kavika411
Mar 22, 01:19 PM
Newbie question - please don't flame me.
How big of a transition is this, as compared - for example - to the Intel chip back around 2006? What I mean is, after the transition to Intel, certain software and eventually the newest operating system itself could no longer be run on the old chip. So, is this transition as significant as that, or is this more of a speed boost kind of thing?
Thanks.
How big of a transition is this, as compared - for example - to the Intel chip back around 2006? What I mean is, after the transition to Intel, certain software and eventually the newest operating system itself could no longer be run on the old chip. So, is this transition as significant as that, or is this more of a speed boost kind of thing?
Thanks.
Multimedia
Sep 9, 02:48 PM
I think it might be in Windows 2000 as well. It's found via Task Manager under Processes. Right click on a process in the list and you can assign its affinity. Some programs crash when the encounter hyper threading or multi core machines. So you have to assign the process to a single CPU/core. More then likely on a dual processor machine from back then a multi-core one.Seems like the application developers could add a link to such a feature in their code so the user could just assign core volume in each application prefs that would tell the system what amount to assign to that process. Maybe even have the system do that automatically to all applicaiton preferences so the choice appears in all general preference panes of each application.
Vegasman
Mar 30, 01:29 PM
It looks descriptive to you because there is an App Store for your Mac and there is an App Store for the iPhone, iPod Touch, and iPad. If Apple hadn't invented the term "App Store" and used it for its super successful site, you would never have heard the term, and you wouldn't know what it means.
Uh!? Anytime someone tells me there is a YYYY store, my first reaction is that it is a store that sells YYYY's. It is no different with an app store.
What would one buy at a record store?
What would one buy at a grocery store?
What would one buy at a paint store?
What would one buy at an app store?
Uh!? Anytime someone tells me there is a YYYY store, my first reaction is that it is a store that sells YYYY's. It is no different with an app store.
What would one buy at a record store?
What would one buy at a grocery store?
What would one buy at a paint store?
What would one buy at an app store?
Eidorian
Jul 14, 12:47 PM
Exactly. Which is why the Ghz myth will stay for a long time. You can't market Memory or FSB or SATA or PCI-X/PCI-E, you won't get anywhere.
Ghz, GB, "X times faster", and you can play games that look very pretty. Those will be what computer marketing will be all about for many years to come.Yeah, the GHz made sense to me until AMD started pulling this XXXX+ naming. Then I realized it. It worked pretty much until Intel gave up on clock speed is the THING when it comes to computing power.
I didn't buy a new computer between 1999 - 2003 so I had a lot of catching up to do.
Ghz, GB, "X times faster", and you can play games that look very pretty. Those will be what computer marketing will be all about for many years to come.Yeah, the GHz made sense to me until AMD started pulling this XXXX+ naming. Then I realized it. It worked pretty much until Intel gave up on clock speed is the THING when it comes to computing power.
I didn't buy a new computer between 1999 - 2003 so I had a lot of catching up to do.
thejadedmonkey
Sep 26, 12:58 PM
Do you're self a favour and ask for your pac code when the phon is released. A free upgrade is pretty much to be expected, if you dont ask for the pac code their unlikely to give you any other freebies.
You should always ask for the pac code and then wait for their retention team to give you a call back
Jay
What's a pac code?
You should always ask for the pac code and then wait for their retention team to give you a call back
Jay
What's a pac code?
Westside guy
Apr 11, 02:18 AM
They'll change the key and force a firmware update on any airport express user who wants to update itunes.
Unlikely - this would require the new private key be embedded in the firmware update package, which would defeat the purpose of replacing the old key.
This is a fundamental issue with DRM solutions - you, as the consumer, have to hold the private key. They (Apple) can obfuscate where that key is, but in the end it has to be accessible in some manner. It's the same thing with iTunes DRM. If someone cares enough, they can almost certainly retrieve the private key (which is how Requiem works).
I'm guessing Apple may make some half-hearted move or another; but I doubt they care all that much.
Unlikely - this would require the new private key be embedded in the firmware update package, which would defeat the purpose of replacing the old key.
This is a fundamental issue with DRM solutions - you, as the consumer, have to hold the private key. They (Apple) can obfuscate where that key is, but in the end it has to be accessible in some manner. It's the same thing with iTunes DRM. If someone cares enough, they can almost certainly retrieve the private key (which is how Requiem works).
I'm guessing Apple may make some half-hearted move or another; but I doubt they care all that much.
AidenShaw
Sep 10, 11:48 PM
I've owned SMP machines in the past and often found it more useful to force CPU affinity of CPU-heavy tasks to a single processor, as Windows 2000 (which was current at the time) by default had a habit of swapping it between chips, resulting in a lot of cache-dirtying....
However, you could see some significant improvement in processing time on some non-parallelizable cpu-bound tasks.
I came to the opposite conclusion....
Running many compute-bound single-threaded benchmarks and apps - I saw how NT (pre Win2k) would balance across CPUs (that is, a "100%" compute-bound job would show each CPU running at 50%).
However, setting affinity so that one CPU was 100% and the other was 0% had no significant effect on the run times. (And by "significant" I mean statistically significant - I literally ran hundreds of runs in each configuration.)\\
By the way, with Win2k3 (and XP 64-bit, really the same system) you see much less "balancing" - a single-threaded app will stick to a CPU for much longer.
However, you could see some significant improvement in processing time on some non-parallelizable cpu-bound tasks.
I came to the opposite conclusion....
Running many compute-bound single-threaded benchmarks and apps - I saw how NT (pre Win2k) would balance across CPUs (that is, a "100%" compute-bound job would show each CPU running at 50%).
However, setting affinity so that one CPU was 100% and the other was 0% had no significant effect on the run times. (And by "significant" I mean statistically significant - I literally ran hundreds of runs in each configuration.)\\
By the way, with Win2k3 (and XP 64-bit, really the same system) you see much less "balancing" - a single-threaded app will stick to a CPU for much longer.
Ravich
May 3, 05:05 PM
macpro dead in 2 years...my prediction:mad:
Why would Apple do that?
Why would Apple do that?
Porco
Oct 28, 04:55 AM
I am very concerned about the environment, but I think it sounds like Greenpeace did go too far. I am actually dubious of the methodology used to say that Apple is ranked so poorly in terms of the environment, because as others have said, I think Mac users tend to hang on to their machines more, or else they do seem to have a better time being resold on e-bay etc, they hold their value well. So even if an individual Mac contained, say 10% more dangerous stuff (guesstimate - ) in it than a Dell or something, if it has two owners or is used for twice as long then does that really still make them so bad?
That said, I do wish Apple would improve upon meeting their environmental responsibilities, there's no good reason for them not to. Their name and company logo is a piece of fruit that grows on trees, so the tree-hugging comments aren't quite so irrelevant, are they? :p
Edit: Apple can you also put a spell check into Safari please :)
If you're running Tiger, it does already - system-wide actually, just choose Edit>Spelling>Check Spelling as You Type whilst using anything you can enter text in (a forum reply box would work for example) :)
That said, I do wish Apple would improve upon meeting their environmental responsibilities, there's no good reason for them not to. Their name and company logo is a piece of fruit that grows on trees, so the tree-hugging comments aren't quite so irrelevant, are they? :p
Edit: Apple can you also put a spell check into Safari please :)
If you're running Tiger, it does already - system-wide actually, just choose Edit>Spelling>Check Spelling as You Type whilst using anything you can enter text in (a forum reply box would work for example) :)
Eidorian
Sep 9, 02:40 PM
Wow so if that's in XP already it's gotta be a feature in Leopard.
You call that Application Core Affinity or what's the correct full termonology? And where in the OS do you choose the applications to assign x number of cores with that dialog box. Looks like they're ready for a lot of cores coming up?!?! :eek:
32. I'd say that's planning ahead.I think it might be in Windows 2000 as well. It's found via Task Manager under Processes. Right click on a process in the list and you can assign its affinity. Some programs crash when the encounter hyper threading or multi core machines. So you have to assign the process to a single CPU/core. More then likely on a dual processor machine from back then a multi-core one.
You call that Application Core Affinity or what's the correct full termonology? And where in the OS do you choose the applications to assign x number of cores with that dialog box. Looks like they're ready for a lot of cores coming up?!?! :eek:
32. I'd say that's planning ahead.I think it might be in Windows 2000 as well. It's found via Task Manager under Processes. Right click on a process in the list and you can assign its affinity. Some programs crash when the encounter hyper threading or multi core machines. So you have to assign the process to a single CPU/core. More then likely on a dual processor machine from back then a multi-core one.
CEAbiscuit
Sep 27, 09:32 AM
There's a nifty mock-up of an iPhone at
http://skangerland.blogspot.com/2006/09/i-want-to-be-able-to-go-rob-one-of.html
Geez, I hope it doesn't look like that. Rotary looks kool, but imagine trying to text or dial without looking.
http://skangerland.blogspot.com/2006/09/i-want-to-be-able-to-go-rob-one-of.html
Geez, I hope it doesn't look like that. Rotary looks kool, but imagine trying to text or dial without looking.
tsugaru
Mar 22, 03:33 PM
One thing that will stink about the iMac update is that the GPU will most likely only get 8 PCIe lanes, as 4 of them will go to Thunderbolt. Sandy Bridge offers a max of 16 PCIe lanes. So Apple, maybe you feel like adding USB3 to the mix to use the last 4 lanes.
* yes I know the performance of a GPU doesn't drop THAT much going from x16 to x8, but still.
And toddy, a 6950 would be decent, but I don't see Apple offering it. I see the 6750 akin to the MacBook Pros going in (sadly.)
Even the 5750 in the 27" is around the same speed as the 4850. Apple just gimped the 4850 by using the GDDR3 version and only giving it 512MB /shakefist.
* yes I know the performance of a GPU doesn't drop THAT much going from x16 to x8, but still.
And toddy, a 6950 would be decent, but I don't see Apple offering it. I see the 6750 akin to the MacBook Pros going in (sadly.)
Even the 5750 in the 27" is around the same speed as the 4850. Apple just gimped the 4850 by using the GDDR3 version and only giving it 512MB /shakefist.
FSUSem1noles
Apr 22, 05:28 AM
Great, another way to chew through our cellular data..
I can see it now, after the release of this "cloud service" the cell companies are going to scream bloody murder "our networks can't handle all this data consumption on, we have to raise rates to upgrade our infrastructure, yada, yada.."
Zooooooom, we the consumer get the shaft yet again!
I can see it now, after the release of this "cloud service" the cell companies are going to scream bloody murder "our networks can't handle all this data consumption on, we have to raise rates to upgrade our infrastructure, yada, yada.."
Zooooooom, we the consumer get the shaft yet again!
Drew n macs
Mar 23, 10:41 PM
Dont forget you'll need an SSD too inside the iMac to achieve the Thunderbolt speeds!!
And it must be a very good and expensive SSD, with more than 700MB/s.
Thunderbolt not worth it right now because its TOO expensive. I'll wait 2 years, when SSDs are much MUCH more cheaper.
thats what I have been saying. Wait till they see the price of the new TB drives people will choke... some will have moved on from 2011 model to 2012 models without even owning a Thunderbolt drive.
And it must be a very good and expensive SSD, with more than 700MB/s.
Thunderbolt not worth it right now because its TOO expensive. I'll wait 2 years, when SSDs are much MUCH more cheaper.
thats what I have been saying. Wait till they see the price of the new TB drives people will choke... some will have moved on from 2011 model to 2012 models without even owning a Thunderbolt drive.
MacCheetah3
Apr 11, 02:04 PM
Hi
Been wanting this for a while. I have a windows PC just doing nothing, if I can turn it into an Airport Express like device, can have music going throughout the house.
You already can, it's called Home Sharing (http://support.apple.com/kb/ht3819), which is also available on your iDevice using iOS 4.3 and later.
There are a number of AirPlay apps in the App Store that allow an iDevice to be recognized as an Apple TV, as mentioned, AirView (http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/airview/id412370918?mt=8) is one of those particular apps -- and it even offers streaming from one iDevice to another, as one of the other devices is a virtual Apple TV.
Why is it that much more difficult to create an app that receives audio only AirPlay? I don't know -- but I'm not a veteran iOS app developer.
I think, with iOS now capable of being in the Home Sharing loop the demand for audio only streaming to iDevices using AirPlay -- instead of some third-party solution -- is extremely low.
Been wanting this for a while. I have a windows PC just doing nothing, if I can turn it into an Airport Express like device, can have music going throughout the house.
You already can, it's called Home Sharing (http://support.apple.com/kb/ht3819), which is also available on your iDevice using iOS 4.3 and later.
There are a number of AirPlay apps in the App Store that allow an iDevice to be recognized as an Apple TV, as mentioned, AirView (http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/airview/id412370918?mt=8) is one of those particular apps -- and it even offers streaming from one iDevice to another, as one of the other devices is a virtual Apple TV.
Why is it that much more difficult to create an app that receives audio only AirPlay? I don't know -- but I'm not a veteran iOS app developer.
I think, with iOS now capable of being in the Home Sharing loop the demand for audio only streaming to iDevices using AirPlay -- instead of some third-party solution -- is extremely low.
DrFrankTM
Sep 10, 05:19 AM
If my memory serves me correctly Conroe will not be pin compatible with Merom, is that right? I just can't remember what's what anymore. Old age.
As far as I know, the first generation Merom is pin-compatible with Yonah, the Core Duo mobile processor that is in the MacBook, MacBook Pro and Mac Mini at the moment. And if I'm not mistaken, Kentsfield will be pin-compatible with Conroe, which is not used in any Mac at the moment.
EDIT: But no, Conroe and Merom are not pin-compatible.
As far as I know, the first generation Merom is pin-compatible with Yonah, the Core Duo mobile processor that is in the MacBook, MacBook Pro and Mac Mini at the moment. And if I'm not mistaken, Kentsfield will be pin-compatible with Conroe, which is not used in any Mac at the moment.
EDIT: But no, Conroe and Merom are not pin-compatible.
MikeDTyke
Sep 1, 06:50 AM
Wasn't a silent upgrade. Apple bollocksed up the order.
You know this for certain????
Last year Apple did the exact same thing sneaking out faster G4's with more vram in the Mac mini line.
Everyone and their pet rumor site is expecting upgrades. We weren't expecting across the board superdrives. I now am.
Personally i'd trade that superdrive for GMA965 with x3000 graphics, but thats about as likely before MWSF07 as a bullet proof string vest.
M.
You know this for certain????
Last year Apple did the exact same thing sneaking out faster G4's with more vram in the Mac mini line.
Everyone and their pet rumor site is expecting upgrades. We weren't expecting across the board superdrives. I now am.
Personally i'd trade that superdrive for GMA965 with x3000 graphics, but thats about as likely before MWSF07 as a bullet proof string vest.
M.
rish
Sep 17, 03:59 PM
I don't really see this happening, if apple is going to take the risk of entering this competitive market, I see them doing it with a very innovative 'new' product.
Hi people. Take a quick look at this working prototye.
http://www.cameraphonefocus.co.uk/minor_brands/pilotfishsynaptics_onyx_button.php
I understand that Synaptics is a company Apple already has a working relationship with.
It kinda gets the juices flowing when you consider the possibilities. No more crap mobiles, I hope.
Regards
Hi people. Take a quick look at this working prototye.
http://www.cameraphonefocus.co.uk/minor_brands/pilotfishsynaptics_onyx_button.php
I understand that Synaptics is a company Apple already has a working relationship with.
It kinda gets the juices flowing when you consider the possibilities. No more crap mobiles, I hope.
Regards
dime21
Apr 15, 03:42 PM
http://gadgetwise.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/07/06/testing-real-world-speed-of-usb-3-0-hard-drives/
That is horrible scaling given that USB 2.0 lasted 10 years.
Of course, what did you expect from an interface designed for keyboards, joysticks, and mice?
Even USB 2.0 has a pathetic 50% effective utilization rate, while Firewire is ~95%. USB 2.0 is 480 Mb/s, which equals 60 MB/s, yet in real world speeds, you're lucky if you see 30 MB/s - HALF it's rated bandwidth. USB is just plain horrible for bulk data transfer, and the new 3.0 iteration is no different. The protocol overhead is atrocious.
Of course USB also operates in slow horrible PIO mode, meaning it has to run everything through the host CPU. PATA, SATA, SCSI, Firewire, and Thunderbolt all operate in DMA mode, bypassing the host CPU for much much faster transfers.
That is horrible scaling given that USB 2.0 lasted 10 years.
Of course, what did you expect from an interface designed for keyboards, joysticks, and mice?
Even USB 2.0 has a pathetic 50% effective utilization rate, while Firewire is ~95%. USB 2.0 is 480 Mb/s, which equals 60 MB/s, yet in real world speeds, you're lucky if you see 30 MB/s - HALF it's rated bandwidth. USB is just plain horrible for bulk data transfer, and the new 3.0 iteration is no different. The protocol overhead is atrocious.
Of course USB also operates in slow horrible PIO mode, meaning it has to run everything through the host CPU. PATA, SATA, SCSI, Firewire, and Thunderbolt all operate in DMA mode, bypassing the host CPU for much much faster transfers.
zap2
May 3, 05:27 PM
Yeah... All 13 of you :rolleyes: JK.
Don't get me wrong, I'd probably be a little upset if I were you, but this shouldn't come as too much of a surprise; you are a VERY small percentage of the market.
The amount people who want to use the iMac as a display is a small group?
We're talking consoles, PCs, Macs, phones, tablets, media players, blue-ray players.
I think we'd see a large amount of people like this features, plus it would make the iMac a much more attractive purchase, as it would still be a fine display even after the hardware in it is too old. I know it would most likely make me go for the iMac over the Mac mini(although most likely I'm waiting for the mini before any purchases)
Don't get me wrong, I'd probably be a little upset if I were you, but this shouldn't come as too much of a surprise; you are a VERY small percentage of the market.
The amount people who want to use the iMac as a display is a small group?
We're talking consoles, PCs, Macs, phones, tablets, media players, blue-ray players.
I think we'd see a large amount of people like this features, plus it would make the iMac a much more attractive purchase, as it would still be a fine display even after the hardware in it is too old. I know it would most likely make me go for the iMac over the Mac mini(although most likely I'm waiting for the mini before any purchases)
portishead
May 3, 10:54 AM
SATA III? And if so on all of them or is optical still II like the laptops?
This is what I want to know also. OCZ Vertex III!
This is what I want to know also. OCZ Vertex III!
redvettez06
Apr 28, 03:29 PM
Apple "beats" Microsoft?
But who has the strongest dad? :rolleyes:
ROFL! I totally see what you're saying. Why can't people just avoid fanboyish behavior? Both companies make some great products. Both companies make bad products too. *shrugs*
But who has the strongest dad? :rolleyes:
ROFL! I totally see what you're saying. Why can't people just avoid fanboyish behavior? Both companies make some great products. Both companies make bad products too. *shrugs*
Ted13
Sep 19, 02:16 PM
What I'm really curious about is if there was a huge bump in TV show sales volume with the 4 times increase in resolution.
I know I bought a show I wouldn't have otherwise and plan on buying a couple more.
I know I bought a show I wouldn't have otherwise and plan on buying a couple more.
mazola
Aug 31, 03:19 PM
Here comes Leather iPod Sock -- version 2.0!
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario