cache was a cheaper design choice than a truly scalable memory subsystem. As a result, they will have different competencies. Some types of floating point codes should run very well on Intel.
Not handy, since a lot of this happened on mailing lists.
The short version is that the memory performance scales in a very sub-linear fashion as a function of the number of cores being used, whereas Opteron scalability is almost linear up to a large number of cores. The good news is that for single dual-core processors the memory performance is on par with dual-core Opterons and their in-cache performance can be better. The bad news is that this performance does not hold as you scale cores in a system. So for some applications (e.g. those that live mostly in cache) the Woodcrest processors will be mildly faster than Opterons, but for most the performance is about even in real app benchmarks.
I've seen fairly comprehensive benchmarks for both databases and scientific computing applications, both of which thoroughly exercise the memory subsystem. Even though a single Intel core theoretically has more bandwidth, the high latency means that the real bandwidth is about the same as the slower Opterons (which have real bandwidth that approaches theoretical) and the cross-sectional bandwidth of Opterons when you get up to 4 cores and higher is much higher since the scaling is almost linear with the number of cores. For Intel, I think it was the case that a bigger cache was a cheaper design choice than a truly scalable memory subsystem. As a result, they will have different competencies. Some types of floating point codes should run very well on Intel.
wiestlingjr
Jun 9, 08:21 PM
Okay.. well I guess I wont be taking my chances at RadioShack. If they let me preorder, would I be good to go on launch day? Or could i still encounter problems
wmmk
Aug 17, 09:49 AM
I don't like Adobe anymore. :mad:
I dunno, I mean, I guess they could use core image, but really. CS3 will probably have PS, Illustrator, ID, FW, Flash, DW, CF, Contribute, Bridge and Acrobat. That's 10 apps. Would you want to develop 20 apps, just so that Mac users could have Core Image? Until competitors come along with Core Image support, don't expect Adobe to have it.
I dunno, I mean, I guess they could use core image, but really. CS3 will probably have PS, Illustrator, ID, FW, Flash, DW, CF, Contribute, Bridge and Acrobat. That's 10 apps. Would you want to develop 20 apps, just so that Mac users could have Core Image? Until competitors come along with Core Image support, don't expect Adobe to have it.
starflyer
Mar 22, 02:23 PM
not enough RAM
Not enough RAM to do what exactly?
Not enough RAM to do what exactly?
Sydde
Mar 20, 06:56 PM
But they have worked so hard, all these decades, to diminish the "one man, one vote" to something much less than that.
Well, you see, it is not about the one-man-one-vote thing. That works just fine. You just have to make sure you keep the wrong men from voting.
Well, you see, it is not about the one-man-one-vote thing. That works just fine. You just have to make sure you keep the wrong men from voting.
iJawn108
Aug 6, 03:21 PM
http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/mwsf06/
Rt&Dzine
Apr 27, 12:32 PM
So what would be good enough to convince you?
Nothing. These Birthers aren't going to give up their religion.
Nothing. These Birthers aren't going to give up their religion.
*LTD*
Apr 10, 09:50 PM
Oh, we are totally getting an iPad app to go along with this program. I can feel it.
Impossible.
The iPad is not a serious computer. This will never happen.
It's just a fad.
Ignore the big-name game titles for iOS. Ignore the upcoming Photoshop app. Ignore the millions of sales. Ignore the copycats in the market.
It'll all go away very soon.
Impossible.
The iPad is not a serious computer. This will never happen.
It's just a fad.
Ignore the big-name game titles for iOS. Ignore the upcoming Photoshop app. Ignore the millions of sales. Ignore the copycats in the market.
It'll all go away very soon.