MrCrowbar
Jul 20, 08:25 AM
Would be a very long keynote too:
- release date of 10.5 revealed - possibly more stuff revealed
- new software (considerable update to iWork if the rumours are true)
- iMac/MacBook updates
- iPod/iTunes stuff
And one more thing: The Auad PowerMac has been the fastest Mac until today. I present to you the new Octa Mac Pro!"
- release date of 10.5 revealed - possibly more stuff revealed
- new software (considerable update to iWork if the rumours are true)
- iMac/MacBook updates
- iPod/iTunes stuff
And one more thing: The Auad PowerMac has been the fastest Mac until today. I present to you the new Octa Mac Pro!"
sierra oscar
Sep 19, 08:53 AM
It's not quite 0700 Cupertino time - so maybe? :)
jeanlain
Apr 12, 12:10 PM
You open it from Compressor, in the top right corner. Then, if you have a cluster (set up in Qmaster) it will show on top of "Your computer"
Here you can monitor your render progress and see how many cores are used.
See attached screen shot
I have not set up a cluster, so I only see "my computer" in the list.
Here you can monitor your render progress and see how many cores are used.
See attached screen shot
I have not set up a cluster, so I only see "my computer" in the list.
wmmk
Jul 14, 03:30 PM
You would think they would come out with the fastest chip...
I mean what seperates them from a Dell or HP workstation that is top of the line? OS X (yes), but to the ones on the fence that doesn't justify paying more for less.
A 2.66 Ghz Woodcrest will probably be faster than a 2.93Ghz Conroe. A 1.83Ghz Yonah is faster than a 3.2Ghz Pentium, right?;)
I mean what seperates them from a Dell or HP workstation that is top of the line? OS X (yes), but to the ones on the fence that doesn't justify paying more for less.
A 2.66 Ghz Woodcrest will probably be faster than a 2.93Ghz Conroe. A 1.83Ghz Yonah is faster than a 3.2Ghz Pentium, right?;)
iGary
Aug 25, 04:36 PM
Having to go through 5 Cinema Displays, two logic boards, a new processor set, a dented new PB, 12 Apple Store visits, and 16 hours on the phone with AppleCare pretty much sums up my satisfaction with Apple's support.
They are nice and courteous, but not given the power to do much in most situations. Pass the buck is their motto.
They are nice and courteous, but not given the power to do much in most situations. Pass the buck is their motto.
LightSpeed1
Apr 25, 01:40 PM
The Feds are bored.
~Shard~
Jul 15, 10:49 AM
I disagree. Using ATX power supplies is a stupid idea. I am sure Apple uses higher quality power supplies than you would pick up at your local CompUSA.
If they allow this there will be a lot of dead Macs, from power supplies whose rails aren't strong enough.
Not to mention those who buy the 400W model because it is only 20 bucks and drastically underpower there Mac.
This would cause to many problems. Keep it proprietary IMO.
Actually that is a good point. Another good example is how some people install incorrect RAM into their Mac - they just pick up generic cheapo RAM, not Mac-certified, and wonder why they have all sorts of issues.
If they allow this there will be a lot of dead Macs, from power supplies whose rails aren't strong enough.
Not to mention those who buy the 400W model because it is only 20 bucks and drastically underpower there Mac.
This would cause to many problems. Keep it proprietary IMO.
Actually that is a good point. Another good example is how some people install incorrect RAM into their Mac - they just pick up generic cheapo RAM, not Mac-certified, and wonder why they have all sorts of issues.
twoodcc
Nov 30, 05:20 PM
so far i like this game. i haven't had time to play it alot, but i'm a level 6 right now, and i'm about 9% game complete.
fivepoint
Mar 23, 02:20 PM
Again, Fivepoint, you forget that the President was selling the Iraq war with suspicious and weak information that the many questioned. It turns out they were right. Pre-war, the big issue was whether the war was justified based on the evidence being pushed by the President. The criticism President Bush faced thereafter had a lot to do with the fact that he lied to the American people in order to start a poorly planned war. They bungled every aspect of a war they lied to get us into. There were plenty of reasons to be critical.
"Lying" implies intent. Are you accusing them of lying, or getting it wrong?
Yes, there were many reasons to be critical.
Is it your position that Libya represents a larger danger to American assets/security than Iraq? If not, is it your suggestion that America should be involved in every humanitarian crisis with brutal dictators worldwide, or at least those comparable to Libya? If so, why aren't we in North Korea? Why aren't we in any number of African nations?
Out of curiousity, what do you expect? I expect conservative congressmen and women to support a conservative president, but to think for themselves, and do what they independently think is right. I don't respect blind support like what they did under GWB. Similarly, I expect liberal congressmen and women to support a liberal president, but to also think for themselves, and do what they independently think is right. Some are speaking out, and some are not blindly supporting President Obama. Can you acknowledge that the liberals are doing a better job with consistency than the GOP? If not, how do you explain GOP opposition to the Libya action?
Part of what you say is true, in that I should EXPECT people to be more critical of the other side. This is true. But I also think it's important (especially in this forum) to point out hypocrisy stemming from the left so that the Macrumors Echo Chamber doesn't keep you all in denial. What I personally expect is people to stand on principles, and not on parties. What I expect is that people live their lives in a honorable way and present a consistent philosophy. This is the same reason I rip on neo-con Republicans for talking about fiscal conservatism when history has shown us that their real world actions when in power are very different from their rhetoric... even if they still aren't as bad as the Democrats... it's not good enough. Both parties are bad at it, too many people simply tow the party line and don't think for themselves.
It sure is easy to peg me isn't it? Too bad if you go back over my posts you will find more than enough denouncing involvement in Iraq / Afghanistan.
It's much easier than actually addressing your real views... it's a defense mechanism which she uses to avoid serious debate.
If you are supporting non-intervention, than I disagree. I support the notion that the UN (using member-nations' pooled military or civilian assets) should be able to intervene in a nation's affairs if it is thought necessary to either 1) protect other nations from harm or 2) protect a nation's own people from its government, or in the case of a civil war, one or more factions.
Being a 'non-interventionist' does not mean that you NEVER support war, it means that you avoid it whenever possible. It means that you are far less prone to military intervention than someone who does not care about the values of non-interventionism.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-interventionism
Nonintervention or non-interventionism is a foreign policy which holds that political rulers should avoid alliances with other nations, but still retain diplomacy, and avoid all wars not related to direct territorial self-defense.
"Lying" implies intent. Are you accusing them of lying, or getting it wrong?
Yes, there were many reasons to be critical.
Is it your position that Libya represents a larger danger to American assets/security than Iraq? If not, is it your suggestion that America should be involved in every humanitarian crisis with brutal dictators worldwide, or at least those comparable to Libya? If so, why aren't we in North Korea? Why aren't we in any number of African nations?
Out of curiousity, what do you expect? I expect conservative congressmen and women to support a conservative president, but to think for themselves, and do what they independently think is right. I don't respect blind support like what they did under GWB. Similarly, I expect liberal congressmen and women to support a liberal president, but to also think for themselves, and do what they independently think is right. Some are speaking out, and some are not blindly supporting President Obama. Can you acknowledge that the liberals are doing a better job with consistency than the GOP? If not, how do you explain GOP opposition to the Libya action?
Part of what you say is true, in that I should EXPECT people to be more critical of the other side. This is true. But I also think it's important (especially in this forum) to point out hypocrisy stemming from the left so that the Macrumors Echo Chamber doesn't keep you all in denial. What I personally expect is people to stand on principles, and not on parties. What I expect is that people live their lives in a honorable way and present a consistent philosophy. This is the same reason I rip on neo-con Republicans for talking about fiscal conservatism when history has shown us that their real world actions when in power are very different from their rhetoric... even if they still aren't as bad as the Democrats... it's not good enough. Both parties are bad at it, too many people simply tow the party line and don't think for themselves.
It sure is easy to peg me isn't it? Too bad if you go back over my posts you will find more than enough denouncing involvement in Iraq / Afghanistan.
It's much easier than actually addressing your real views... it's a defense mechanism which she uses to avoid serious debate.
If you are supporting non-intervention, than I disagree. I support the notion that the UN (using member-nations' pooled military or civilian assets) should be able to intervene in a nation's affairs if it is thought necessary to either 1) protect other nations from harm or 2) protect a nation's own people from its government, or in the case of a civil war, one or more factions.
Being a 'non-interventionist' does not mean that you NEVER support war, it means that you avoid it whenever possible. It means that you are far less prone to military intervention than someone who does not care about the values of non-interventionism.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-interventionism
Nonintervention or non-interventionism is a foreign policy which holds that political rulers should avoid alliances with other nations, but still retain diplomacy, and avoid all wars not related to direct territorial self-defense.
kansast
Nov 28, 09:43 PM
yea no thanks. i pay for my music anyway. got to support the "band" you know :)
Who's to say that if I buy an iPod that I would ever want to put any of Universal's music on it //
Who's to say that if I buy an iPod that I would ever want to put any of Universal's music on it //
caspersoong
Apr 13, 04:53 AM
The longer the wait, the less likely for my family to buy it.
Chupa Chupa
Apr 8, 06:17 AM
The problem is not the number of retail-locations selling iPads, the problem is number of iPads in those stores. Now that BB is out of the picture, other retailers can receive more units. Now Apple can stop supplying BB-stores, and use those units to supply some other stores instead. You know, stores that actually sell the product to a customer?
My point is that Apple sells BB more products than the iPad. If it gets pissy about how the iPad is sold and holds units back then it's going to strain the relationship and right now Apple needs BBs floor space to show off its other products b/c there are lots of gaps in Apple Store locations.
As I said this story is fantasy and B.S.
My point is that Apple sells BB more products than the iPad. If it gets pissy about how the iPad is sold and holds units back then it's going to strain the relationship and right now Apple needs BBs floor space to show off its other products b/c there are lots of gaps in Apple Store locations.
As I said this story is fantasy and B.S.
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.
alent1234
Apr 27, 08:16 AM
Apple is planning on releasing a free iOS update in the next few weeks that performs the following:
- reduces the size of the crowd-sourced Wi-Fi hotspot and cell tower database cached on the iPhone,
- ceases backing up this cache, and
- deletes this cache entirely when Location Services is turned off.
and the very next day apple will be swamped with support calls asking why it's taking so long to get one's location
- reduces the size of the crowd-sourced Wi-Fi hotspot and cell tower database cached on the iPhone,
- ceases backing up this cache, and
- deletes this cache entirely when Location Services is turned off.
and the very next day apple will be swamped with support calls asking why it's taking so long to get one's location
centauratlas
Apr 6, 04:39 PM
You both ignored HOT DOGS! Sheesh, hot dogs rule. The only problem is kids under 6 choking on them unless you cut them right. But that will be fixed in the v3.0 hot dog, they will come pre-sliced.
You busted me.
I am a hamburger fanboi, and will turn into a raving lunatic, foam at the mouth and make up opinions based on nothing all to defend my beloved hamburgers. After all they're lighter, slimmer and tastier than cheesburgers!!!
Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk
You busted me.
I am a hamburger fanboi, and will turn into a raving lunatic, foam at the mouth and make up opinions based on nothing all to defend my beloved hamburgers. After all they're lighter, slimmer and tastier than cheesburgers!!!
Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk
11thIndian
Apr 9, 10:07 PM
Uh, except I said "lots of professionals" and then you claimed I meant "professionals that I know" and then you acknowledged that it's not just professionals that I know.
Yes, I agreed there are professionals, but not LOTS of professionals. You don't know, cause... you don't know them, and neither do I. So these "lots" outside of your field of view may or may not be looking to switch. You see the difference, yes?
Yes, I agreed there are professionals, but not LOTS of professionals. You don't know, cause... you don't know them, and neither do I. So these "lots" outside of your field of view may or may not be looking to switch. You see the difference, yes?
gugy
Aug 11, 11:24 AM
you mean sell an unlocked phone? that would be sweet. then the carrier couldn't cripple it. we would experience it as steve intended us to.
although they could get some kind of exclusive rights deal if they picked a carrier.
If Apple pick a carrier, I hope is not Cingular. But from past situations, that's very likely.
The ideal is a carrier free phone. That way the iphone can reach many more people and make it possible to upgrade phones without asking people to terminate their contracts.
although they could get some kind of exclusive rights deal if they picked a carrier.
If Apple pick a carrier, I hope is not Cingular. But from past situations, that's very likely.
The ideal is a carrier free phone. That way the iphone can reach many more people and make it possible to upgrade phones without asking people to terminate their contracts.
milo
Sep 13, 07:05 AM
A bit pointless given that no software utilises the extra cores yet.
Not true, according to the article. They said it wasn't easy, but they were able to max out all 8 cores. You can see the Activity Monitor graph all filled up.
It would be nice if 10.5 would allow a more 'blind' method to utilize these cores, versus having programmers specificly program for multi-core. Now that would be extremely helpful and allow a more simultanous workflow.
That's how it is now, at least with multiple apps. I bet it's possible to program for an unspecified number of multiple cores, and there may be apps doing it already.
I was interested to see that they were unable to max out CPU utilization on all 8 cores in the system. I hope it's due to the software these days not being ready to fully utilize more than one or two cores and not due to OSX's ability to scale to larger core counts. Since that's obviously where we're heading. Does anyone know about the potential for scalability of OSX to large numbers of CPU's/cores? I know some *nix varieties and BSD varieties do this really well, but one wonders if they were thinking this far in the future when they developed OSX. It'll be interesting to see...
Read the article again, they WERE able to max them out, just not easily. Based on that, OSX seems to be able to scale already. Developers just need to start writing apps that are more MP friendly.
Not true, according to the article. They said it wasn't easy, but they were able to max out all 8 cores. You can see the Activity Monitor graph all filled up.
It would be nice if 10.5 would allow a more 'blind' method to utilize these cores, versus having programmers specificly program for multi-core. Now that would be extremely helpful and allow a more simultanous workflow.
That's how it is now, at least with multiple apps. I bet it's possible to program for an unspecified number of multiple cores, and there may be apps doing it already.
I was interested to see that they were unable to max out CPU utilization on all 8 cores in the system. I hope it's due to the software these days not being ready to fully utilize more than one or two cores and not due to OSX's ability to scale to larger core counts. Since that's obviously where we're heading. Does anyone know about the potential for scalability of OSX to large numbers of CPU's/cores? I know some *nix varieties and BSD varieties do this really well, but one wonders if they were thinking this far in the future when they developed OSX. It'll be interesting to see...
Read the article again, they WERE able to max them out, just not easily. Based on that, OSX seems to be able to scale already. Developers just need to start writing apps that are more MP friendly.
rickjs
Apr 6, 03:19 PM
did you feel dorky typing XOOM so many times. I would, because its dorky. It's the same reasons that everything in "Xenon: Girl of the 21st Century" was dorky
Yeah but it kinda grows on you. I really don't like iPad 2 as a name very much, but it kinda grows on you too.
Yeah but it kinda grows on you. I really don't like iPad 2 as a name very much, but it kinda grows on you too.
anush3
Apr 25, 03:17 PM
somebody named Adam posted on http://www.9to5mac.com/63593/steve-jobs-takes-to-email-to-set-record-straight-on-location/#more-63593
Folks, this is all in the 1996 Telecommunications Act. The government way back then made it mandatory for all cel phones to track and record users. They also force all carriers to have back doors built into all devices to spy and steal your data. Look into it, this is pure evil and absolutely shreds the 4th Amendment.
The fact Senators are "demanding answers" is a joke. They were the ones who wrote the stinking bill. Why is Al Franken so clueless to this fact? Maybe they should investigate themselves first.
Want to get rid of this? Get rid of the nasty parts of the '96 Act and get your 4th Amendment back.
Wondering no-one knew about
Folks, this is all in the 1996 Telecommunications Act. The government way back then made it mandatory for all cel phones to track and record users. They also force all carriers to have back doors built into all devices to spy and steal your data. Look into it, this is pure evil and absolutely shreds the 4th Amendment.
The fact Senators are "demanding answers" is a joke. They were the ones who wrote the stinking bill. Why is Al Franken so clueless to this fact? Maybe they should investigate themselves first.
Want to get rid of this? Get rid of the nasty parts of the '96 Act and get your 4th Amendment back.
Wondering no-one knew about
KnightWRX
Apr 12, 07:02 PM
The coverage and cost obviously.
Because if Apple release an iPhone 5 with LTE, it will cost more and won't be backwards compatible... right... :rolleyes:
Obviously not a factor.
Because if Apple release an iPhone 5 with LTE, it will cost more and won't be backwards compatible... right... :rolleyes:
Obviously not a factor.
Bob Knob
Nov 28, 06:47 PM
While I usually don't go for boycotts this time I would make an exception, if this was to go through I'd boycott buying anything from Universal. It wouldn't matter if it was an artist I had listened to for years, I'd simply never buy anything they release from that point on.
faroZ06
Apr 8, 12:46 AM
I meant last year when the iPhone 4 was released....
Yes, did they have the iPhone 4 in the AT&T stores? I thought they did. I know for sure when the 3G came out, they had it in the AT&T stores as well as the Apple stores.
I don't mean the $50 3GS that you can get now from AT&T.
Yes, did they have the iPhone 4 in the AT&T stores? I thought they did. I know for sure when the 3G came out, they had it in the AT&T stores as well as the Apple stores.
I don't mean the $50 3GS that you can get now from AT&T.
rjohnstone
Apr 25, 03:06 PM
You obviously missed the point that they do not track anything. It's just a log file on your iphone, it stays with your iphone. I GOT even more news!! I FOUND a file on the iphone that stores text messages. YES PEOPLE text messages. I can read your text messages from this file if I have your phone!! Oh ya, I know you can launch the SMS app, but WHY WOULD APPLE NEED TO STORE TEXT MESSAGES ON MY DEVICE?!?! I'm suing!!
Just like web caching, storing text messages is part of the function of the messaging app. It serves a purpose of giving YOU a history.
And guess what... you can clear it. ;)
Just like web caching, storing text messages is part of the function of the messaging app. It serves a purpose of giving YOU a history.
And guess what... you can clear it. ;)
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario