steviem
Mar 26, 02:55 PM
Wow, this is pretty cool.
I think Apple is waiting on the next PlayStation/Xbox to do something better.
I can see them using AppleTV/iPad/iPhone to their advantage, having the same games running on all devices, keeping the same save points, so you can be at work, play some Madden or whatever on your iPhone on a bathroom break, then on the train home, pull out your iPad, continue where you left off, get home and continue your Franchise on the Apple TV.
The HDMI dongle doesn't seem to be quite right yet, but I think this is encouraging for Apple and game developers.
I think Apple is waiting on the next PlayStation/Xbox to do something better.
I can see them using AppleTV/iPad/iPhone to their advantage, having the same games running on all devices, keeping the same save points, so you can be at work, play some Madden or whatever on your iPhone on a bathroom break, then on the train home, pull out your iPad, continue where you left off, get home and continue your Franchise on the Apple TV.
The HDMI dongle doesn't seem to be quite right yet, but I think this is encouraging for Apple and game developers.
Shookster
Sep 14, 09:24 AM
Does Consumer Reports stop recommending automobile purchases? Because you know if there is an issue with a car, the manufacturer will issue a recall. If you are affected, you have to take it into a dealer where it will be fixed. The onus is on the owner of the car, for crying out loud! The auto manufacturers should go house to house providing the fix for free to all cars, whether their owners report a problem or not!
Wait, you mean Consumer Reports does not hold the auto manufacturers to the same artificial standard they hold Apple to? How amazing...
I guess you don't read the news. Toyota has recalled millions of vehicles this year, even though not every owner of those vehicles was specifically experiencing the problem.
Wait, you mean Consumer Reports does not hold the auto manufacturers to the same artificial standard they hold Apple to? How amazing...
I guess you don't read the news. Toyota has recalled millions of vehicles this year, even though not every owner of those vehicles was specifically experiencing the problem.
mrapplegate
Apr 3, 06:28 PM
^ I don't about you, guys, but is there a way to make the address bar auto-hide when in FS mode? Logically, you don't wanna see anything but page content when in FS mode, no?
Not that I'm aware of currently, but you know that will be an extension as soon as it is released.
Not that I'm aware of currently, but you know that will be an extension as soon as it is released.
scottgroovez
Apr 3, 05:36 AM
Ironically the use of "magical" breaks the illusion. As soon as I hear that, it makes me think that's just clever tech rather than the experience they're selling.
adroit
Nov 15, 11:25 AM
That really depends on the program, on how "parallelizable" the application is.
The simplest way to think of it is like this: Let's say you have a program that first has to calculate A. Then, when it's done that, it uses the result of A to calculate B. Then, when it's done that, uses the result of B to calculate C, then C to D, and so on. That's a *serial* problem there. The calculation of B can't begin until A is done, so it doesn't matter how many processors you have running, all computation is held up on one spot.
On the other hand, let's say you have an application that needs to calculate A, B, C and D, but those four values are not dependent on each other at all. In that case, you can use four processors at the same time, to calculate all four values at the same time.
Think of it like baking a cake. You can't start putting on the icing until the cake is done baking. And you can't start baking the cake until the ingredients are all mixed together. But you can have people simultaneously getting out and measuring the ingredients.
So that problem is partially parallelizable, but the majority of its workload is a serial process.
Some software applications, just by their very nature, will never be able to do anything useful with multiple processors.
This is true, but there are still many many ways to optimize the multi-core processor that's not currently being use.
For example, I am waiting for a program to compile right now. Although I have a dual core on my computer, the compiler only compile one file at a time and usually takes about 10 min to do a full compile . If I have an 8 core computer with a multi-threaded compiler then I can cut the total time to jsut over a min + couple of seconds for linking time.
I think the main problem with muti-threading program is that it is difficult to implement, especially for coders who only knows high-level languages. Muti-threading in low-level program such as C is not easy but at least it is straight-forward. But trying to muti-thread high-level language such as VB or C# can get you into a big headace since everything is abstracted from the programmer. To do that, you need to get into unsafe code and call a bunch of DLLs, and it's easy to get memory leaks. Basically it can start to get very complicated, very quickly.
The simplest way to think of it is like this: Let's say you have a program that first has to calculate A. Then, when it's done that, it uses the result of A to calculate B. Then, when it's done that, uses the result of B to calculate C, then C to D, and so on. That's a *serial* problem there. The calculation of B can't begin until A is done, so it doesn't matter how many processors you have running, all computation is held up on one spot.
On the other hand, let's say you have an application that needs to calculate A, B, C and D, but those four values are not dependent on each other at all. In that case, you can use four processors at the same time, to calculate all four values at the same time.
Think of it like baking a cake. You can't start putting on the icing until the cake is done baking. And you can't start baking the cake until the ingredients are all mixed together. But you can have people simultaneously getting out and measuring the ingredients.
So that problem is partially parallelizable, but the majority of its workload is a serial process.
Some software applications, just by their very nature, will never be able to do anything useful with multiple processors.
This is true, but there are still many many ways to optimize the multi-core processor that's not currently being use.
For example, I am waiting for a program to compile right now. Although I have a dual core on my computer, the compiler only compile one file at a time and usually takes about 10 min to do a full compile . If I have an 8 core computer with a multi-threaded compiler then I can cut the total time to jsut over a min + couple of seconds for linking time.
I think the main problem with muti-threading program is that it is difficult to implement, especially for coders who only knows high-level languages. Muti-threading in low-level program such as C is not easy but at least it is straight-forward. But trying to muti-thread high-level language such as VB or C# can get you into a big headace since everything is abstracted from the programmer. To do that, you need to get into unsafe code and call a bunch of DLLs, and it's easy to get memory leaks. Basically it can start to get very complicated, very quickly.
dorramide7
Oct 17, 11:48 PM
I don't know of anyone having a problem with the new iphone! I know that it is possible to make the reception problem happen, but I could also "make" reception problems happen on every cell phone I've ever owned.
Does Consumer Reports stop recommending automobile purchases? Because you know if there is an issue with a car, the manufacturer will issue a recall. If you are affected, you have to take it into a dealer where it will be fixed. The onus is on the owner of the car, for crying out loud! The auto manufacturers should go house to house providing the fix for free to all cars, whether their owners report a problem or not!
Wait, you mean Consumer Reports does not hold the auto manufacturers to the same artificial standard they hold Apple to? How amazing...
Does Consumer Reports stop recommending automobile purchases? Because you know if there is an issue with a car, the manufacturer will issue a recall. If you are affected, you have to take it into a dealer where it will be fixed. The onus is on the owner of the car, for crying out loud! The auto manufacturers should go house to house providing the fix for free to all cars, whether their owners report a problem or not!
Wait, you mean Consumer Reports does not hold the auto manufacturers to the same artificial standard they hold Apple to? How amazing...
iMeowbot
Nov 29, 03:11 PM
According to Bob Cringley:
"�The USB port is clearly intended for an Apple iSight camera, a webcam to go with your HDTV."
Cringely comes up with some interesting thoughts, I'll say that :) There are much more mundane possibilities, like a keyboard to facilitate content purchases or iPod connectivity.
"�The USB port is clearly intended for an Apple iSight camera, a webcam to go with your HDTV."
Cringely comes up with some interesting thoughts, I'll say that :) There are much more mundane possibilities, like a keyboard to facilitate content purchases or iPod connectivity.
puuukeey
Sep 1, 02:43 PM
if it gets bigger, does it get thinner?
Lord Blackadder
Mar 4, 02:27 PM
In many ways, it's shameful today that we think that 60 or even 70mpg is somehow remarkable for a family car. :(
It certainly could be significantly higher. Public taste, laziness on the part of manufacturers and other things have all conspired to keep the bar set low on fuel economy.
In the US, there's one key reason why small cars don't sell (above and beyond the reasons I already listed), and that is that popular wisdom holds that you will die in a small car when someone in a large SUV or truck hits you. It's a self-fulfilling prophesy as people buy big cars because they don't feel safe in small ones, with the result that they become part of the "problem". Ultimately it's down to selfishness. Apparently people would rather kill someone else in an accident than risk being killed themselves.
It's idiotic, but this "wisdom" will only be unlearned slowly. Smaller cars are much safer now then they once were - safer than trucks and SUVs.
By way of a postscript, it's worth pointing out that today's safety and environmental regulations make it more difficult to make a car frugal, small and light than it was when Alec Issigonis designed the Mini. Also, aluminum construction (in smaller production cars such as the A2) remains nearly as rare and expensive as it was in the 50s.
But not the brand image... that could perhaps be the biggest stumbling block of all, it certainly is in Europe anyway.
True, and that's a shame, because brand image often matters than a car's actual merits. If the new Jetta is a turd, people will still buy it because the VW badge has cachet here that GM does not, at least in the realm of small cars.
I'm not going to stand up too much for GM, I've never held a high opinion of most of their products, but I have reasonably read good reviews of the Cruze and I hope they bring the diesel here.
Have to say my preference is for saloons... occasionally an estate (particularly A4 & A6 allroads, also 159 Sportwagons, that sort of thing), hatches (the bigger ones anyway) & estates can/tend to be a little boomy in my experience. Saloons also often have better body rigidity too.
The sedan body is the default in the US. Hatches and wagons are much rarer and therefore more interesting. In Europe it's really the other way around. When you're talking about mid-size or larger cars, sedans do generally have better proportions in my opinion (with a few exceptions - I like 5-Series wagon, and the 1990s Subaru Legacy wagon). Hatches look good on small cars though. The Focus, for example, looked stupid as a sedan but great as a hatch.
I do agree with you about the noise though - my Forester's rear suspension is sometimes very audible in the cabin, especially with the seats down. A few years before I bought my Forester, I used to mock it as the ugliest thing on the road, but I've gotten used to it and while it's never going to be attractive it does have a certain pleasing purposefulness in its proportions. Even though a lesbian couple I know call it my lesbian wagon. :rolleyes::D
It certainly could be significantly higher. Public taste, laziness on the part of manufacturers and other things have all conspired to keep the bar set low on fuel economy.
In the US, there's one key reason why small cars don't sell (above and beyond the reasons I already listed), and that is that popular wisdom holds that you will die in a small car when someone in a large SUV or truck hits you. It's a self-fulfilling prophesy as people buy big cars because they don't feel safe in small ones, with the result that they become part of the "problem". Ultimately it's down to selfishness. Apparently people would rather kill someone else in an accident than risk being killed themselves.
It's idiotic, but this "wisdom" will only be unlearned slowly. Smaller cars are much safer now then they once were - safer than trucks and SUVs.
By way of a postscript, it's worth pointing out that today's safety and environmental regulations make it more difficult to make a car frugal, small and light than it was when Alec Issigonis designed the Mini. Also, aluminum construction (in smaller production cars such as the A2) remains nearly as rare and expensive as it was in the 50s.
But not the brand image... that could perhaps be the biggest stumbling block of all, it certainly is in Europe anyway.
True, and that's a shame, because brand image often matters than a car's actual merits. If the new Jetta is a turd, people will still buy it because the VW badge has cachet here that GM does not, at least in the realm of small cars.
I'm not going to stand up too much for GM, I've never held a high opinion of most of their products, but I have reasonably read good reviews of the Cruze and I hope they bring the diesel here.
Have to say my preference is for saloons... occasionally an estate (particularly A4 & A6 allroads, also 159 Sportwagons, that sort of thing), hatches (the bigger ones anyway) & estates can/tend to be a little boomy in my experience. Saloons also often have better body rigidity too.
The sedan body is the default in the US. Hatches and wagons are much rarer and therefore more interesting. In Europe it's really the other way around. When you're talking about mid-size or larger cars, sedans do generally have better proportions in my opinion (with a few exceptions - I like 5-Series wagon, and the 1990s Subaru Legacy wagon). Hatches look good on small cars though. The Focus, for example, looked stupid as a sedan but great as a hatch.
I do agree with you about the noise though - my Forester's rear suspension is sometimes very audible in the cabin, especially with the seats down. A few years before I bought my Forester, I used to mock it as the ugliest thing on the road, but I've gotten used to it and while it's never going to be attractive it does have a certain pleasing purposefulness in its proportions. Even though a lesbian couple I know call it my lesbian wagon. :rolleyes::D
rmwebs
Mar 22, 04:31 PM
Disk space aside, there's nothing wrong with the current iPod Classic. It doesnt need bluetooth, microphones, cameras, etc - the hint is in the name...CLASSIC.
Wany bluetooth? Get a iTouch. You arent going to be listening to your library of 50,000 song on the way to work I'm sure it wouldnt kill you to load 10,000 onto an iTouch for the car. :rolleyes:
Wany bluetooth? Get a iTouch. You arent going to be listening to your library of 50,000 song on the way to work I'm sure it wouldnt kill you to load 10,000 onto an iTouch for the car. :rolleyes:
led1002
Mar 19, 03:14 PM
Granted, it's life is far from over but I get the impression that Apple is telling me that unless I am willing to pony up $2500.00 - $3000.00, that my only options are either old or unupgradable products.
Actually it's $1800-3000, for a G5 64 bit computer. Where do you buy your computers from? No wonder Apple can't dispell the myths even Mac users don't know how much they cost!
Actually it's $1800-3000, for a G5 64 bit computer. Where do you buy your computers from? No wonder Apple can't dispell the myths even Mac users don't know how much they cost!
MacRumors
Aug 6, 08:37 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
MacRumorsLive.com (http://www.macrumorslive.com/) will provide live coverage of the event starting at 1PM EDT (10AM Pacific). No need to reload the page, updates will appear as they are posted. In January, our system successfully delivered updates to over 100,000 (http://www.macrumors.com/events/mwsf2006-stats.php) simultaneous visitors.
More photos of banners posted at WWDC have been circulating. Apple appears to be taking on Microsoft's upcoming Vista operating system directly with banners that state:
"Mac OS X Leopard, Introducing Vista 2.0" (photo (http://static.flickr.com/74/207241438_7c0f89412d_b.jpg))
"Mac OS X Leopard, Hasta la Vista, Vista"
In the meanwhile, you can read the WWDC 2006 Rumor Roundup (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060805162310.shtml), see our WWDC related Guide Pages (http://guides.macrumors.com/Category:WWDC_2006), chat in our IRC channel (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2003/06/20030608214842.shtml) or participate in the forums (http://forums.macrumors.com).
We will continue to provide any last minute updates leading to the event.
Digg This (http://digg.com/apple/MacRumorsLive_No_WWDC_Live_QT_Stream_No_Problem)
MacRumorsLive.com (http://www.macrumorslive.com/) will provide live coverage of the event starting at 1PM EDT (10AM Pacific). No need to reload the page, updates will appear as they are posted. In January, our system successfully delivered updates to over 100,000 (http://www.macrumors.com/events/mwsf2006-stats.php) simultaneous visitors.
More photos of banners posted at WWDC have been circulating. Apple appears to be taking on Microsoft's upcoming Vista operating system directly with banners that state:
"Mac OS X Leopard, Introducing Vista 2.0" (photo (http://static.flickr.com/74/207241438_7c0f89412d_b.jpg))
"Mac OS X Leopard, Hasta la Vista, Vista"
In the meanwhile, you can read the WWDC 2006 Rumor Roundup (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060805162310.shtml), see our WWDC related Guide Pages (http://guides.macrumors.com/Category:WWDC_2006), chat in our IRC channel (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2003/06/20030608214842.shtml) or participate in the forums (http://forums.macrumors.com).
We will continue to provide any last minute updates leading to the event.
Digg This (http://digg.com/apple/MacRumorsLive_No_WWDC_Live_QT_Stream_No_Problem)
BJB Productions
Apr 12, 09:51 PM
I wonder if they'll update the whole studio suite
(yes, including DVD Studio Pro I hope)
Here's hoping too. :)
(yes, including DVD Studio Pro I hope)
Here's hoping too. :)
slffl
Oct 23, 09:55 AM
As I am waiting for a revision to get a new macbook pro, i really hope when they do update them, it's a major overhaul with a bunch of new goodies. I'm not saying the current design is bad, but I've had my 17" PB for 3.5 years and I just need something new.
archer75
Apr 19, 11:31 AM
You misunderstood me friend...I meant an HD 6950 2GB (Desktop Card)
Yes, its a pipe dream...but cant a man dream:rolleyes:
Ah yes, well a desktop card would be nice. And the 27" does have the room when compared to the 21". They could engineer it in there if they wanted to.
But yes, I share your dream.
Yes, its a pipe dream...but cant a man dream:rolleyes:
Ah yes, well a desktop card would be nice. And the 27" does have the room when compared to the 21". They could engineer it in there if they wanted to.
But yes, I share your dream.
karsten
Mar 24, 01:18 PM
pleasegodpleasegodpleasegod
xUKHCx
Mar 25, 03:44 PM
That looks really impressive, makes me want to buy an iPad 2 (or a playstation :D).
hkim1983
Oct 29, 08:31 PM
Hi everyone, I just recently purchased an Ipod Touch 4G to replace my aging 1G, and have decided to buy a case to help protect my investment (to resell at a later time) this time to avoid the massive damage my 1G went through (long story...it's not pretty anymore, but hey, it does work).
My requirements are as follows:
-It MUST protect the glass on the front if it were to fall face-down onto a hard surface. Now, I'm not expecting miracles here, but it has to offer some protection for this (if you're wondering, this is what happened to my 1G...).
-It must protect the back from scratches and whatnot, but I assume most cases do this by default...
-It must not compromise any ports/buttons at all.
-It must not be too bulky.
-This isn't a major thing, but I'd like to be able to open it up without too much of a hassle if the need arises.
-I'm looking to spend between $20-25 at most.
Right now, I've narrowed it down to the Griffen Reveal, Switcheasy Colors, and the iFrogz Luxe due to their overall positive reputations. Does anyone have any thoughts on the above 3? Does anyone have any other recommendations that I missed? Thanks.
My requirements are as follows:
-It MUST protect the glass on the front if it were to fall face-down onto a hard surface. Now, I'm not expecting miracles here, but it has to offer some protection for this (if you're wondering, this is what happened to my 1G...).
-It must protect the back from scratches and whatnot, but I assume most cases do this by default...
-It must not compromise any ports/buttons at all.
-It must not be too bulky.
-This isn't a major thing, but I'd like to be able to open it up without too much of a hassle if the need arises.
-I'm looking to spend between $20-25 at most.
Right now, I've narrowed it down to the Griffen Reveal, Switcheasy Colors, and the iFrogz Luxe due to their overall positive reputations. Does anyone have any thoughts on the above 3? Does anyone have any other recommendations that I missed? Thanks.
ojwk
Jan 12, 07:29 AM
People here seem to want to condone ANY decision Apple may wish to make. Already people seem to be defensive on the "MacBook Air" name which is probably just a rumor and also seem to be defensive of Apple's decision to remove the optical drive - something we don't even know will happen! People are defensive of Apple's decision to ship the new Mac Pros with the 8800GT and not something of higher spec, people are defensive of Apple's decision not to release a mid-tower.
I'm a big Apple fan myself but sometimes I do see the point many anti-Mac people make that many Apple 'fanboys' will simply defend any decision Apple may or may not make! It doesn't show loyalty or devotion to the brand but a sheep like quality that really isn't desirable.
If you can't formulate your own opinions on stuff then that really doesn't corroborate with the Apple marketing and ethos. "Think Different" etc..
Say what? It may have a higher melting point than plastic, but it's the most recyclable material out there. Plastic often can't even be used in the same application multiple times, and ends up being "downcycled" into something completely different. Wikipedia says recycling aluminum is 95% more efficient than making it from ore; recycling plastic is only 70% more efficient than making it new.
Very good point.
Plastic is incredibly hard to recycle as there are many different types that need to be sorted and lots of those can't even be recycled. An example of this is the caps on plastic bottles of Coke etc. This material cannot be recycled - at least my local refuse authority refuses to deal with it.
Aluminum on the other hand is definitely one of the most recyclable materials out there. It is a simple process of melting it down, purification and formation into ingots of aluminum.
I'm a big Apple fan myself but sometimes I do see the point many anti-Mac people make that many Apple 'fanboys' will simply defend any decision Apple may or may not make! It doesn't show loyalty or devotion to the brand but a sheep like quality that really isn't desirable.
If you can't formulate your own opinions on stuff then that really doesn't corroborate with the Apple marketing and ethos. "Think Different" etc..
Say what? It may have a higher melting point than plastic, but it's the most recyclable material out there. Plastic often can't even be used in the same application multiple times, and ends up being "downcycled" into something completely different. Wikipedia says recycling aluminum is 95% more efficient than making it from ore; recycling plastic is only 70% more efficient than making it new.
Very good point.
Plastic is incredibly hard to recycle as there are many different types that need to be sorted and lots of those can't even be recycled. An example of this is the caps on plastic bottles of Coke etc. This material cannot be recycled - at least my local refuse authority refuses to deal with it.
Aluminum on the other hand is definitely one of the most recyclable materials out there. It is a simple process of melting it down, purification and formation into ingots of aluminum.
tirk
Mar 22, 05:11 PM
Do people seriously have that many songs?!!! seriously?!!!
220gb = 50,000 songs?!!!!! That is totally not necessary.
Apple discontinue that dinosaur! It makes you look bad to just have it on your website.
Why don't you go and buy a Zune. You would simultaneously improve the average IQ of both Zune and iPod users! :p
220gb = 50,000 songs?!!!!! That is totally not necessary.
Apple discontinue that dinosaur! It makes you look bad to just have it on your website.
Why don't you go and buy a Zune. You would simultaneously improve the average IQ of both Zune and iPod users! :p
kungming2
Jan 12, 10:57 AM
I think 'air' would have been capitalised on the banner if it was a reference to a product name.
It might not be capitalized: Check it out, iPod touch, nano, and classic. All lowercase.
It might not be capitalized: Check it out, iPod touch, nano, and classic. All lowercase.
Zoddino
Mar 31, 10:03 AM
I'd like to see this too! The old one was pretty bland at the bottom so if this is true I'm glad they changed it.
it's true, it's changed!
here it is to download it!
http://cl.ly/3I371o1z0w003t371d0l
it's true, it's changed!
here it is to download it!
http://cl.ly/3I371o1z0w003t371d0l
projectle
Aug 6, 09:09 PM
Why have a picture when they can have the Governator himself pay a visit?
Multimedia
Sep 1, 01:11 PM
Wow, this would be amazing. Screw my plan to buy an ACD if this happens. A MacBook and a 23" iMac would look awesome on my new glass desk. ;)All you need is an external keyboard, mouse and a $700 Dell 24" Display to exceed a 23" iMac Caitlyn. Your MacBook is just as powerful as today's iMacs are. Put a FW 400GB HD on the floor and you're good to go. ;)
0 Yorumlar