NoSmokingBandit
Aug 17, 09:30 PM
What you scale the difficulty up? On NFS:Shift, I started on easy A.I, quickly moved to normal, and am now doing most of my races on hard A.I. My car settings for traction and control and such is normal.
I havent played it in a while, but i recall setting traction control to standard, AI to the hardest, and everything else to the hard/realistic settings. I was racing with my DFGT wheel and it all just felt really easy. I was safely taking turns faster than i would ever attempt in GT4.
I havent played it in a while, but i recall setting traction control to standard, AI to the hardest, and everything else to the hard/realistic settings. I was racing with my DFGT wheel and it all just felt really easy. I was safely taking turns faster than i would ever attempt in GT4.
cult hero
Mar 26, 12:25 AM
Some of the comments on this board are inane.
1) Launchpad is the selling point...Really? You think Versions, Resume, Mission Control, OS wide Full Screen App support are not selling points?
2) $129 is too much. This one cracks me up. Apple is bundling a $500 product into the OS (and other OS based servers are far more expensive) and people think $129 is too much?
3) When has Apple released an OS, and not shown new features on the final release keynote?
I don't know that #2 matters that much. A vast majority of the people buying the OS couldn't care less about the server tools. In fact of all the Mac users I know personally, I'd be the only one that would care about their inclusion.
Also, we don't know that the price point will be $129.00 yet. The price point is something I am VERY interested in seeing though. Will it be that high? Or will it be as cheap as Snow Leopard? Or somewhere in the middle? I'm personally guessing it'll be the latter. The AppStore is changing the general population's idea of what software should cost (which is, in my opinion, one of the best things about it). So we'll see.
1) Launchpad is the selling point...Really? You think Versions, Resume, Mission Control, OS wide Full Screen App support are not selling points?
2) $129 is too much. This one cracks me up. Apple is bundling a $500 product into the OS (and other OS based servers are far more expensive) and people think $129 is too much?
3) When has Apple released an OS, and not shown new features on the final release keynote?
I don't know that #2 matters that much. A vast majority of the people buying the OS couldn't care less about the server tools. In fact of all the Mac users I know personally, I'd be the only one that would care about their inclusion.
Also, we don't know that the price point will be $129.00 yet. The price point is something I am VERY interested in seeing though. Will it be that high? Or will it be as cheap as Snow Leopard? Or somewhere in the middle? I'm personally guessing it'll be the latter. The AppStore is changing the general population's idea of what software should cost (which is, in my opinion, one of the best things about it). So we'll see.
8CoreWhore
Mar 22, 02:55 PM
Why do they call their tablet a "book". Just stupid.
gnasher729
Jul 20, 05:12 PM
I think Reverse Hyperthreading will have to be processor-bound, like Hyperthreading. Intel has its mitosis project, so let's hope that works out well!
There is no such thing as "Reverse Hyperthreading". This has been completely debunked.
There is no such thing as "Reverse Hyperthreading". This has been completely debunked.
err404
Apr 25, 02:09 PM
It is also used for forensic evidence against and for you in legal court.
They could, but law enforcement doesn't need this log. They can get the data straight from the cell provider.
They could, but law enforcement doesn't need this log. They can get the data straight from the cell provider.
DEE9299
Jun 15, 08:39 PM
i got 2 pins from radio shack today.....one 22000...... and the other 25000......
shamino
Jul 20, 09:32 AM
Is having more cores more energy efficient than having one big fat ass 24Ghz processor? Maybe thats a factor in the increasing core count.
Actually, this is well documented.
There are serious electrical and physical problems with jacking up clock speeds much further than they are now. Intel managed to push their chips to 3.4GHz, but the power consumed was tremendous.
When you can't ramp up the clock speed, your next best alternative is to go for as much parallelism as you can - increase the number of instructions you can execute in a single clock.
Chip makers achieve this in a wide variety of ways, including multiple CPU packages on a motherboard, multiple cores per CPU package, multiple threads per core, and multiple functional units per thread.
And yes, a single CPU at 3GHz can easily consume more power than two CPUs (or two cores) at 1.5GHz.
As for your theoretical 24GHz processor, such a thing is simply not possible with today's technology. (Well, there were some university experiments that hit insanely fast speeds, but don't expect commercial products any time soon.) Given the heat/power curves of today's chips, I wouldn't want to think about the cooling requirements of a 24GHz chip if you could somehow manage to build one.
Of course, breakthroughs do happen, and higher clock speeds might become practical in the future. But multi-core tech isn't going away - we'll simply end up with multiple cores at higher clock speeds.
Actually, this is well documented.
There are serious electrical and physical problems with jacking up clock speeds much further than they are now. Intel managed to push their chips to 3.4GHz, but the power consumed was tremendous.
When you can't ramp up the clock speed, your next best alternative is to go for as much parallelism as you can - increase the number of instructions you can execute in a single clock.
Chip makers achieve this in a wide variety of ways, including multiple CPU packages on a motherboard, multiple cores per CPU package, multiple threads per core, and multiple functional units per thread.
And yes, a single CPU at 3GHz can easily consume more power than two CPUs (or two cores) at 1.5GHz.
As for your theoretical 24GHz processor, such a thing is simply not possible with today's technology. (Well, there were some university experiments that hit insanely fast speeds, but don't expect commercial products any time soon.) Given the heat/power curves of today's chips, I wouldn't want to think about the cooling requirements of a 24GHz chip if you could somehow manage to build one.
Of course, breakthroughs do happen, and higher clock speeds might become practical in the future. But multi-core tech isn't going away - we'll simply end up with multiple cores at higher clock speeds.
saltyzoo
Apr 5, 05:12 PM
I'm not trolling, this is an honest question. But isn't a Final Cut pretty much worthless for commercial use without a way to put the results on Blu-Ray?
Eidorian
Jul 27, 10:12 AM
i cant wait to do this to my mac mini. i bought the core solo with the intention of upgrading the chip myself (once i heard core 2 was pin to pin compatible) but my question now is does anyone know if the version shipping is still pin to pin compatible???!?!?!http://guides.macrumors.com/Merom
Mattie Num Nums
Mar 31, 02:30 PM
How could you not see this coming. Even the most active anti-apple android fanboy/cheerleader could see that eventually it wouldn't work. Too many cooks in 'teh' kitchen trying to one up the competition whilst ruining the experience for the user.
I think everyone saw it. The question is what will Google do when they do publish the source code? All of these people pointing and laughing didn't read the article.
At least, that's what the Fandroids wanted us to believe when Android fragmentation started being tossed around as a problem. Where are those guys now that Google is actually acknowledging that it's a problem? :eek:
Not a problem for me. HTC does a great job keeping phones updated.
I think everyone saw it. The question is what will Google do when they do publish the source code? All of these people pointing and laughing didn't read the article.
At least, that's what the Fandroids wanted us to believe when Android fragmentation started being tossed around as a problem. Where are those guys now that Google is actually acknowledging that it's a problem? :eek:
Not a problem for me. HTC does a great job keeping phones updated.
Peace
Aug 7, 11:32 PM
Woah! This is heavy stuff. Lot of eye candy in Core Animation :cool:
Did you go to WWDC or D/L Leopard?
Did you go to WWDC or D/L Leopard?
edgcrshr
Apr 8, 12:22 AM
I am still waiting on my black 16gb wifi, I preordered it Sunday after launch and am still waiting for Best Buy to call me. I guess I am going to have to call them and see what is going on. I have not been looking elsewhere since I wanted to get it from them and use gift cards, looks like that may not be happening anymore.
Simiber
Apr 25, 02:17 PM
IANAL, but AFAIK, here in America, having rights infringed upon is reason for sueing. That, in itself, is a "damage". Hence why Apple is being sued. They apparently are infringing upon the consumers' rights to privacy.
But how would a judge or jury quantify the size of the claim..? And surely the settlement should go to everyone who has had their right infringed upon, hence why a regulatory body should be responsible for protecting the people's rights so that any fine imposed by the regulator can be further used to protect peoples right to privacy when using a mobile..?
I understand the fact that the people who sue are taking the risk and costs of the lawsuit, but surely there are times when people's rights are being infringed but because nobody is prepared to sue, nothing ever gets done... If it was primarily the responsibility of a regulatory body to protect the consumer, then people's right to privacy would be protected not only when someone felt they had a case that they could make money out of :/
But how would a judge or jury quantify the size of the claim..? And surely the settlement should go to everyone who has had their right infringed upon, hence why a regulatory body should be responsible for protecting the people's rights so that any fine imposed by the regulator can be further used to protect peoples right to privacy when using a mobile..?
I understand the fact that the people who sue are taking the risk and costs of the lawsuit, but surely there are times when people's rights are being infringed but because nobody is prepared to sue, nothing ever gets done... If it was primarily the responsibility of a regulatory body to protect the consumer, then people's right to privacy would be protected not only when someone felt they had a case that they could make money out of :/
Yebubbleman
Apr 6, 03:35 PM
Disagree, the Air is a niche product, and there is a noticeable difference in weight. 2KG 13" Pro is exactly 50% heavier than 1.3KG Air, and if you lug the laptop around all day long such weight difference is noticeable. It might be added that most Air users are never gonna need the extra computing power of the MBP. If your work requires a MBP you're never going to get an Air anyway.
If you don't need the power of a MacBook Pro, then a white MacBook is the best bang for the buck. Period. The only two reasons why an Air would be desirable over a white MacBook are superficial aesthetic preferences (please people, these are computers, not fashion accessories) and weight, which brings me to...
I am going even further - I like the featherweight of the 11" and the fact that after the update it is going to be a very serious machine is not to be neglected.
After the update, it'll still be the slowest Mac in the line-up. Serious machine? Perhaps compared to a Core 2 Duo machine, but then again, at that point, they'll all have Sandy Bridge and will thusly all be serious compared to the Core 2 Duo Macs in every respect (save for the IGP in tow, of course). Featherweight? Sure, but at that point, do I really want to be editing my Microsoft Word documents or Photoshop files on a computer with an 11.6" screen? And for the same cost as a full featured Mac laptop (white MacBook)? No thanks.
Last but not least, those 2 pounds you're talking about can be crucial when deciding what to take in your hand luggage when traveling by plane. I've been up to such a decision when I had to take my 2.8kg PC laptop. That's where I guess the name of the computer comes from - Macbook Air, designed for use on an Airplane.
A 13" MacBook Pro wouldn't make travel THAT much harder. Seriously. I've traveled with a white MacBook for quite a while, and honestly, an Air would make the bag lighter, but not to the point where I'd take it over a white MacBook or a 13" MacBook Pro. Were I doing constant walking with the thing, maybe. As it stands I don't have that kind of mobile computing lifestyle, nor do I know many people that do.
The integrated Intel HD 3000 seems to be about equal to the integrated GeForce 320M when Barefeets did their tests on vidoe games.
On Portal, the HD3000 was 68FPS and the 320M was 65FPS.
On X-Plane, the HD3000 was 38FPS and the 320M was 43FPS.
Certainly worth moving to SB processors.
http://www.barefeats.com/mbps04.html
The 4Gig RAM limit is more critical than the change in graphics.
For every test that the HD 3000 beat the 320M or matched it, the CPU was largely at play. Jus' sayin'. Though really of the four Macs that ship sans a discrete GPU, the only one where it is sorely missed is the 13" MacBook Pro. For everyone else, the difference between the 320M and the HD 3000 won't matter at all.
I think you need to define very simple, because the MBA can run about everything. Lets face it, computers have been capable of running pretty much anything for the last decade, the upgrades stopped being as meaningful as they used to be quite some time ago.
I'm a Unix sysadmin, the MBA is my only computer. I do casual gaming on it, I use it to do graphics for my website using CS5, I use it for my work (using a VM), I use it to do my hobby coding, I use it to watch TV series and Anime in 720p. It has the upside of being light and small, so carrying it around on the motorcycle for when I'm on stand-by is less of a pain than 15" MBP or even a 13" MBP (which I had before, when it was called the Unibody Macbook).
Call me bat-**** crazy or my needs "simple", but it works for me as a stand-alone computer.
By "run everything", you can't possibly mean run games at "higher than medium" settings, nor edit lots of HD footage in something like Final Cut Pro. Though that's not what YOU use YOUR MacBook Air for, and really that's fine. I'm not trying to invalidate your purchase decision, man. I'm saying that on the whole, unless ultraportability ABSOLUTELY HAS TO BE A CONCERN, it's not the best of buys in an already over-priced Mac market. If you handed me $1000 and told me to buy a Mac laptop, I'd buy the white MacBook over the 11.6" Air every time. But that's a difference in opinion and frankly, I'd rather not argue difference in opinions.
If you don't need the power of a MacBook Pro, then a white MacBook is the best bang for the buck. Period. The only two reasons why an Air would be desirable over a white MacBook are superficial aesthetic preferences (please people, these are computers, not fashion accessories) and weight, which brings me to...
I am going even further - I like the featherweight of the 11" and the fact that after the update it is going to be a very serious machine is not to be neglected.
After the update, it'll still be the slowest Mac in the line-up. Serious machine? Perhaps compared to a Core 2 Duo machine, but then again, at that point, they'll all have Sandy Bridge and will thusly all be serious compared to the Core 2 Duo Macs in every respect (save for the IGP in tow, of course). Featherweight? Sure, but at that point, do I really want to be editing my Microsoft Word documents or Photoshop files on a computer with an 11.6" screen? And for the same cost as a full featured Mac laptop (white MacBook)? No thanks.
Last but not least, those 2 pounds you're talking about can be crucial when deciding what to take in your hand luggage when traveling by plane. I've been up to such a decision when I had to take my 2.8kg PC laptop. That's where I guess the name of the computer comes from - Macbook Air, designed for use on an Airplane.
A 13" MacBook Pro wouldn't make travel THAT much harder. Seriously. I've traveled with a white MacBook for quite a while, and honestly, an Air would make the bag lighter, but not to the point where I'd take it over a white MacBook or a 13" MacBook Pro. Were I doing constant walking with the thing, maybe. As it stands I don't have that kind of mobile computing lifestyle, nor do I know many people that do.
The integrated Intel HD 3000 seems to be about equal to the integrated GeForce 320M when Barefeets did their tests on vidoe games.
On Portal, the HD3000 was 68FPS and the 320M was 65FPS.
On X-Plane, the HD3000 was 38FPS and the 320M was 43FPS.
Certainly worth moving to SB processors.
http://www.barefeats.com/mbps04.html
The 4Gig RAM limit is more critical than the change in graphics.
For every test that the HD 3000 beat the 320M or matched it, the CPU was largely at play. Jus' sayin'. Though really of the four Macs that ship sans a discrete GPU, the only one where it is sorely missed is the 13" MacBook Pro. For everyone else, the difference between the 320M and the HD 3000 won't matter at all.
I think you need to define very simple, because the MBA can run about everything. Lets face it, computers have been capable of running pretty much anything for the last decade, the upgrades stopped being as meaningful as they used to be quite some time ago.
I'm a Unix sysadmin, the MBA is my only computer. I do casual gaming on it, I use it to do graphics for my website using CS5, I use it for my work (using a VM), I use it to do my hobby coding, I use it to watch TV series and Anime in 720p. It has the upside of being light and small, so carrying it around on the motorcycle for when I'm on stand-by is less of a pain than 15" MBP or even a 13" MBP (which I had before, when it was called the Unibody Macbook).
Call me bat-**** crazy or my needs "simple", but it works for me as a stand-alone computer.
By "run everything", you can't possibly mean run games at "higher than medium" settings, nor edit lots of HD footage in something like Final Cut Pro. Though that's not what YOU use YOUR MacBook Air for, and really that's fine. I'm not trying to invalidate your purchase decision, man. I'm saying that on the whole, unless ultraportability ABSOLUTELY HAS TO BE A CONCERN, it's not the best of buys in an already over-priced Mac market. If you handed me $1000 and told me to buy a Mac laptop, I'd buy the white MacBook over the 11.6" Air every time. But that's a difference in opinion and frankly, I'd rather not argue difference in opinions.
Cartaphilus
Apr 25, 04:26 PM
Despite the fact that were I the judge I'd levy Rule 11 sanctions against these lawyers, I can't agree that it makes any difference that the file is only available with access to the user's computer which can be password protected. In a civil matter, like a divorce case in a jurisdiction where it matters, the court can compel the user to divulge the password, to not delete or modify the file, and to deliver the computer to an expert to extract subpoenaed information. I haven't kept up with all the Patriot Act era provisions, but it wouldn't be surprising if law enforcement could obtain a warrant effectively forcing similar disclosures despite the Fifth Amendment.
Even had Apple super-encrypted the file, users and providers (like Apple, ISPs, and Telcos) would nonetheless be vulnerable to legal compulsion to cooperate in providing information deemed by the courts to be material and relevant to some lawsuit or prosecution. Accordingly, it isn't entirely harmless if such information is recorded without the knowledge--actual or constructive--of the user. Even so, these plaintiffs are unlikely to plead that they are terrorists, serial bank robbers, or adulterers who were duped into recording their whereabouts, however imprecisely, and whose highly-developed sense of ethics prevents them from simply smashing the telltale devices instead of bringing a lawsuit.
Even had Apple super-encrypted the file, users and providers (like Apple, ISPs, and Telcos) would nonetheless be vulnerable to legal compulsion to cooperate in providing information deemed by the courts to be material and relevant to some lawsuit or prosecution. Accordingly, it isn't entirely harmless if such information is recorded without the knowledge--actual or constructive--of the user. Even so, these plaintiffs are unlikely to plead that they are terrorists, serial bank robbers, or adulterers who were duped into recording their whereabouts, however imprecisely, and whose highly-developed sense of ethics prevents them from simply smashing the telltale devices instead of bringing a lawsuit.
ezekielrage_99
Aug 17, 01:19 AM
Yes...Photoshop can only run under Rosetta on the Intel machines...there's no universal version of it.
It was just the performance was dam quick I just wasn't sure if there was an Intel version out or not, either way that is killer performance.
It was just the performance was dam quick I just wasn't sure if there was an Intel version out or not, either way that is killer performance.
SWC
Aug 7, 07:36 PM
This is interesting; how do they figure that they can get the service to a mobile phone?
Discuss!
Cheers.
Quicktime. they have had mobile phone support for a while. since h.264 i beleive.
Discuss!
Cheers.
Quicktime. they have had mobile phone support for a while. since h.264 i beleive.
roland.g
Apr 6, 10:39 AM
I have something better than a MacBook Air. It's called an iPad 2.
That with my iMac and I have no need anymore for my 13" aluminum MacBook. While the Air is a nice looking and light machine, I still like having things like Firewire, an optical drive (without having to pay extra for it or plug it in), and above all, screen real estate.
My 24" iMac gives me that. While my iPad 2 gives my instant on, mobile, and light. When the iMacs get a refresh and ship with Lion, it will be time for a 27".
That with my iMac and I have no need anymore for my 13" aluminum MacBook. While the Air is a nice looking and light machine, I still like having things like Firewire, an optical drive (without having to pay extra for it or plug it in), and above all, screen real estate.
My 24" iMac gives me that. While my iPad 2 gives my instant on, mobile, and light. When the iMacs get a refresh and ship with Lion, it will be time for a 27".
dudemac
Aug 7, 04:05 PM
Features I want:
-iChat screen sharing (awesome idea!) and video effects
-Spaces (finally a Apple OS-level implementation)
-Time Machine (I want a friggin wormhole on my computer!)
I wish they'd show us the Top Secret features.
But seriously, so one even saw Time Machine coming. That was a surprise!
-iChat screen sharing (awesome idea!) and video effects
-Spaces (finally a Apple OS-level implementation)
-Time Machine (I want a friggin wormhole on my computer!)
I wish they'd show us the Top Secret features.
But seriously, so one even saw Time Machine coming. That was a surprise!
roland.g
Apr 6, 11:27 AM
Yeah, but for alot of people as cool as the iPad 2 is, it still can't do alot of what they need to do on the road. I have the iPad 1 and it's great. My favorite way to surf the web hands down! HOWEVER...I like to edit HD movies from my csnon dslr and do some creative projects while traveling...and the iPad can't do it. When I heard the iPad 2 was going to get iMovie, I got excited, but when it was released, I found out that iMovie on the iPad 2 can ONLY edit movies shot on apple iOS devices(the iPad, iPod and iPhone)!! Nor can I use Photoshop, aperture, illustrator or anime studio pro on it.
There are MANY creative people out there who love the MacBook air, but have been waiting for this update.
I still love my original iPad, and travel with it everywhere. BUT I decided not to buy the new iPad 2 even if it has a camera and is faster....cause it's still a "closed" device, and can't do alot of the things I need to do on the road. Things the MacBook air CAN do.
Heck, when I get one of the new MacBook airs...I may travel with BOTH it AND my iPad. Lol. They are slim enough and can both fit in my laptop sleeve in my knapsack and still weigh less than a 15" or 17" MacBook pro!
I will get a new iMac when they are updated too for my workstation at home, since my G5 iMac is on it's last legs. Lol.
And I am sure EVENTUALLY I will update my iPad. But for now I don't need to at all.
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.
There are MANY creative people out there who love the MacBook air, but have been waiting for this update.
I still love my original iPad, and travel with it everywhere. BUT I decided not to buy the new iPad 2 even if it has a camera and is faster....cause it's still a "closed" device, and can't do alot of the things I need to do on the road. Things the MacBook air CAN do.
Heck, when I get one of the new MacBook airs...I may travel with BOTH it AND my iPad. Lol. They are slim enough and can both fit in my laptop sleeve in my knapsack and still weigh less than a 15" or 17" MacBook pro!
I will get a new iMac when they are updated too for my workstation at home, since my G5 iMac is on it's last legs. Lol.
And I am sure EVENTUALLY I will update my iPad. But for now I don't need to at all.
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.
Erasmus
Jul 21, 11:55 PM
So I read in this thread that Kentsfield and Clovertown ARE compatible with Conroe and Woodcrest sockets (respectively) (Cloverton or Clovertown?)
Hope for upgrading an iMac to Quad Core is kindled! At least if Apple releases Conroe iMacs.
BTW, In my opinion, one thing a person should never, ever say is some computer has too much power, and that it will never be needed. So when 128 core CPUs come out in ~10 years time, will we still be considering dual core CPUs as fast enough for our use?
I seem to remember that when the original DOS operating system was created, its RAM was limited. I can't remember exactly to how much, but it was decided that people would never use more than a few kilobytes of memory. Now we are arguing that Mac should provide no less than a gigabyte! Now we are moving to 64 bit processing, with its capability to address a few exobytes, or millions of Terabytes of storage, it seems impossible that we will ever need 128bit computing. But, no doubt, one day we will.
When we will be able to download our entire lives, and even conciousness into a computer, as is said to happen in about 40 years (very much looking forward to), I dare say it will take a lot of memory to do, and even more processing power to manage effectively, especially if we wanted to "live" inside computers, as we will no doubt want to do someday.
So as a conclusion to my most recent rant, Please, never tell me a computer is too powerfu, has too many cores, or has too much storage capacity. If it is there to be used, it will be used. It always is.
Hope for upgrading an iMac to Quad Core is kindled! At least if Apple releases Conroe iMacs.
BTW, In my opinion, one thing a person should never, ever say is some computer has too much power, and that it will never be needed. So when 128 core CPUs come out in ~10 years time, will we still be considering dual core CPUs as fast enough for our use?
I seem to remember that when the original DOS operating system was created, its RAM was limited. I can't remember exactly to how much, but it was decided that people would never use more than a few kilobytes of memory. Now we are arguing that Mac should provide no less than a gigabyte! Now we are moving to 64 bit processing, with its capability to address a few exobytes, or millions of Terabytes of storage, it seems impossible that we will ever need 128bit computing. But, no doubt, one day we will.
When we will be able to download our entire lives, and even conciousness into a computer, as is said to happen in about 40 years (very much looking forward to), I dare say it will take a lot of memory to do, and even more processing power to manage effectively, especially if we wanted to "live" inside computers, as we will no doubt want to do someday.
So as a conclusion to my most recent rant, Please, never tell me a computer is too powerfu, has too many cores, or has too much storage capacity. If it is there to be used, it will be used. It always is.
bretm
Apr 11, 07:56 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
Go get yourself an Atrix or HTC and see if you like it better. You won't. We have an Atrix in our house. And it's dual processor still is slower than the iPhone 4. Heck, just interface snappiness and smoothness is still a lesser experience to the original iPhone.
Go get yourself an Atrix or HTC and see if you like it better. You won't. We have an Atrix in our house. And it's dual processor still is slower than the iPhone 4. Heck, just interface snappiness and smoothness is still a lesser experience to the original iPhone.
Multimedia
Jul 15, 05:15 AM
I prefer the Simpsons' parody of that cartoon:
"...and I'll make Ted Kennedy pay, if he fights back I'll say that he's gay."
But seriously, the $1799 price point is a step in the right direction. If we could get it down to $1599 or <gasp> $1499, then that would be the de facto mini tower so many have clamored for. I would like a redesigned case, but that'll come eventually.
Sometimes the right price can make a person forget about what might have been.We have that already on the Refurbished page. :) Dual Core 2GHz G5 is only $1699 there. Quad only $2799. So your dream of $1499 will come when the 2GHz Core 2 Duo Mac Pro hits the refurb page - which, according to recent history, should happen before Christmas.I believe that the MacBook was on the refurb page in around 3-4 weeks. The iMac Core Duo took AGES though.Yes MacBook broke the speed record for shift to the refurb page in record time. Right now everything is up there except the 17" MacBook Pros. My Quad made it there in only 3 months last Winter.
"...and I'll make Ted Kennedy pay, if he fights back I'll say that he's gay."
But seriously, the $1799 price point is a step in the right direction. If we could get it down to $1599 or <gasp> $1499, then that would be the de facto mini tower so many have clamored for. I would like a redesigned case, but that'll come eventually.
Sometimes the right price can make a person forget about what might have been.We have that already on the Refurbished page. :) Dual Core 2GHz G5 is only $1699 there. Quad only $2799. So your dream of $1499 will come when the 2GHz Core 2 Duo Mac Pro hits the refurb page - which, according to recent history, should happen before Christmas.I believe that the MacBook was on the refurb page in around 3-4 weeks. The iMac Core Duo took AGES though.Yes MacBook broke the speed record for shift to the refurb page in record time. Right now everything is up there except the 17" MacBook Pros. My Quad made it there in only 3 months last Winter.
freebooter
Nov 28, 09:39 PM
Just greed, plain and simple.
No comments:
Post a Comment