amin
Aug 22, 07:33 PM
Current generation AMD Opterons still clearly outscale Woodcrest in real-world memory bandwidth with only two cores.
Do you have a reference showing that this translates to better performance in real-world application tests in a head to head competition?
Do you have a reference showing that this translates to better performance in real-world application tests in a head to head competition?
KnightWRX
Apr 7, 04:43 AM
See, that is exactly not the purpose of OpenCL. OpenCL can also use specialized DSPs, if someone writes a compiler for them. OpenCL is GPU-independent, which is a problem, if you want to optimize your OpenCL-code for a specific GPU.
See, that's exactly the same thing I said. And see, that's exactly what the SB + Intel 3000 HD solution does not do. :rolleyes:
Look, you're saying the same thing I am, you just don't want to agree that the Intel 3000 HD solution is sub-par for OpenCL, a big feature Apple pushed with Snow Leopard. Stop being obtuse. Right now, SB does not run OpenCL code on a DSP or anything else, it runs on it the CPU, defeating the whole purpose.
nVidia 320M si about 20W, so they can use 17W processors on 11,6" and 25W processors on 13", with an increased battery life on both models.
You're forgetting that the 320m is more than just a graphics processor. SB still requires a south bridge which will also have a power rating.
See, that's exactly the same thing I said. And see, that's exactly what the SB + Intel 3000 HD solution does not do. :rolleyes:
Look, you're saying the same thing I am, you just don't want to agree that the Intel 3000 HD solution is sub-par for OpenCL, a big feature Apple pushed with Snow Leopard. Stop being obtuse. Right now, SB does not run OpenCL code on a DSP or anything else, it runs on it the CPU, defeating the whole purpose.
nVidia 320M si about 20W, so they can use 17W processors on 11,6" and 25W processors on 13", with an increased battery life on both models.
You're forgetting that the 320m is more than just a graphics processor. SB still requires a south bridge which will also have a power rating.
hob
Apr 5, 05:00 PM
Genuinely looking forwards to getting my grubby mitts on this one...
k995
Mar 23, 03:54 AM
To be fair, every smartphone on the market is an iPhone clone and every tablet an iPad clone, so it is all related to Apple in that way.
Complete BS "iphone" lookalikes date back to ebfore the iphone was anounced. So either some companys have people who can predict the future, or the design and tech behind the iphone was aused BEFORe it was released and apple just changed excisting designs.
Ipad is basicly a large smartphone.
Complete BS "iphone" lookalikes date back to ebfore the iphone was anounced. So either some companys have people who can predict the future, or the design and tech behind the iphone was aused BEFORe it was released and apple just changed excisting designs.
Ipad is basicly a large smartphone.
deconai
Aug 11, 03:59 PM
Well, I had been screwed about 4x as much as a typical cell user... at least when I had the misfortune and poor sense to have a Cingular contract.
I think there are several people who have felt "screwed" by their wireless company, regardless of which company they chose to sign with. I have used Cingular from day one of my cell usage, and I have nothing but good things to say about their service. Of course, you're 4x more likely to get screwed, I guess. ;)
I think there are several people who have felt "screwed" by their wireless company, regardless of which company they chose to sign with. I have used Cingular from day one of my cell usage, and I have nothing but good things to say about their service. Of course, you're 4x more likely to get screwed, I guess. ;)
EagerDragon
Aug 25, 06:38 PM
When I read a lot of posts where people complain about Apple service, it seems that it is offten from non-US. Is this my imagination or does Apple need to kick the Arse of their international support groups?
:D
:D
babyj
Sep 19, 09:52 AM
Like I said, 64 bit is pretty irrelevant for most users, and the speed and battery differences are quite negligible. And the argument that Apple is losing tons of sales to PC manufactuers is, frankly, laughable too.
The pre-release tests I saw reckoned Merom was about 25% faster with 7% longer battery life. Though they are pretty meaningless figures and we won't know until Merom is actually in a Macbook and a comparable test can be made.
I'd imagine there will be far bigger improvements to both with Santa Rosa and nand cache (which I presume Apple will support) than there is with Merom.
The pre-release tests I saw reckoned Merom was about 25% faster with 7% longer battery life. Though they are pretty meaningless figures and we won't know until Merom is actually in a Macbook and a comparable test can be made.
I'd imagine there will be far bigger improvements to both with Santa Rosa and nand cache (which I presume Apple will support) than there is with Merom.
logandzwon
Apr 19, 02:51 PM
The First Commercial GUI
http://img62.imageshack.us/img62/5659/star1vg.gif
Xerox's Star workstation was the first commercial implementation of the graphical user interface. The Star was introduced in 1981 and was the inspiration for the Mac and all the other GUIs that followed.
http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/7892/leopardpreviewdesktop4.jpghttp://img714.imageshack.us/img714/5733/xerox8010star.gif
-The Star was not a commercial product. Xerox didn't sell them. (Well eventually they did, but not as PCs. they were to be similar to what we'd call a terminal today.)
-the middle image is actually of an Apple Lisa. I think you were just showing as a comparison, but some people might think your saying it's a Star. It's not. It's a Lisa.
-Apple compensated Xerox for the ideas borrowed from the Star. SJ and the mac team were already working on the GUI before any of them ever saw the Star though. Also, Macintosh 1 wasn't a copy of the Star. In fact a lot of the stables of a modern GUI today were innovated by Apple for the Macintosh.
http://img62.imageshack.us/img62/5659/star1vg.gif
Xerox's Star workstation was the first commercial implementation of the graphical user interface. The Star was introduced in 1981 and was the inspiration for the Mac and all the other GUIs that followed.
http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/7892/leopardpreviewdesktop4.jpghttp://img714.imageshack.us/img714/5733/xerox8010star.gif
-The Star was not a commercial product. Xerox didn't sell them. (Well eventually they did, but not as PCs. they were to be similar to what we'd call a terminal today.)
-the middle image is actually of an Apple Lisa. I think you were just showing as a comparison, but some people might think your saying it's a Star. It's not. It's a Lisa.
-Apple compensated Xerox for the ideas borrowed from the Star. SJ and the mac team were already working on the GUI before any of them ever saw the Star though. Also, Macintosh 1 wasn't a copy of the Star. In fact a lot of the stables of a modern GUI today were innovated by Apple for the Macintosh.
[G5]Hydra
Jul 15, 04:23 PM
Early Blu-Ray burners can't read or write CDs, and are slow at DVDs. Maybe we'll see a Blu-Ray burner and a high-speed DVD�R(W)/CD-R(W).
Exactly right. Apple seems cozy with Pioneer, they did debut the original Superdrive in a PowerMac remember, and Pioneer's BDR-101A Blu-ray burner can't read or write CDs. Dual opticals would have nothing to do with Apple wanting to make people copy discs or doing anything made simple with two opticals. Pioneer debuted the BDR-101A (http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/article/0,aid,125581,00.asp) a few months ago at $1000 retail and if Apple gets a nice discount to use them they would need to go with an additional drive to be able to do CD's.
-Jerry C.
Exactly right. Apple seems cozy with Pioneer, they did debut the original Superdrive in a PowerMac remember, and Pioneer's BDR-101A Blu-ray burner can't read or write CDs. Dual opticals would have nothing to do with Apple wanting to make people copy discs or doing anything made simple with two opticals. Pioneer debuted the BDR-101A (http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/article/0,aid,125581,00.asp) a few months ago at $1000 retail and if Apple gets a nice discount to use them they would need to go with an additional drive to be able to do CD's.
-Jerry C.
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.
Macnoviz
Jul 20, 04:23 PM
Sort of proves the point i was trying to make, at some point mose users wil rather get a beter IO subsystem than more processing power.
Actually, that was my point, but now that you mention it, reversed hyperthreading would solve some problems.
In the long run (really long run, I'm talking quantumcomputers here) however, you are right, and innovation in computing will mostly come from software and how you tell the computer what to do. The nec-plus-ultra would be thinking of a result and getting it (or saying it to your computer) like a photoshop user going, well I would like the sun being more dominant in that picture, the power lines removed, and make those persons look younger. Boom. It happens.
Actually, that was my point, but now that you mention it, reversed hyperthreading would solve some problems.
In the long run (really long run, I'm talking quantumcomputers here) however, you are right, and innovation in computing will mostly come from software and how you tell the computer what to do. The nec-plus-ultra would be thinking of a result and getting it (or saying it to your computer) like a photoshop user going, well I would like the sun being more dominant in that picture, the power lines removed, and make those persons look younger. Boom. It happens.
handsome pete
Apr 6, 08:57 AM
Yes, there are ways in FCP, but they are clunky! It was much easier for my project to do it in iMovie. Naturally, it is not true for every project.
For example, I can't do Multicam edits in iMovie. FCP has also its advantages, for sure! If FCP could marry with iMovie and make a child, the new FCP, that would be heaven.
If you can't do precision edits in FCP quickly and easily, then you just don't know the software that well.
Changing FCP to mimic iMovie would be the death of it as a "pro" application. It would turn away most of it's established user base. There aren't many complaints about the mechanics of the interface. After all, almost all pro NLEs are based in the same structure. What a new version of FCP needs instead are things like better media management, 64 bit support, better blu-ray authoring, etc.
For example, I can't do Multicam edits in iMovie. FCP has also its advantages, for sure! If FCP could marry with iMovie and make a child, the new FCP, that would be heaven.
If you can't do precision edits in FCP quickly and easily, then you just don't know the software that well.
Changing FCP to mimic iMovie would be the death of it as a "pro" application. It would turn away most of it's established user base. There aren't many complaints about the mechanics of the interface. After all, almost all pro NLEs are based in the same structure. What a new version of FCP needs instead are things like better media management, 64 bit support, better blu-ray authoring, etc.
chatin
Aug 20, 02:21 PM
Mac Pros will need 64bit Leopard to achieve their full multi-core potential. Expect all Core 2 based Macs to hold value well through the next release cycle of OSX Leopard.
Apple is still selling G5's on the website for $3299! Until
Adobe gets out - and optimizes - universal binaries, Quad G5 will sell for more than Quad Xeon Mac Pros!
:rolleyes:
Apple is still selling G5's on the website for $3299! Until
Adobe gets out - and optimizes - universal binaries, Quad G5 will sell for more than Quad Xeon Mac Pros!
:rolleyes:
Billy Boo Bob
Aug 6, 08:38 PM
It won't be a live video stream. In the afternoon Apple will begin streaming a compressed HD recording of it.
I wish they would provide a full QT file download, like the movie trailers. Even if it isn't HD, but just the standard QT. Sure the file would be large, but they could BitTorrent it. Make a standalone app that uses BT, but will only download that one single file. You wouldn't even have to know that BT was under the hood... Just that you were downloading at near peak speeds (depending on when you actually grab the file).
I wish they would provide a full QT file download, like the movie trailers. Even if it isn't HD, but just the standard QT. Sure the file would be large, but they could BitTorrent it. Make a standalone app that uses BT, but will only download that one single file. You wouldn't even have to know that BT was under the hood... Just that you were downloading at near peak speeds (depending on when you actually grab the file).
macfan881
Nov 15, 10:42 PM
Sony did a smart move putting out on the 24th this thing will sell like hotcakes on black Friday and I'm sure will move alot of ps3's with that bundle and a PS Move bundle expect to see alot of ps3's sold for thanksgiving weekend till Christmas.
citizenzen
Mar 18, 09:06 PM
I am very unhappy that Obama did not get us out of a state of War. Which pacifist do you plan on voting for this next time around?
What pacifist ever has a realistic chance of becoming the next "commander-in-chief"?
That's why 5P's contention is so ridiculous.
Candidates must paint themselves as "strong" and capable of leading our military, otherwise there'd be little chance they'd be elected as president.
What pacifist ever has a realistic chance of becoming the next "commander-in-chief"?
That's why 5P's contention is so ridiculous.
Candidates must paint themselves as "strong" and capable of leading our military, otherwise there'd be little chance they'd be elected as president.
deputy_doofy
Mar 31, 04:06 PM
And the Apple haters do yet another 180...
1. Macs
1995 to 2007: Don't use a Mac. Noone uses Macs.
2007 to Present: Don't use a Mac. Everyone uses a Mac.
2. Apps
1995 to 2/22/2011: Don't use Apple. There is no software and they can't do anything.
2/22 to Present: Apps? Who needs Apps as long as you have a robust UI?
3. Open
2007 to Today: Apple is a walled garden that only stupid lemmings use.
Today going forward: Controlling the OS is necessary and good for the consumer.
Honestly... this just needs repeating to drive the point home. Well said and 100000% accurate.
1. Macs
1995 to 2007: Don't use a Mac. Noone uses Macs.
2007 to Present: Don't use a Mac. Everyone uses a Mac.
2. Apps
1995 to 2/22/2011: Don't use Apple. There is no software and they can't do anything.
2/22 to Present: Apps? Who needs Apps as long as you have a robust UI?
3. Open
2007 to Today: Apple is a walled garden that only stupid lemmings use.
Today going forward: Controlling the OS is necessary and good for the consumer.
Honestly... this just needs repeating to drive the point home. Well said and 100000% accurate.
AndrewR23
Apr 11, 11:23 AM
I hope not. I want the 5 now :)
bobbleheadbob
Apr 10, 11:06 AM
I hope the new version comes in a box with a free t-shirt.
skunk
Feb 28, 06:16 PM
Lee, I agree with you about what you say, but he clearly did say that this was only his opinion. People are allowed that, even if it is hateful and exclusionist.Sure, but if they are going to air their opinions, they should also be able to back their opinions up with something better than hearsay.
iMikeT
Apr 7, 10:22 PM
Having once worked for BB, their behavior in this matter does not surprise me. They got what was coming to them.
akm3
Apr 5, 10:17 PM
About time. FCP is aging poorly. The engine is still Carbon and based around the old QT, which means that a lot of functions only use two cores at the most. I think we'll finally see Apple seriously leveraging GCD, OpenCL, etc here, although don't expect video compression to use OpenCL if the lousy quality of CUDA encodes is any indicator. Maybe Apple will add support for QuickSync on Sandy Bridge.
Also, Compressor is a damned joke. When your "Pro" software encoder gives you less options and lower quality with longer render times than free alternatives, you really need to go back to the drawing board. Yes, a lot of folks use hardware encoders, but really, if you're going to include a software encoder, at least make it as good as free software...
Is for example Handbrake better than compressor? i.e. higher quality h.264 files and/or smaller file sizes and/or faster encodes?
Also, Compressor is a damned joke. When your "Pro" software encoder gives you less options and lower quality with longer render times than free alternatives, you really need to go back to the drawing board. Yes, a lot of folks use hardware encoders, but really, if you're going to include a software encoder, at least make it as good as free software...
Is for example Handbrake better than compressor? i.e. higher quality h.264 files and/or smaller file sizes and/or faster encodes?
yg17
Apr 27, 08:49 AM
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2711155/posts?q=1&;page=101
There you have it. The birthers aren't satisfied. I knew it.
There you have it. The birthers aren't satisfied. I knew it.
Vercingetorix
Mar 31, 10:33 PM
I completely disagree.
Going open sounded like a great idea in the beginning. Fast forward to today, and manufacturers have used the openness against the platform by creating custom versions of android that aren't readily upgradable.
This has hurt the platform more than 'being open' helped it and google is right to start regulating what can and cannot be done.
I think we're all pretty lucky to have experienced both sides of the spectrum to be honest :)
Whether they're right to start regulating or not, they're still shamless hypocrites. What happened to all the principles that they waved around in the air? Andy Rubin himself said that the "definition of open" was that anyone could download the Android source and do whatever they wanted to it. Now people have to kiss his ring?
Google are the ones who waved the bloody shirt and shrieked about how Android-vs-the-iPhone was about freedom. Just because they're forced to backtrack now doesn't mean it's not blatant hypocrisy.
Going open sounded like a great idea in the beginning. Fast forward to today, and manufacturers have used the openness against the platform by creating custom versions of android that aren't readily upgradable.
This has hurt the platform more than 'being open' helped it and google is right to start regulating what can and cannot be done.
I think we're all pretty lucky to have experienced both sides of the spectrum to be honest :)
Whether they're right to start regulating or not, they're still shamless hypocrites. What happened to all the principles that they waved around in the air? Andy Rubin himself said that the "definition of open" was that anyone could download the Android source and do whatever they wanted to it. Now people have to kiss his ring?
Google are the ones who waved the bloody shirt and shrieked about how Android-vs-the-iPhone was about freedom. Just because they're forced to backtrack now doesn't mean it's not blatant hypocrisy.
