pcharles
Mar 23, 07:58 AM
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but people keep going on about ThunderBolt like it's gonna fill 200gig ipods in a minute and how you can copy 500gig files between computers in minutes...
That may be the case between ThunderBolt connected RAID arrays, and Macbook Pros with lightning fast SSD write rates,
but isn't the case that the 1.8inch HDD in the ipod wouldn't be able to write files to it's disk at anything close to ThunderBolt speeds, I wouldn't be suprised if USB2.0 nearly saturates these 1.8inch drive write speeds.
I agree that Thunderbolt is overkill until we have raided SSD, but my old FW400 ipod fills much faster than my new USB2 iPod Video, so I do not think that USB2 is saturating the drive. There are plenty of benchmarks out there showing that FW is significantly faster for sustained read/write operations. Thunderbolt could be thought of as the new firewire because it supports fast sustained transfer, can be daisy chained, and supports other protocols such as networking and video. Its potential is amazing! Imagine a computer of the future with one port on to which you can daisy chain your monitor and all your peripherals, and still have bandwidth to spare!
That may be the case between ThunderBolt connected RAID arrays, and Macbook Pros with lightning fast SSD write rates,
but isn't the case that the 1.8inch HDD in the ipod wouldn't be able to write files to it's disk at anything close to ThunderBolt speeds, I wouldn't be suprised if USB2.0 nearly saturates these 1.8inch drive write speeds.
I agree that Thunderbolt is overkill until we have raided SSD, but my old FW400 ipod fills much faster than my new USB2 iPod Video, so I do not think that USB2 is saturating the drive. There are plenty of benchmarks out there showing that FW is significantly faster for sustained read/write operations. Thunderbolt could be thought of as the new firewire because it supports fast sustained transfer, can be daisy chained, and supports other protocols such as networking and video. Its potential is amazing! Imagine a computer of the future with one port on to which you can daisy chain your monitor and all your peripherals, and still have bandwidth to spare!
stevehp
Oct 23, 04:33 PM
If this update is for 15", it does make sense. I think 15" was the first intel Mac, followed by 17" and MB.
ya but unless there is a stock issue of C2D's, it makes no sense to only update the 15 inch. All the iMac's were updated at the same time regardless of their original release date.
ya but unless there is a stock issue of C2D's, it makes no sense to only update the 15 inch. All the iMac's were updated at the same time regardless of their original release date.
BornAgainMac
Sep 6, 09:14 AM
These new Mac Mini's don't seem like a great deal anymore. I think it was done on purpose to get people to upscale to a higher model.
Eraserhead
Apr 9, 01:45 AM
The solution to Mexico's problems is drugs legalisation.
lyzardking
May 8, 11:44 AM
wait, so are you running a3's on your 09s? or bigadv units?
also, congrats to whiterabbit for 15 million points!
a3's on the '08
-bigadv on the '09s (they occasionally pickup an a3)
Sorry about the confusion (I should reread what I type) :o
also, congrats to whiterabbit for 15 million points!
a3's on the '08
-bigadv on the '09s (they occasionally pickup an a3)
Sorry about the confusion (I should reread what I type) :o
gri
Apr 19, 11:33 AM
The iMac update is likely to be a spec bump, Sandy Bridge, better Graphics, etc...plus Thunderbolt. I plan to hang on to my current model for now.
I am more excited about a potential Mac Mini Update, because I need one of those.
And what prey makes you excited about an upcoming mini update? Or are you just hoping?
I am more excited about a potential Mac Mini Update, because I need one of those.
And what prey makes you excited about an upcoming mini update? Or are you just hoping?
AppleIntelRock
Nov 29, 05:39 PM
In order to make this product perfect Apple needs to give it a few more features:
A) Add a HDD bay so that if one wants, they can add built-in DVR functionality. (I said the BAY and not the actual HDD because not EVERYONE wants this feature- hear that Sony?)
B) Add a built in iPod dock. This would enable friends to bring their iPod to your iTv and play their videos.
C) Enable drag and drop functionality to the HDD, enabling the iTv to play your movies even when not connected to the internet- or in the car etc.
D) Change the remote- no offense, but this remote needs a few more buttons, considering it may drive a media hub.
I don't know if anyone has told you yet...
http://www.ilounge.com/index.php/mobile/reviews/aft-icarta-stereo-dock-for-ipod-and-bath-tissue-holder/
Those people need to find another calling.
A) Add a HDD bay so that if one wants, they can add built-in DVR functionality. (I said the BAY and not the actual HDD because not EVERYONE wants this feature- hear that Sony?)
B) Add a built in iPod dock. This would enable friends to bring their iPod to your iTv and play their videos.
C) Enable drag and drop functionality to the HDD, enabling the iTv to play your movies even when not connected to the internet- or in the car etc.
D) Change the remote- no offense, but this remote needs a few more buttons, considering it may drive a media hub.
I don't know if anyone has told you yet...
http://www.ilounge.com/index.php/mobile/reviews/aft-icarta-stereo-dock-for-ipod-and-bath-tissue-holder/
Those people need to find another calling.
gmcalpin
Jun 22, 06:02 PM
Ah yes. A porn free, tightly censored, code controlled desktop machine. That's what everyone wants right? :rolleyes:
Did you miss the part where it says OSX and iOS?
Did you miss the part where it says OSX and iOS?
Tomorrow
Apr 20, 11:01 AM
Automatics are for the elderly, and for fat and/or lazy people.
http://paradoxdgn.com/junk/avatars/trollface.jpg
Wow, really? :rolleyes:
So if someone wants to buy a Corvette, and they're neither elderly, fat, nor lazy, they should shell out extra and order one with a manual transmission rather than buy one off the lot?
If someone wants to buy a Ford Taurus, Nissan Maxima, Chevrolet Impala, or a host of similar cars, then they must be either elderly, fat, or lazy, right? Because none of those are available with a manual transmission.
That's because you only have automatics to drive :p
No, my first car had a manual transmission (on the column). It was even worse, but that's mostly because the car was a 1965 model and had no air conditioning, no power steering, no power brakes, no power windows, torn-up seats, and oddly chewed through right rear tail light bulbs at a blistering pace. That was back in the days when driving was less of a headache than it is today (I was much younger), but even then I would still rather ride shotgun.
http://paradoxdgn.com/junk/avatars/trollface.jpg
Wow, really? :rolleyes:
So if someone wants to buy a Corvette, and they're neither elderly, fat, nor lazy, they should shell out extra and order one with a manual transmission rather than buy one off the lot?
If someone wants to buy a Ford Taurus, Nissan Maxima, Chevrolet Impala, or a host of similar cars, then they must be either elderly, fat, or lazy, right? Because none of those are available with a manual transmission.
That's because you only have automatics to drive :p
No, my first car had a manual transmission (on the column). It was even worse, but that's mostly because the car was a 1965 model and had no air conditioning, no power steering, no power brakes, no power windows, torn-up seats, and oddly chewed through right rear tail light bulbs at a blistering pace. That was back in the days when driving was less of a headache than it is today (I was much younger), but even then I would still rather ride shotgun.
garybUK
Feb 24, 06:01 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
Take it you've never been down south where ford makes it's own engines?
You mean Dagenham where they make the Petrol and some of the PSA Diesel engines? Take it I have... seeing as my dad and uncle worked for Ford for >20 years ;) Funny how after knowing about fords like that neither of them would own a Ford privately (dad has a Audi A6 Estate + uncle a VW Passatt).
Take it you've never been down south where ford makes it's own engines?
You mean Dagenham where they make the Petrol and some of the PSA Diesel engines? Take it I have... seeing as my dad and uncle worked for Ford for >20 years ;) Funny how after knowing about fords like that neither of them would own a Ford privately (dad has a Audi A6 Estate + uncle a VW Passatt).
~Shard~
Nov 25, 12:38 AM
Certainly not the most expensive mac ever sold. The 40 Mhz II fx was shipping while the II ci sported an MSRP of over $8,000 at 25Mhz. Cheapest the ci sold for even at developer discount at the end of its amazingly long 4+ year run was over $3,300, and those were late 80's dollars.
So to my mind, a few grand on a new machine these days is dirt cheap.
Couldn't agree more. After all, this used to be a bargain as well as the aforementioned machines... :cool:
http://img215.imageshack.us/img215//tandypricetp6.png (http://imageshack.us)
So to my mind, a few grand on a new machine these days is dirt cheap.
Couldn't agree more. After all, this used to be a bargain as well as the aforementioned machines... :cool:
http://img215.imageshack.us/img215//tandypricetp6.png (http://imageshack.us)
qualleyiv
Nov 15, 10:30 AM
That really depends on the program, on how "parallelizable" the application is.
The simplest way to think of it is like this: Let's say you have a program that first has to calculate A. Then, when it's done that, it uses the result of A to calculate B. Then, when it's done that, uses the result of B to calculate C, then C to D, and so on. That's a *serial* problem there. The calculation of B can't begin until A is done, so it doesn't matter how many processors you have running, all computation is held up on one spot.
On the other hand, let's say you have an application that needs to calculate A, B, C and D, but those four values are not dependent on each other at all. In that case, you can use four processors at the same time, to calculate all four values at the same time.
Think of it like baking a cake. You can't start putting on the icing until the cake is done baking. And you can't start baking the cake until the ingredients are all mixed together. But you can have people simultaneously getting out and measuring the ingredients.
So that problem is partially parallelizable, but the majority of its workload is a serial process.
Some software applications, just by their very nature, will never be able to do anything useful with multiple processors.
OK, I'm hardly a programmer (PHP doesn't really count) but that's the exact same description that I've heard applied to the description of what it takes to vectorize a program (i.e. make it Alti-Vec optimized) [that and the process of making loops that can be unrolled]. So I've got to ask, is there some difference between those two concepts? If not, it sure seems like we would have a lot more multi-core enabled apps out there already...
The simplest way to think of it is like this: Let's say you have a program that first has to calculate A. Then, when it's done that, it uses the result of A to calculate B. Then, when it's done that, uses the result of B to calculate C, then C to D, and so on. That's a *serial* problem there. The calculation of B can't begin until A is done, so it doesn't matter how many processors you have running, all computation is held up on one spot.
On the other hand, let's say you have an application that needs to calculate A, B, C and D, but those four values are not dependent on each other at all. In that case, you can use four processors at the same time, to calculate all four values at the same time.
Think of it like baking a cake. You can't start putting on the icing until the cake is done baking. And you can't start baking the cake until the ingredients are all mixed together. But you can have people simultaneously getting out and measuring the ingredients.
So that problem is partially parallelizable, but the majority of its workload is a serial process.
Some software applications, just by their very nature, will never be able to do anything useful with multiple processors.
OK, I'm hardly a programmer (PHP doesn't really count) but that's the exact same description that I've heard applied to the description of what it takes to vectorize a program (i.e. make it Alti-Vec optimized) [that and the process of making loops that can be unrolled]. So I've got to ask, is there some difference between those two concepts? If not, it sure seems like we would have a lot more multi-core enabled apps out there already...
rdowns
Mar 22, 12:51 PM
We do work to make things better in the US that's why everyone always wants to come to America. What I am saying is if Gays really want to complain about an App being created or anything else being done in the US then go to another country and see how much support you will actually get.
Gays freak out over the considered "normal" person rights, but yet when we give gay's rights you say it's never enough, when will Gays be content with what is given, and realize it takes time to give you everything. Signing a sheet of paper doesn't fix everything, nor was Rome built in a day so don't expect Gays to have = rights asap.
I was going to reply to all your posts in the thread but then I remembered, you're the guy whose father is dating the owner of AT&T. :rolleyes:
Gays freak out over the considered "normal" person rights, but yet when we give gay's rights you say it's never enough, when will Gays be content with what is given, and realize it takes time to give you everything. Signing a sheet of paper doesn't fix everything, nor was Rome built in a day so don't expect Gays to have = rights asap.
I was going to reply to all your posts in the thread but then I remembered, you're the guy whose father is dating the owner of AT&T. :rolleyes:
Tmelon
Mar 30, 08:55 PM
Is there a DMG or is the App Store / Redemption Code the only way to update? What about offline computers?
Redemption code seems to be the only way. For some reason I can't get mine to work.
Redemption code seems to be the only way. For some reason I can't get mine to work.
iberroa
Apr 3, 02:08 AM
beautiful... :apple:
Cagle
Apr 3, 01:15 AM
Wow that's a little extreme
that's not extreme, that's pure nuts :eek:
great ad, very restrained, no bashing, focusing on great software, something apple really needs to do to make the ipad more than an oversized ipod.
hard to believe the same company signed off on the recent iphone ads. good grief....
that's not extreme, that's pure nuts :eek:
great ad, very restrained, no bashing, focusing on great software, something apple really needs to do to make the ipad more than an oversized ipod.
hard to believe the same company signed off on the recent iphone ads. good grief....
toddybody
Apr 26, 01:16 PM
I have to say I never heard of an "App Store" before Apple started one. Was there another before then?
When I open windows in my home an I running a PC?
App + Store? You're right, I personally didnt hear that combo until Apple started its iOS days.
I do feel though, that adding "store" to a term that was not invented (only popularized) by Apple does not justify trademark protection. Anyways, its laughable to think that Apple could lose any business to an "Amazon App Store" or a "Windows App Store"...if you have an iOS device, those stores are essentially useless to you. Stay frosty dude!
When I open windows in my home an I running a PC?
App + Store? You're right, I personally didnt hear that combo until Apple started its iOS days.
I do feel though, that adding "store" to a term that was not invented (only popularized) by Apple does not justify trademark protection. Anyways, its laughable to think that Apple could lose any business to an "Amazon App Store" or a "Windows App Store"...if you have an iOS device, those stores are essentially useless to you. Stay frosty dude!
JTToft
Apr 21, 11:53 AM
If anybody is interested, here is the iPhone Software License Agreement:
http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/iphone.pdf
On the very first page, there is a rather large paragraph describing the use of non-personal location data.
http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/iphone.pdf
On the very first page, there is a rather large paragraph describing the use of non-personal location data.
quadgirl
Sep 1, 01:29 PM
Talking about the iMac chin, isn't it time for a new-look iMac? I couldn't imagine a 23" wide chin :eek:
imac_japan
Apr 8, 09:05 AM
maybe thats because its not true and most mac articles are written by very wintel biased writers.
Well....then Is this the Mac-files ?
Is there a conspiracy ???
Well....then Is this the Mac-files ?
Is there a conspiracy ???
AidenShaw
Oct 23, 10:57 PM
Can someone confirm C2D is what is needed for 64-bit instructions? I thought it has be the combination of C2D and chipset to make 64-bit instructions happen. I heard the current platform for CoreDuo was not made for 64-bit.
The current Napa64 platform (that is, Napa with Merom as the CPU) does support 64-bit instructions. It can't address more than 4 GiB of physical memory, but it can run the faster 64-bit instructions.
Here's the download page for the x64 drivers for Dell's Latitude D620 with Core 2 Duo:
http://support.dell.com/support/downloads/devices.aspx?c=us&cs=555&l=en&s=biz&SystemID=LATITUDE%20D620&os=WXPX&osl=EN#
The current Napa64 platform (that is, Napa with Merom as the CPU) does support 64-bit instructions. It can't address more than 4 GiB of physical memory, but it can run the faster 64-bit instructions.
Here's the download page for the x64 drivers for Dell's Latitude D620 with Core 2 Duo:
http://support.dell.com/support/downloads/devices.aspx?c=us&cs=555&l=en&s=biz&SystemID=LATITUDE%20D620&os=WXPX&osl=EN#
PBF
Apr 1, 03:34 AM
New: Launch Time Machine and watch how the core of the galaxy disperses tiny dust particles. Looks totally awesome and freakishly realistic. :D
Daveway
Jan 1, 07:04 PM
Where did you find that image? Are there others?
Its on the Apple.com front page
Its on the Apple.com front page
toaoc
Mar 25, 07:25 AM
...is an ipod that is just about music and nothing else. and yeah the sound quality of the classic thats out right now does suck...i'd like to see improved battery life, higher quality chips (DAC, amps,...), digital output, maybe airplay - and all of that in a sexy, indestructable metal case with a click wheel and a small non touch display...
No comments:
Post a Comment