daveaudio
Aug 11, 01:04 PM
Hahahaha you obviously have not been a customer of either T-Mo or Cingular. And if you looked at their coverage maps, Cingular's coverage is quite a bit better than T-Mobile's. Yes, they do share SOME towers, but not all.
Hahahha coverage maps don't mean jack.Everyone in the wireless business knows they are gross approximations of the reality.
jessica alba 2011
jessica alba on harpers bazaar
Jessica Alba @ MET Ball 2011
Jessica Alba graces the cover
Jessica-Alba-2011-3
Jessica Alba
Jessica-Alba
Hahahha coverage maps don't mean jack.Everyone in the wireless business knows they are gross approximations of the reality.
sunfast
Aug 17, 02:07 AM
Awesome machine. Just awesome. I can't believe that photoshop test!
VanNess
Aug 5, 10:20 PM
Well, if you're located and in SF and are you are a Safari user, or have questions about Safari, or maybe even questions about what SJ shows Safari-wise or other webkit-related content in Leopard, you don't have to shell out for WWDC admission, because the Safari/webkit folks are hosting a freebie (http://webkit.opendarwin.org/blog/?p=63) on Tuesday at 7 that's open to all.
If you are a Mac OS X developer, a browser hacker, a web developer, or just someone with an interest in cool technology, then come hobnob with WebKit contributors from Apple and elsewhere. Unlike WWDC itself, this event will be open to anyone who is interested free of charge. Also, it will be unbelievably awesome. We promise!
If you are a Mac OS X developer, a browser hacker, a web developer, or just someone with an interest in cool technology, then come hobnob with WebKit contributors from Apple and elsewhere. Unlike WWDC itself, this event will be open to anyone who is interested free of charge. Also, it will be unbelievably awesome. We promise!
obeygiant
Apr 27, 09:18 AM
His middle name is Hussein?!!?!? OMG!
He could have released this years ago.
He could have released this years ago.
arkitect
Mar 3, 04:52 AM
I believe that every "gay" person should be celibate.
Why?
I also think opposite-sex monogamous marriage is the only appropriate context for sex
Why?
Yes, I know you "explain", but I just never get it.
I'm heterosexual. I still feel opposite-sex attraction, but my sex drive has been weak for years. I'm grateful for that weakness, too, because I don't see others as mere objects.
Last year I (male) married my partner (male) — we've been together 11 years. (As an aside, that 11 year relationship has outlasted all — and I mean all my straight cousins's marriages and relationships).
Now, you may not like to hear this, but when we have sex we make love. I do not see him as just an object. I fell in love with him because he is a wonderful man. He makes me happy and content.
No different from other couples straight or gay.
So why should we suddenly live together in a platonic relationship — because you have issues with sex?
We're pretty middle class (Shock *gasp* horror). We look out for our neighbours, our friends come around for dinner and sometimes they bring their little kids along. Listen to music and nod off in front of the TV. We have sex, sorry to freak you out, but we do.
In all respects we are normal adults contributing to society, paying taxes, recycling our (maybe too many) wine bottles etc.
Look I am sorry life apparently dealt you a few nasty cards, but perhaps you should consider a religious retreat — life in a monastery can be I hear very fulfilling for men and women like you.
But please leave the rest of us to deal with 21st century issues.
And as for your two gay friends… well… I don't know if I wouldn't file them under I for imaginary. That is just my gut instinct. (Unless the couple you refer to are Catholic priests, in which case… I guess.)
Why?
I also think opposite-sex monogamous marriage is the only appropriate context for sex
Why?
Yes, I know you "explain", but I just never get it.
I'm heterosexual. I still feel opposite-sex attraction, but my sex drive has been weak for years. I'm grateful for that weakness, too, because I don't see others as mere objects.
Last year I (male) married my partner (male) — we've been together 11 years. (As an aside, that 11 year relationship has outlasted all — and I mean all my straight cousins's marriages and relationships).
Now, you may not like to hear this, but when we have sex we make love. I do not see him as just an object. I fell in love with him because he is a wonderful man. He makes me happy and content.
No different from other couples straight or gay.
So why should we suddenly live together in a platonic relationship — because you have issues with sex?
We're pretty middle class (Shock *gasp* horror). We look out for our neighbours, our friends come around for dinner and sometimes they bring their little kids along. Listen to music and nod off in front of the TV. We have sex, sorry to freak you out, but we do.
In all respects we are normal adults contributing to society, paying taxes, recycling our (maybe too many) wine bottles etc.
Look I am sorry life apparently dealt you a few nasty cards, but perhaps you should consider a religious retreat — life in a monastery can be I hear very fulfilling for men and women like you.
But please leave the rest of us to deal with 21st century issues.
And as for your two gay friends… well… I don't know if I wouldn't file them under I for imaginary. That is just my gut instinct. (Unless the couple you refer to are Catholic priests, in which case… I guess.)
ergle2
Sep 14, 08:09 PM
Not sure about beyond 8 which can be paired into a 16 core Mac. Perhaps. Too far out to tell although it is casually mentioned in the roadmap.
New micro-arch -- Nehalem is due 2008.
New micro-arch -- Nehalem is due 2008.
sinisterdesign
Jul 20, 10:09 AM
eight cores + Tiger = Octopussy?!?
digitalbiker
Aug 25, 08:00 PM
I have .mac now for several years, and I am still wondering why I re-subscribe. Maybe Im lazy. I must be. Don't get it. Need a Gmail invite?????
I'm the same way. I have had .mac since way back when it was "Free for Life" and I just have gotten used to keeping it. I also keep thinking that ole Jobs and company are going to come up with the killer .mac app that will make .mac indespensible.
I'm still waiting...
jessica alba 2011 pictures.
Jessica Alba|Hot And Sexy
jessica alba 2011 hair.
jessica alba 2011 pregnant.
film actress Jessica Alba
Jessica Alba#39;s different looks
Jessica Alba Sunday February
jessica alba 2011 pregnant.
Jessica Alba 2011 Style.
Jessica Alba 2011 - Page 2
jessica alba 2011 pregnant.
I'm the same way. I have had .mac since way back when it was "Free for Life" and I just have gotten used to keeping it. I also keep thinking that ole Jobs and company are going to come up with the killer .mac app that will make .mac indespensible.
I'm still waiting...
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).
mkruck
Apr 6, 02:37 PM
I own both the iPad and the Xoom - both do some things very well, and both do some things horribly.
I am starting to wean myself off of iOS, though. The iPad served me well as a "starter" tablet, but I constantly find myself wanting it to do more or different things, which is something Android (not the Xoom specifically, but Android as a whole) does offer.
To each his own, you know?
I am starting to wean myself off of iOS, though. The iPad served me well as a "starter" tablet, but I constantly find myself wanting it to do more or different things, which is something Android (not the Xoom specifically, but Android as a whole) does offer.
To each his own, you know?
walterwhite
Apr 25, 01:54 PM
Lawyers never seem to see or feel the Karma stick for nonsensical and litigious lawsuits that just end up effecting the rest of us... that do our best to be good human beings.
Javik
Apr 7, 05:01 AM
I guess you have to do what you have to do on the road. Still a shame that you suffer running Photoshop, aperture, illustrator or anime studio pro, or edit HD video on a notebook, let alone an underpowered one. Both from a power and a screen aspect.
I don't discount the fact that there are road warriors who need an MBA or other portable for work. Whether that is an office suite and email or actual video/photo production or anything in between. But while some people, especially of the lighter use group, will choose the MBA over the MBP in a 15" or 17" form factor, or even the 13" MBP, for their needs, the point was that the MBA borders on a consumption machine because of its weight, access, and limits in power. You can do workhorse projects on it, but will still suffer the slow rendering time. An MBA is perfectly suited to the business traveler who needs all the office capabilities but no significant power.
You obviously have not used a MBA for real work before. It is more than capable for some people's needs, not capable for others. I've been able to run 100 track Logic files on the thing without the Air breaking a sweat. Before you run along blabbering things you don't know about: think.
I don't discount the fact that there are road warriors who need an MBA or other portable for work. Whether that is an office suite and email or actual video/photo production or anything in between. But while some people, especially of the lighter use group, will choose the MBA over the MBP in a 15" or 17" form factor, or even the 13" MBP, for their needs, the point was that the MBA borders on a consumption machine because of its weight, access, and limits in power. You can do workhorse projects on it, but will still suffer the slow rendering time. An MBA is perfectly suited to the business traveler who needs all the office capabilities but no significant power.
You obviously have not used a MBA for real work before. It is more than capable for some people's needs, not capable for others. I've been able to run 100 track Logic files on the thing without the Air breaking a sweat. Before you run along blabbering things you don't know about: think.
Super Dave
Aug 8, 12:50 AM
Also a very good point, so I need a bigger main HD for my MacBookPro (the new Seagate 160GB becomes interesting) for Time Machine, but i still need to back the hole thing up to an external HD in case of a HD crash (I had 2 in the last 8 months!). So Tine Machine doesn't make Backups obsolete, I didn't even think of that up to now. Hmmm..
Time Machine is backup, it's not for on the same drive (or nothing implied it was).
David :cool:
Time Machine is backup, it's not for on the same drive (or nothing implied it was).
David :cool:
Amazing Iceman
Apr 7, 10:50 PM
Don't be a troll :rolleyes:
Obviously you know little about trolls... :D (JK!)
Obviously you know little about trolls... :D (JK!)
regandarcy
Apr 6, 10:56 AM
So are the current MacBook airs using a dedicated gpu? Or is it integrated? I'm confused. :-)
relimw
Sep 12, 11:15 AM
Very cool. Now to find apps (os10.5 direct blind support?) that can make use of all those cores. :cool:
ninethirty
Aug 6, 03:15 PM
You have absolutely no chance of winning any legal battle based on what you've described here.
Also, while you're whining about who stole what from who, maybe change your 'save' icon on your site. It's nearly identical to Apples.
As Apple applied for the trademark, it will not be approved.
It is up to Apple how they want to proceed. A fight that can't win, no matter how much money they have.
Mac Pro has been the premier Mac dealer in the same county as Apple since 1988. Out of all the names for this new line of computers, why choose one that they know they cannot have.
We are already getting countless support calls for the macbook pro. It seems they assume we made them When we can't help them, they seem to get very upset.
Mac Pro is in a position to file for a court order not to release any computer that bears our name.
So get ready WWDC, we will be watching.
Mike Ajlouny
President
MAC-PRO.com
Also, while you're whining about who stole what from who, maybe change your 'save' icon on your site. It's nearly identical to Apples.
As Apple applied for the trademark, it will not be approved.
It is up to Apple how they want to proceed. A fight that can't win, no matter how much money they have.
Mac Pro has been the premier Mac dealer in the same county as Apple since 1988. Out of all the names for this new line of computers, why choose one that they know they cannot have.
We are already getting countless support calls for the macbook pro. It seems they assume we made them When we can't help them, they seem to get very upset.
Mac Pro is in a position to file for a court order not to release any computer that bears our name.
So get ready WWDC, we will be watching.
Mike Ajlouny
President
MAC-PRO.com
Lincoln
Aug 5, 03:29 PM
I am really looking forward to this year's WWDC - a chance to see Leopard and see how it stacks up against Vista.
Also hoping that the Mac Pro is finally realeased and to see who is right about the processor (Dual 2 Core Duo low end, Xeon CPU middle and Dual Xeon's high end?).
Finally, it would be nice if the Mac Pro's get the new Core 2 Duo chips.:D
I think that that we'll have to wait for Paris for the iMac update and new iPods.
Lets see what we get.:rolleyes:
Edited bad typing
Also hoping that the Mac Pro is finally realeased and to see who is right about the processor (Dual 2 Core Duo low end, Xeon CPU middle and Dual Xeon's high end?).
Finally, it would be nice if the Mac Pro's get the new Core 2 Duo chips.:D
I think that that we'll have to wait for Paris for the iMac update and new iPods.
Lets see what we get.:rolleyes:
Edited bad typing
xStep
Apr 6, 06:22 AM
I'm willing to bet there will be a price drop and only available on the Mac App Store.
I doubt it will be available on the Mac App store. Think about how much space FCS requires.
I doubt it will be available on the Mac App store. Think about how much space FCS requires.
radesousa
Sep 13, 11:40 AM
So the question I have is can the latest iMac be CPU upgraded like the MacPro?
mac1984user
Apr 27, 08:33 AM
Apple's solution is fine by me. They wouldn't have done anything if there wasn't so much press about it, but I guess that's a good reason (one of the only ones) for the press to exist. Still, they all managed to get it a bit wrong, though. I noticed (like so many others out there), that the map wasn't recording my EXACT location, but just cell towers and wifi spots I may have accessed. The info didn't really bother me. It wasn't like it had me pegged at my local pub - or did it?!?! =)
macpross
Aug 6, 11:14 PM
Fascinating. What will they call it? Macintosh Pro?
That name will be fine, I have no 100% claim to that.
That name will be fine, I have no 100% claim to that.
fivepoint
Mar 22, 12:56 PM
Precisely. The UN mandate is to enforce a no-fly zone, amongst other things, tasks that are particularly suited for certain nations. I'm no gung-ho supporter of this action in Libya, but it strikes me as similar to Bosnia, with the real political pressure coming particularly from France for very real reasons.
Expect the overt US involvement to rapidly scale back soon.
Did Ronald Reagan get a go-ahead from Congress in 1986 for attacking Libya?
No he did not. It was a mistake then, it is a mistake now. The only difference is, I oppose it in all circumstances, regardless of who's president. You only oppose it when it's a Republican in office.
Wait a second. Wait a second. You are trying to compare the media's portrayal of GWB over about SEVEN years, TWO wars, and HOW MANY lies to Libya and less then ONE WEEK. The Lybia thing has been going on for about a day or so. In the FIRST days of the Afghanistan war, did you hear ANY mainstream media criticizing GWB? In the FIRST days of the Iraq war, did you hear ANY mainstream media criticizing GWB? Democrats were falling all over themselves to support the President and the need to get those WMDs, which is why after almost 6 years, it was a defining issue of the presidential campaign. The candidates 5 years later were all explaining why they supported one war then, but not now after all the lies were exposed, or how they were against it all along. Not to mention Afghanistan after 7 years. There were a few, unlike now, where there are a lot.
This is THE FIRST WEEK of this thing, and NBC nightly news had their entire story about: criticism from congress; inability of white house to deal with that problem, partly because in Brazil; late involvement; involvement here but not in Somalia, Congo, etc..., risk that Ghaddafi would survive this and remain in power; lack of real Arab support and weak coalition; and fact that opposition is disorganized, poorly armed and leaderless, and probably won't be able to win without military support on the ground.
That's pretty hard reporting, and I'm very happy Congress is being critical. Almost everything Fivepoint, the GOP and the Democrats who are speaking out have said is a valid concern. They should have done this during week ONE of Afghanistan, and Iraq. I know I don't want another one of those.
(edit) Yesterday, NPR was talking about Candidate Obama vs. President Obama, and pointed out Candidate Obama's statements about ONLY CONGRESS CAN DECLARE WAR. They discussed, at length, prior presidents assumption of power, Obama's use of it and how guest couldn't imagine a new president opposed to a power like this giving it up. So, maybe you should watch some NBC, ABC, CBS and listen to some NPR. Mind you, in FPs defense, I spent 16 hours in the car since this all started, so I've probably heard every story...
Expect the overt US involvement to rapidly scale back soon.
Did Ronald Reagan get a go-ahead from Congress in 1986 for attacking Libya?
No he did not. It was a mistake then, it is a mistake now. The only difference is, I oppose it in all circumstances, regardless of who's president. You only oppose it when it's a Republican in office.
Wait a second. Wait a second. You are trying to compare the media's portrayal of GWB over about SEVEN years, TWO wars, and HOW MANY lies to Libya and less then ONE WEEK. The Lybia thing has been going on for about a day or so. In the FIRST days of the Afghanistan war, did you hear ANY mainstream media criticizing GWB? In the FIRST days of the Iraq war, did you hear ANY mainstream media criticizing GWB? Democrats were falling all over themselves to support the President and the need to get those WMDs, which is why after almost 6 years, it was a defining issue of the presidential campaign. The candidates 5 years later were all explaining why they supported one war then, but not now after all the lies were exposed, or how they were against it all along. Not to mention Afghanistan after 7 years. There were a few, unlike now, where there are a lot.
This is THE FIRST WEEK of this thing, and NBC nightly news had their entire story about: criticism from congress; inability of white house to deal with that problem, partly because in Brazil; late involvement; involvement here but not in Somalia, Congo, etc..., risk that Ghaddafi would survive this and remain in power; lack of real Arab support and weak coalition; and fact that opposition is disorganized, poorly armed and leaderless, and probably won't be able to win without military support on the ground.
That's pretty hard reporting, and I'm very happy Congress is being critical. Almost everything Fivepoint, the GOP and the Democrats who are speaking out have said is a valid concern. They should have done this during week ONE of Afghanistan, and Iraq. I know I don't want another one of those.
(edit) Yesterday, NPR was talking about Candidate Obama vs. President Obama, and pointed out Candidate Obama's statements about ONLY CONGRESS CAN DECLARE WAR. They discussed, at length, prior presidents assumption of power, Obama's use of it and how guest couldn't imagine a new president opposed to a power like this giving it up. So, maybe you should watch some NBC, ABC, CBS and listen to some NPR. Mind you, in FPs defense, I spent 16 hours in the car since this all started, so I've probably heard every story...
RichP
Sep 13, 09:33 AM
After that, what will be the next method of radically increasing computing throughput?
Personally, I still see data transfer, namely from storage media, as a huge bottleneck in performance. Unless you are doing something really CPU intensive (vid editing, rendering, others) Most of the average "wait-time" is the damn hard drive.
Personally, I still see data transfer, namely from storage media, as a huge bottleneck in performance. Unless you are doing something really CPU intensive (vid editing, rendering, others) Most of the average "wait-time" is the damn hard drive.