Evangelion
Aug 18, 04:44 AM
I have to say, I actually expected the woodcrest results to be better. It really shows that the G5 was years ahead of the competition. :cool:
On some tasks, it was. Overall, it was merely competetive with what was available on the x86-world at the time (Opteron etc.). The difference was that G4 was getting massacred by x86, G5 restored parity.
Yes, G5 whooped ass on some benchmarks. And lost in some other benchmarks. But at least it wasn't getting it's ass whooped all the time and everywhere ;)
On some tasks, it was. Overall, it was merely competetive with what was available on the x86-world at the time (Opteron etc.). The difference was that G4 was getting massacred by x86, G5 restored parity.
Yes, G5 whooped ass on some benchmarks. And lost in some other benchmarks. But at least it wasn't getting it's ass whooped all the time and everywhere ;)
zap2
Apr 29, 01:08 PM
I don't want anyone to attack anyone else. Whomever calls names, name-calling is libel or slander. I say, "Attack ideas, not people."
Not if its true. So saying "Palin is a tax lower lowering nut" can be true. Its up for debate, but you can make the argument based off factual arguments.
Doesn't mean its a good idea or helpful to the nation, but its not libel/slander if its true.
I I wasn't talking about liberals in general. I said that most of the name-callers I knew of were liberals.
But its clear what you are implying
Not if its true. So saying "Palin is a tax lower lowering nut" can be true. Its up for debate, but you can make the argument based off factual arguments.
Doesn't mean its a good idea or helpful to the nation, but its not libel/slander if its true.
I I wasn't talking about liberals in general. I said that most of the name-callers I knew of were liberals.
But its clear what you are implying
dougny
Nov 28, 06:44 PM
(Did the music companies ask for money for every CD player or Tape Recorder sold? Nope)
Actually, they do. They also got paid on every blank tape sold when cassettes were big. I think it is crazy for everyone to think that the music industry is greedy when it getting squeezed out of all of their revenue streams. So, Apple makes hundreds of millions off of their back on the itunes site, and a billion off of iPod sales, and they cannot share in the wealth?
It doesn't cost the consumer any more, why wouldn't you want the people who actually make the music you are listening to get compensated?
This debate is stale. People want something for nothing.
Actually, they do. They also got paid on every blank tape sold when cassettes were big. I think it is crazy for everyone to think that the music industry is greedy when it getting squeezed out of all of their revenue streams. So, Apple makes hundreds of millions off of their back on the itunes site, and a billion off of iPod sales, and they cannot share in the wealth?
It doesn't cost the consumer any more, why wouldn't you want the people who actually make the music you are listening to get compensated?
This debate is stale. People want something for nothing.
nwcs
Apr 10, 07:40 AM
Oh boo hoo about the companies being "booted" from sponsorships. The company I work for goes to trade shows. The time invested is actually quite small and most of the materials are in inventory anyway. The presentations are usually based on the same script. I bet the companies aren't that disappointed. In fact they would like to be there and see what Apple is up to more than anyone else. So I bet they'll send the same presenter staff there to view and record anything of note to send back to their company.
Businesses deal with things by contract and those contracts have terms and conditions. No company would just break a contract so I'm sure everything wad handled quite smoothly behind the scenes. So I think this idea that Apple bullied or pushed people is silly.
Businesses deal with things by contract and those contracts have terms and conditions. No company would just break a contract so I'm sure everything wad handled quite smoothly behind the scenes. So I think this idea that Apple bullied or pushed people is silly.
dgree03
Apr 6, 02:45 PM
You list ONE issue with the iPad, that it looks too much like the iPhone, and then go on to a laundry list of issues on the Xoom that culminates in a tech support call and THAT is your preferred device?
Rock on winner. I have a bridge I want to sell you.
If you want I can give you a laundry list of things wrong with the ipad.. it will surely be longer than my xoom cons?
Rock on winner. I have a bridge I want to sell you.
If you want I can give you a laundry list of things wrong with the ipad.. it will surely be longer than my xoom cons?
magbarn
Apr 9, 09:23 AM
Intel did indeed force Apple to use their IGP by not licensing other vendors to provide IGPs. The reason the MBP 13" and MBA 13" use IGPs and not dedicated GPU is one of space. Apple can't magically conjure up space on the logic board.
I push the GPU more often than I push the CPU on my MBA. I doubt I'm in the minority, though I'm probably part of the minority that actual knows this little fact. ;)
No matter how much you try to spin this, Intel got greedy on this one and couldn't back their greed with competence. They have sucked at GPUs since they have been in the GPU game (Intel i740 anyone ?).
I don't think 2IS is getting that IF Intel allowed Nvidia to continue making sandy bridge chipsets, Nvidia could've easily integrated a 320m successor into the south bridge. This would give you the best of both worlds, the downclocked Low-voltage Intel HD graphics when on battery or basic surfing, or the 320m successor in the south bridge when playing games or aperture photo editing. All this WITHOUT raising the motherboard chip count that putting a separate discrete (on it's own, not integrated into the chipset like 320m) would entail.
I push the GPU more often than I push the CPU on my MBA. I doubt I'm in the minority, though I'm probably part of the minority that actual knows this little fact. ;)
No matter how much you try to spin this, Intel got greedy on this one and couldn't back their greed with competence. They have sucked at GPUs since they have been in the GPU game (Intel i740 anyone ?).
I don't think 2IS is getting that IF Intel allowed Nvidia to continue making sandy bridge chipsets, Nvidia could've easily integrated a 320m successor into the south bridge. This would give you the best of both worlds, the downclocked Low-voltage Intel HD graphics when on battery or basic surfing, or the 320m successor in the south bridge when playing games or aperture photo editing. All this WITHOUT raising the motherboard chip count that putting a separate discrete (on it's own, not integrated into the chipset like 320m) would entail.
brobert99
Apr 11, 01:02 PM
Whos to say Apple aren't leaking these rumors to try and put everyone off and try and prevent the same thing happening as happened with the iPhone 4?
Bakey
Apr 5, 06:09 PM
A very ignorant post. Especially if you value quality. I hardly call providing the best quality video "sucking money out of home consumers"
Or are you one of those that want to insist that streaming "hd" video is just as good as blu-ray. Because if you are - you shouldn't have even weighed in here.
No need to school you on the difference here though unless you come back and tell me you still think there's no difference.
+1... Maybe I should've snipped the quote, but I couldn't agree more! :)
Or are you one of those that want to insist that streaming "hd" video is just as good as blu-ray. Because if you are - you shouldn't have even weighed in here.
No need to school you on the difference here though unless you come back and tell me you still think there's no difference.
+1... Maybe I should've snipped the quote, but I couldn't agree more! :)
dgree03
Apr 6, 03:58 PM
1. Have you seen how those apps "scale" on XOOM? That doesn't make them optimized for tablets, just fit more screen space and even that doesn't work that well.
2. Bull.
YOU apparently havent seen how apps scale first hand. Like i said ill take that over x1, x2 ANY day.
Scale?? Access to each other??
I'm beginning to wonder if you have ever used EITHER iOS or Android.
HAHA, Yes I own a XOOM and a Ipad 2(previously Ipad 1).
YOU apparently havent used either at any length.
My point still stands, I can use less apps to accomplish the same goals on a XOOM than i can on a Ipad.
If you have any other first hand usage that proves me wrong.. go for it.
2. Bull.
YOU apparently havent seen how apps scale first hand. Like i said ill take that over x1, x2 ANY day.
Scale?? Access to each other??
I'm beginning to wonder if you have ever used EITHER iOS or Android.
HAHA, Yes I own a XOOM and a Ipad 2(previously Ipad 1).
YOU apparently havent used either at any length.
My point still stands, I can use less apps to accomplish the same goals on a XOOM than i can on a Ipad.
If you have any other first hand usage that proves me wrong.. go for it.
dwero
Jun 9, 03:29 AM
When called #639*, I got the news that 16GB for $199 and 32GB for $299.
That's suck
That's suck
gnasher729
Jul 23, 06:41 PM
A Quad 2.3 for $1999 ... not going to happen.
Even the cheapest configuration of Dell Precision 490 Workstartion (http://catalog.us.dell.com/CS1/cs1page2.aspx?br=6&c=us&cs=04&fm=11456&kc=6W463&l=en&s=bsd) with dual 2.3 Woodcrests comes out to $2348. This includes 1GB RAM, 80GB SATA drive, and 128MB nVidia Quadro NVS 285 2D graphics.
Apple prices are typically a few hundred $ higher. I am guessing it will be more like $2699 with a larger hard drive and better graphics.
That's what Kentsfield is for. It is a single quad core chip, which is expected to fit into the cheaper motherboards for Conroe instead of the much more expensive motherboards for Woodcrest.
Two recent quotes: On their earnings release, Apple said that they are on track to finish the Intel transition by the end of the year. And Intel said that Kentsfield will be available in the last quarter of this year. A single chip Woodcrest is nonsense (much more expensive than Conroe at same performance). Complete line with dual chip times dual core Woodcrest is too expensive for the cheapest mode. By waiting for Kentsfield, Apple can avoid designing two motherboards and still have quad cores.
Even the cheapest configuration of Dell Precision 490 Workstartion (http://catalog.us.dell.com/CS1/cs1page2.aspx?br=6&c=us&cs=04&fm=11456&kc=6W463&l=en&s=bsd) with dual 2.3 Woodcrests comes out to $2348. This includes 1GB RAM, 80GB SATA drive, and 128MB nVidia Quadro NVS 285 2D graphics.
Apple prices are typically a few hundred $ higher. I am guessing it will be more like $2699 with a larger hard drive and better graphics.
That's what Kentsfield is for. It is a single quad core chip, which is expected to fit into the cheaper motherboards for Conroe instead of the much more expensive motherboards for Woodcrest.
Two recent quotes: On their earnings release, Apple said that they are on track to finish the Intel transition by the end of the year. And Intel said that Kentsfield will be available in the last quarter of this year. A single chip Woodcrest is nonsense (much more expensive than Conroe at same performance). Complete line with dual chip times dual core Woodcrest is too expensive for the cheapest mode. By waiting for Kentsfield, Apple can avoid designing two motherboards and still have quad cores.
silverblue3
Aug 25, 04:24 PM
Granted, there are problems with the mac hardware. but till date, I've found apple tech support excellent. They have always replaced my hardware with no questions asked. In fact, they replaced my whole LCD screen on my 3 year old powerbook just because of a white spot.
QCassidy352
Jul 27, 10:50 AM
nice. :) I'm predicting no MBPs at WWDC, just mac pros, leopard preview, and maybe new displays. MBPs will be quietly updated with Merom a week or two later and start shipping soon after that.
unless there's a new case design (which I doubt) - if there is, Steve would have something impressive to show up on stage.
unless there's a new case design (which I doubt) - if there is, Steve would have something impressive to show up on stage.
Jpoon
Jun 8, 08:30 PM
I would rather just order it online if I didn't want to drive to an Apple Store.
Seriously, RadioShack needs to die.
Seriously, RadioShack needs to die.
gorgeousninja
Apr 20, 09:40 AM
Don't let a few cherry picked pictures trick you, most Galaxy models don't look at all like an iPhone :
http://www.rogers.com/cms/images/en/Wireless/CellPhoneDetail/Banners/banner01_i896blkr.png
This one can go either way. Of course the Apple biased media are cherry picking their pictures. I'd doubt you'd have a hard time telling both devices apart in the real world with both in front of you.
Especially consdiring the Samsung doesn't use the icon grid on its homescreen at all, contrary to what the pictures are trying to show.
http://cultofmac.cultofmaccom.netdna-cdn.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Screen-shot-2011-04-19-at-8.37.05-PM.png
feel free to point out how difficult it is to see any similarities...
http://www.rogers.com/cms/images/en/Wireless/CellPhoneDetail/Banners/banner01_i896blkr.png
This one can go either way. Of course the Apple biased media are cherry picking their pictures. I'd doubt you'd have a hard time telling both devices apart in the real world with both in front of you.
Especially consdiring the Samsung doesn't use the icon grid on its homescreen at all, contrary to what the pictures are trying to show.
http://cultofmac.cultofmaccom.netdna-cdn.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Screen-shot-2011-04-19-at-8.37.05-PM.png
feel free to point out how difficult it is to see any similarities...
Peace
Jul 27, 10:10 AM
Very, very true. You usually only get half the things you expect... the real gem is when you get something you didn't expect.
Like the 30th Anniversary Mac ;)
Like the 30th Anniversary Mac ;)
Macnoviz
Jul 22, 03:03 AM
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.
I agree with your point on never saying a computer is too powerful, although living in computers is probably not going to happen. Sounds a bit too Matrix-like for me.
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.
I agree with your point on never saying a computer is too powerful, although living in computers is probably not going to happen. Sounds a bit too Matrix-like for me.
shamino
Jul 14, 05:26 PM
Kind of odd/funny how we seem to be going backwards in processor speeds. Instead of 3.6 GHz Pentiums, we are looking at 2.x GHz Intel Cores. It would be interesting to see how well a single Core processor matches up to PowerPC, or a Pentium, or AMD.
It just means that Intel has finally publicly recognized the validity of the MHz Myth.
Raw clock speed is meaningless. You can get better performance at a slower clock speed if you can increase parallelism. This includes features like superscalar architecture (where multiple instructions are executed per clock), deep pipelining, hyperthreading, SIMD instructions, and multi-core chips.
However, I am finding one of my predicitions finally happen...it appears that a ceiling has been currently met on how fast the current line of processors can go, and now we are relying on multiple cores/processors to distribute work, instead of relying on just one fast chip.
That's a part of the equation, but not all of it.
Higher clock speeds are possible, but it's not worth the effort. Pumping up the clock speed creates serious problems in terms of power consumption and heat dissipation. Leaving the clock speed lower, but increasing parallelism will also boost performance, and keeps the power curve down at manageable levels.
It's worth noting that Intel has shipped P4-series chips at 3.4GHz. But the new chips (Woodcrest and Conroe) aren't being sold at speeds above 3GHz.
So when will we start seeing 8 chips in a computer? Perhaps this will become the new measurement...not processor speeds, but the number of processors (or cores).
Pay attention. The answer is "sooner than you think".
There have already been technology briefings from Intel that talk about 4-core chips in early and 32-core chips by 2010. Similar offerings are expected from AMD.
And the Xeon-MP series processors (which will, of course, eventually get all this tech) are designed with 8-way SMP in mind. A theoretical Xeon-MP based on this 32-core tech would produce a system with 256 cores. Of course, it is doubtful that anything other than a large server would be able to take proper advantage of this, so I wouldn't ever expect to find one on a desktop.
(FWIW, Intel is looking to Sun as a rival here. Sun's latest chip - the UltraSPARC T1 (http://www.sun.com/processors/UltraSPARC-T1/) - currently ships in an 8-core configuration, with each core capable of running four threads at a time, and only consuming 72W of power. Even at 1.2GHz - the top speed they're currently shipping at - this makes for a very nice server.)
It just means that Intel has finally publicly recognized the validity of the MHz Myth.
Raw clock speed is meaningless. You can get better performance at a slower clock speed if you can increase parallelism. This includes features like superscalar architecture (where multiple instructions are executed per clock), deep pipelining, hyperthreading, SIMD instructions, and multi-core chips.
However, I am finding one of my predicitions finally happen...it appears that a ceiling has been currently met on how fast the current line of processors can go, and now we are relying on multiple cores/processors to distribute work, instead of relying on just one fast chip.
That's a part of the equation, but not all of it.
Higher clock speeds are possible, but it's not worth the effort. Pumping up the clock speed creates serious problems in terms of power consumption and heat dissipation. Leaving the clock speed lower, but increasing parallelism will also boost performance, and keeps the power curve down at manageable levels.
It's worth noting that Intel has shipped P4-series chips at 3.4GHz. But the new chips (Woodcrest and Conroe) aren't being sold at speeds above 3GHz.
So when will we start seeing 8 chips in a computer? Perhaps this will become the new measurement...not processor speeds, but the number of processors (or cores).
Pay attention. The answer is "sooner than you think".
There have already been technology briefings from Intel that talk about 4-core chips in early and 32-core chips by 2010. Similar offerings are expected from AMD.
And the Xeon-MP series processors (which will, of course, eventually get all this tech) are designed with 8-way SMP in mind. A theoretical Xeon-MP based on this 32-core tech would produce a system with 256 cores. Of course, it is doubtful that anything other than a large server would be able to take proper advantage of this, so I wouldn't ever expect to find one on a desktop.
(FWIW, Intel is looking to Sun as a rival here. Sun's latest chip - the UltraSPARC T1 (http://www.sun.com/processors/UltraSPARC-T1/) - currently ships in an 8-core configuration, with each core capable of running four threads at a time, and only consuming 72W of power. Even at 1.2GHz - the top speed they're currently shipping at - this makes for a very nice server.)
Nuvi
Apr 5, 10:36 PM
Nobody's using Blu-Ray, in my experience. It's just another way of sucking money out of home consumers. Everything's done online in terms of delivery...'
Wake up and smell the coffee... BR is the main distribution method for paid HD content in the world. Also the quality is far better then with any download service.
Wake up and smell the coffee... BR is the main distribution method for paid HD content in the world. Also the quality is far better then with any download service.
11thIndian
Apr 5, 10:14 PM
sorry but that's not the case. While some contend it's jaw-dropping, that's only because they're stacking it up against what FCS is currently. Compared to what Avid and Adobe are doing, Apple now has a mountain to climb. Apple has been too interested in their entertainment business to worry about their "pro" line (hardware/software). I know quite a few studios who have already shifted BACK to Avid and some are taking on the Adobe Suite completely as their software of choice. While some may find the new FCS exciting, and it does have some bells and whistles, it's typical Apple doing an incremental bump to keep up with what others are doing. Sad really.
So if you were one of the 100 people up to now who's seen it and can accurately make this evaluation, let's see your invite....
So if you were one of the 100 people up to now who's seen it and can accurately make this evaluation, let's see your invite....
TangoCharlie
Jul 28, 05:17 AM
Ensoniq, thanks so much for the useful corrections. How significant do you think that 64-bit capability will be in the future compared to not having it(say, 2-3 years time)?
AFAIK, the Merom CPUs have an improved SpeedStep technology, so that
on average the heat generation may infact be lower for Merom.
AFAIK, the Merom CPUs have an improved SpeedStep technology, so that
on average the heat generation may infact be lower for Merom.
~Shard~
Jul 15, 10:59 AM
Well I wouldnt worry about that in the case of a mac. Only people who are really going to replace there PSU are going to be people who know something about computers. A lot of people replace there ram. PSU are not upgraded very offen if ever at all.
Also the people who do replace PSU most of them know dont cheap out on them. Among home builder comminty a thing most agree on is NEVER cheap out on a PSU. Go name brand. Reason being is why would you build a 1k system and then risk it all with a cheap PSU (rule can be cut if pretty much using dirt cheap parts to begin with and trying to go as cheaply as possible (less than 500 and in old spare parts). My own PC rig using an Antec True Power PSU in it (that i pick up from compUSA oddly enough).
I think going ATX is a good thing because it means Apple is going to be using more standardized parts so it will be cheaper for apple to get them.
And another good point! ;) Yeah, you would hope that if someone is replacing their PSU they know what they're doing... it is different from a Joe User simply installing some RAM.
Also the people who do replace PSU most of them know dont cheap out on them. Among home builder comminty a thing most agree on is NEVER cheap out on a PSU. Go name brand. Reason being is why would you build a 1k system and then risk it all with a cheap PSU (rule can be cut if pretty much using dirt cheap parts to begin with and trying to go as cheaply as possible (less than 500 and in old spare parts). My own PC rig using an Antec True Power PSU in it (that i pick up from compUSA oddly enough).
I think going ATX is a good thing because it means Apple is going to be using more standardized parts so it will be cheaper for apple to get them.
And another good point! ;) Yeah, you would hope that if someone is replacing their PSU they know what they're doing... it is different from a Joe User simply installing some RAM.
AaronEdwards
Apr 27, 08:25 AM
5. Can Apple locate me based on my geo-tagged Wi-Fi hotspot and cell tower data?
yoak
Apr 12, 01:14 PM
+1
I posted it over in the other FCS thread after learning of the link here. Thanks
I posted it over in the other FCS thread after learning of the link here. Thanks
0 comments:
Post a Comment