michaelz
Mar 25, 11:06 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8C148)
In another news: iPad 3 is released in Fall 2011.
Yes, ipad3 will run os x lion! MBA will have a touch screen!!
In another news: iPad 3 is released in Fall 2011.
Yes, ipad3 will run os x lion! MBA will have a touch screen!!
wPod
Jul 27, 10:11 AM
With things like this, my rule is: If you have to ask, then you can't do it :-(
It is one thing to try these things with a cheap MacMini, especially if your goal is not to have a faster MacMini, but an impressive webpage. Risking a $2000 MacBook Pro is quite another thing. Better to sell your MacBook/MacBook Pro on eBay and buy a new one.
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???!?!?!
It is one thing to try these things with a cheap MacMini, especially if your goal is not to have a faster MacMini, but an impressive webpage. Risking a $2000 MacBook Pro is quite another thing. Better to sell your MacBook/MacBook Pro on eBay and buy a new one.
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???!?!?!
madhatter61
Mar 23, 10:36 AM
Widescreen is great for movie watching, and the spec-lover in me is all over that... but it�s not very flexible for portrait use. (Which is how you hold a tablet one-handed, and is how you see the most content on a web page or scrolling document.)
A 10.1� 1280x800 screen is actually almost exactly the same screen area as an iPad: the iPad is 45.2 sq. in., and the 10.1 is 45.8 sq. in.
Held in portrait mode, the 10.1 is .75� taller... but .5� narrower than an iPad. I don�t think I�d care for that. (But with 1280x800 you do gain 32 pixels of width, and 256 pixels of height. Still not great for portrait use.)
The 8.9 display, though�which seems to save a few bucks�is an interesting option for dropping the price floor on �real� tablets. (Not that I�d settle for Android�s failings. As pointed out: specs alone don�t make a good car, nor a good computer, nor a good tablet!)
Ha ha :D Good thinking!
Actually if you look at Xoom and Samsung 10.1 are both 16:10 ratio ... perfect for movies ... the iPAD is 4x3 old TV ratio ... creates the need for filler top/side bars... I think that is called letterboxing ... CRS?
The key advantage for iPAD is in Landscape there is more vertical space for the virtual keyboard ... duh?
Also key here is PPI and is the heart of the display issue. Apple wants the same density of PPI so software development has a common display requirement. Then all apps work across the board. That is why Apple has hundreds of thousands of apps that work.
A 10.1� 1280x800 screen is actually almost exactly the same screen area as an iPad: the iPad is 45.2 sq. in., and the 10.1 is 45.8 sq. in.
Held in portrait mode, the 10.1 is .75� taller... but .5� narrower than an iPad. I don�t think I�d care for that. (But with 1280x800 you do gain 32 pixels of width, and 256 pixels of height. Still not great for portrait use.)
The 8.9 display, though�which seems to save a few bucks�is an interesting option for dropping the price floor on �real� tablets. (Not that I�d settle for Android�s failings. As pointed out: specs alone don�t make a good car, nor a good computer, nor a good tablet!)
Ha ha :D Good thinking!
Actually if you look at Xoom and Samsung 10.1 are both 16:10 ratio ... perfect for movies ... the iPAD is 4x3 old TV ratio ... creates the need for filler top/side bars... I think that is called letterboxing ... CRS?
The key advantage for iPAD is in Landscape there is more vertical space for the virtual keyboard ... duh?
Also key here is PPI and is the heart of the display issue. Apple wants the same density of PPI so software development has a common display requirement. Then all apps work across the board. That is why Apple has hundreds of thousands of apps that work.
dgree03
Mar 31, 02:36 PM
This wont end androids openness. It will make is so that there is more of a consistent experience amung all android devices.
We will still be able to install from "unknown sources" for example.
Relaz macrumors.. not as big as deal as you are making it.
We will still be able to install from "unknown sources" for example.
Relaz macrumors.. not as big as deal as you are making it.
noservice2001
Aug 5, 04:15 PM
cmon, ipod.....
chatin
Aug 18, 09:55 PM
Here is the link to the fast memory.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.asp?DEPA=0&type;=&Description;=5300+fb+dimm&Submit;=ENE&Ntk;=all&N;=0&minPrice;=&maxPrice;=&Go.x;=0&Go.y;=0
The desktop literally explodes onto the screen! The clock timer gets only one quarter the way around one rotation. I'll see if I can shoot a quicktime movie for future Quad G5 switchers.
:) :p
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.asp?DEPA=0&type;=&Description;=5300+fb+dimm&Submit;=ENE&Ntk;=all&N;=0&minPrice;=&maxPrice;=&Go.x;=0&Go.y;=0
The desktop literally explodes onto the screen! The clock timer gets only one quarter the way around one rotation. I'll see if I can shoot a quicktime movie for future Quad G5 switchers.
:) :p
satty
Jul 20, 08:38 AM
Not that I wouldn't mind more processing power :D ...
but to me it doesn't make much sense for the majority of tasks/applications.
There might be rare exceptions in the professinal area and of course it makes lots of sense for a server, but for a single user machine?
Whatever, bring them on... in this case I like to be proven wrong.
but to me it doesn't make much sense for the majority of tasks/applications.
There might be rare exceptions in the professinal area and of course it makes lots of sense for a server, but for a single user machine?
Whatever, bring them on... in this case I like to be proven wrong.
ThomasJL
Apr 7, 10:19 PM
This is a victory for all the elitist fanboys who think that Apple products should only be sold in Apple Stores in upscale shopping areas.
Nuck81
Dec 10, 04:37 AM
But, I DO love all types of cars. I just don't think they all have a place in a RACING game.
The game doesn't have to be only 700hp exotics, that isn't what I'm saying. There have been PLENTY of wildly varied cars throughout history that would be fun to drive, on a track, in a racing game. The VW K�belwagen and Citro�n DS, for example, aren't some of them.
It says right on the front of the box "The real DRIVING simulator" not "the real racing simulator"
The game doesn't have to be only 700hp exotics, that isn't what I'm saying. There have been PLENTY of wildly varied cars throughout history that would be fun to drive, on a track, in a racing game. The VW K�belwagen and Citro�n DS, for example, aren't some of them.
It says right on the front of the box "The real DRIVING simulator" not "the real racing simulator"
dernhelm
Nov 29, 05:02 AM
dang it microsoft.
Don't curse Microsoft. They're just doing what they've always done - try to screw over anyone they see as a threat. They can't defeat Apple, but they can screw up the market so bad that it won't matter if Apple is king of the hill.
Curse the idiots that buy the Zune without even knowing what they are doing. Better yet, pass the word. This isn't about the Zune being a nice device or not, this is about the DRM in the thing, and the tax you pay to the music companies even if you don't buy any of their songs.
In the end, the Zune will fail, because it is big, expensive, and has DRM that isn't compatible with anything anyone has ever bought before anywhere. It isn't even Vista compatible yet! But this isn't about the Zune being successful, and I'm beginning to think it never was. The Zune is more about Microsoft trying to throw a wrench into the music download industry - and if it can make Apple less profitable by doing so, then so much the better.
Don't curse Microsoft. They're just doing what they've always done - try to screw over anyone they see as a threat. They can't defeat Apple, but they can screw up the market so bad that it won't matter if Apple is king of the hill.
Curse the idiots that buy the Zune without even knowing what they are doing. Better yet, pass the word. This isn't about the Zune being a nice device or not, this is about the DRM in the thing, and the tax you pay to the music companies even if you don't buy any of their songs.
In the end, the Zune will fail, because it is big, expensive, and has DRM that isn't compatible with anything anyone has ever bought before anywhere. It isn't even Vista compatible yet! But this isn't about the Zune being successful, and I'm beginning to think it never was. The Zune is more about Microsoft trying to throw a wrench into the music download industry - and if it can make Apple less profitable by doing so, then so much the better.
cjc81
Sep 19, 11:31 AM
I don't think you've got anything to worry about there...
Looks like your order is going to be delayed, in your favour =)
Looks like your order is going to be delayed, in your favour =)
playaj82
Aug 7, 03:37 PM
If the rumor sites were right....
Mac Pro
Leopard
iPhone
Core 2 Duo
iMac
Tablet, etc...
the keynote would have been 6 hours.
I'm glad they took their time with Leopard and highlighted some neat new and much needed additions to tiger.
Mac Pro
Leopard
iPhone
Core 2 Duo
iMac
Tablet, etc...
the keynote would have been 6 hours.
I'm glad they took their time with Leopard and highlighted some neat new and much needed additions to tiger.
macse30
Apr 27, 07:59 AM
I wish they would leave it on and let me use it. I consider it a feature. It would help me track hours at job sites automatically for billing. I thought of writing an app just for that.
RebeccaL
Mar 31, 09:20 PM
I hope this silences all the Android trolls that claimed there was no fragmentation.
bandalay
Apr 25, 01:43 PM
That something that could be explained in two lines by someone in the know has to go to a Federal lawsuit. Clearly Apple is trying to avoid getting drawn into a privacy discussion, because as we know, there's no end to the absurd lengths people will declare their rights trod upon.
Someone's trying to make a "big thing�" out of this.
Someone's trying to make a "big thing�" out of this.
shamino
Jul 21, 12:45 PM
I strongly disagree. I could use 16 cores right now for notihng more than simple consumer electronics video compression routines. There will be a Mac Pro with 8 cores this Winter 2007.
You are completely blind to the need for many cores right now for very simple stupid work. All I want to do is run 4 copies of Toast while running 4 copies of Handbrake simultaneously. Each wants 2 cores or more. So you are not thinking of the current need for 16 cores already.
All I will say is that you are not a typical user. You are not even close to typical.
OK. So maybe you need ten thousand cores and three million gigabytes of RAM. Don't think for an instant that the majority of the world shares your requirements.
You are completely blind to the need for many cores right now for very simple stupid work. All I want to do is run 4 copies of Toast while running 4 copies of Handbrake simultaneously. Each wants 2 cores or more. So you are not thinking of the current need for 16 cores already.
All I will say is that you are not a typical user. You are not even close to typical.
OK. So maybe you need ten thousand cores and three million gigabytes of RAM. Don't think for an instant that the majority of the world shares your requirements.
twoodcc
Aug 12, 09:04 PM
I don't really care if you count the Prologues as full releases or not. The fact remains...
GT1 + GT2 + GT3 + GT4 = 46M
...not 57M like you originally, and incorrectly, said.
but you do care. you are pointing out that you care by what you just typed. if you count the prologues, you get over 57M sold.
You brought up sales, not me. And last I checked, objectively, 100 is more than 57, regardless of how you subjectively look at it.
i disagree. let's bring math into the equation, since you seem to have missed it.
100,000,000/15 = 6,666,667.
57,000,000/8 = 7,125,000.
so GT has sold more copies per game.
No, the only thing that adds to is a stat point on the back of the box. I mean, hooray, someone's 87 CRX is in a racing game. YAY!! :rolleyes:
That is the problem with GT these days. Too much fluff, and lacking in the racing. I mean, whatever, they can make whatever kind of game they want. If they want to fill the game with 1000 cars, 800 of which most people never touch, they can do that. To me, though, they are losing what made the series great years ago.
well again this is your opinion. we all have one. i personally think that if someone is into cars, they will care about their car. not everyone can afford the cars in the game, but it might be nice to see that car that you can afford and have in real life in the game. i mean, the game is meant for people into cars.
NO WAY!!! I never knew that. :rolleyes:
just pointing out the facts. are you doing any different?
Sure, but a "Guinness Record" for it? Again, to much fluff.
they have records for everything. like how much cheese you can eat, or whatever. that's what Guinness Records are
No, it is a concept car that Citro�n paraded around at car shows. Lots of concept cars get built with the fake intention of going into production. But you know what? Almost none of them do. This Citro�n is no different.
but the intention of the car was for the game. how do you not see that? specifically for the game. in fact, it's named GT after the game
My point is, he was trying to use GT's high sales as a quantifier of the series greatness. Then, when I showed 2 examples of other racing game series with higher sales, he said they were different types of racing games, and that they don't count. Which is understandable, because they are not the same type of game. But then, ultimately, as I said before, if you don't count those other types of racing games, you're really only comparing GT to Forza, since that is the only other similar game.
But what does that prove? A game series that has been out for almost 13 years has sold more than a similar type of game series that has only been out for a little over 5 years. Big shock there. I'll be the first to admit that Forza isn't even remotely close to as big of a sales hit as the GT series. But, like I've said before, liking a game is a subjective thing, and everyone is entitled to their own choices. But sales are an objective thing, that has no relevance to somethings greatness.
how does sales have no relevance if something is great? so iPhone sales show nothing to how good it is? or iPod sales mean nothing to how well it is? of course it does. you make games to sell. if they don't sell, you stop making games. and then there wouldn't be this thread, b/c there would be no GT5.
GT1 + GT2 + GT3 + GT4 = 46M
...not 57M like you originally, and incorrectly, said.
but you do care. you are pointing out that you care by what you just typed. if you count the prologues, you get over 57M sold.
You brought up sales, not me. And last I checked, objectively, 100 is more than 57, regardless of how you subjectively look at it.
i disagree. let's bring math into the equation, since you seem to have missed it.
100,000,000/15 = 6,666,667.
57,000,000/8 = 7,125,000.
so GT has sold more copies per game.
No, the only thing that adds to is a stat point on the back of the box. I mean, hooray, someone's 87 CRX is in a racing game. YAY!! :rolleyes:
That is the problem with GT these days. Too much fluff, and lacking in the racing. I mean, whatever, they can make whatever kind of game they want. If they want to fill the game with 1000 cars, 800 of which most people never touch, they can do that. To me, though, they are losing what made the series great years ago.
well again this is your opinion. we all have one. i personally think that if someone is into cars, they will care about their car. not everyone can afford the cars in the game, but it might be nice to see that car that you can afford and have in real life in the game. i mean, the game is meant for people into cars.
NO WAY!!! I never knew that. :rolleyes:
just pointing out the facts. are you doing any different?
Sure, but a "Guinness Record" for it? Again, to much fluff.
they have records for everything. like how much cheese you can eat, or whatever. that's what Guinness Records are
No, it is a concept car that Citro�n paraded around at car shows. Lots of concept cars get built with the fake intention of going into production. But you know what? Almost none of them do. This Citro�n is no different.
but the intention of the car was for the game. how do you not see that? specifically for the game. in fact, it's named GT after the game
My point is, he was trying to use GT's high sales as a quantifier of the series greatness. Then, when I showed 2 examples of other racing game series with higher sales, he said they were different types of racing games, and that they don't count. Which is understandable, because they are not the same type of game. But then, ultimately, as I said before, if you don't count those other types of racing games, you're really only comparing GT to Forza, since that is the only other similar game.
But what does that prove? A game series that has been out for almost 13 years has sold more than a similar type of game series that has only been out for a little over 5 years. Big shock there. I'll be the first to admit that Forza isn't even remotely close to as big of a sales hit as the GT series. But, like I've said before, liking a game is a subjective thing, and everyone is entitled to their own choices. But sales are an objective thing, that has no relevance to somethings greatness.
how does sales have no relevance if something is great? so iPhone sales show nothing to how good it is? or iPod sales mean nothing to how well it is? of course it does. you make games to sell. if they don't sell, you stop making games. and then there wouldn't be this thread, b/c there would be no GT5.
inkswamp
Jul 28, 04:34 AM
gnasher729, thanks for taking the time to explain that. I had to read it twice, but I get it.
So it seems that in many ways we're getting the best of the G5 and the best of Intel with the Core 2 Duo chips. As these kinds of things unfold, Apple's decision to switch to Intel chips makes more and more sense. They probably knew where Intel was going. Interesting.
So it seems that in many ways we're getting the best of the G5 and the best of Intel with the Core 2 Duo chips. As these kinds of things unfold, Apple's decision to switch to Intel chips makes more and more sense. They probably knew where Intel was going. Interesting.
DocAlge
Sep 19, 09:39 AM
I am new to this (and still waiting to buy my first Mac). BUT why all this talk about speed and not about screen size.
I will buy a new Mac as soon as the new models arrive, but I could probably do with a MacBook - but I just think 13" is to small (my eyes are getting old). Does anyone think a 15" MacBook will be out anytime soon - or do I just have to pay the extra price for the MacBook Pro
I will buy a new Mac as soon as the new models arrive, but I could probably do with a MacBook - but I just think 13" is to small (my eyes are getting old). Does anyone think a 15" MacBook will be out anytime soon - or do I just have to pay the extra price for the MacBook Pro
Gupster
Apr 7, 10:40 PM
d
Mistrblank
Apr 8, 07:19 AM
Wow. I bought mine at Best Buy on opening day and they sold out of them. Why in anybody's right mind would best buy not sell what they have?
It keeps people coming back day after day.
It keeps people coming back day after day.
relimw
Sep 13, 12:36 PM
How much more 'blind' do you want it? All the programmer has to do at this point is use multiple threads. Even if they don't, multiple cores will be automatically used for system and other processes.
Splitting one thread so that it ran cocurent with itself is a recipie for massive trouble. Mac OS X is about as blind as any system out there for the programmer. There may be some more optimizations that the system could make in it's own handling of multiprocessing, but from a programmer's perspective it doesn't matter how many cores the system has. (Unless you really want it to.)
Programming in pthreads is a bear (at least to me) an easier method would be nice. However, when I was looking up something today I came across OpenMP (http://www.openmp.org/) which seems to greatly simply setting up threads and the like. I suppose I was just thinking of run-time parallelization.
Splitting one thread so that it ran cocurent with itself is a recipie for massive trouble. Mac OS X is about as blind as any system out there for the programmer. There may be some more optimizations that the system could make in it's own handling of multiprocessing, but from a programmer's perspective it doesn't matter how many cores the system has. (Unless you really want it to.)
Programming in pthreads is a bear (at least to me) an easier method would be nice. However, when I was looking up something today I came across OpenMP (http://www.openmp.org/) which seems to greatly simply setting up threads and the like. I suppose I was just thinking of run-time parallelization.
daze
Aug 25, 03:52 PM
Call it what you want but these new MacBooks are crap. Yea there is people who are enjoying theirs without a hitch but look at all the reports of problems. Not once on this forum have we had a flood of problems with a single unit. Apple dropped the ball on this one. Poorly made unit
Not to put momre fuel on to the fire, but I agree. MacBooks are indeed crap. I had three sent to me, and all had a few things wrong with them. I ended up getting a refund... Now, if Apple could only re-do a new case for the MacBook Pro series, I'd get one in a heart beat.
Not to put momre fuel on to the fire, but I agree. MacBooks are indeed crap. I had three sent to me, and all had a few things wrong with them. I ended up getting a refund... Now, if Apple could only re-do a new case for the MacBook Pro series, I'd get one in a heart beat.
MacRumors
Aug 26, 03:43 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
eWeek reported (http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,2006986,00.asp) that PC manufacturers are expected to announce availability of new Core 2 Duo (http://guides.macrumors.com/Core_2_Duo) (Merom) notebooks on Monday August 28th.
![]()
eWeek reported (http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,2006986,00.asp) that PC manufacturers are expected to announce availability of new Core 2 Duo (http://guides.macrumors.com/Core_2_Duo) (Merom) notebooks on Monday August 28th.
