xlii
Apr 8, 05:48 AM
Well fill me in. Our family used to run a small local (and successful) computer store in the 80's and if we had it, we sold it.
With cost of inventory being fairly high, why would you stop if you met a "quota"?
The only reason I can think of (and I know nothing down these lines) is to push more revenue into this quarter (the last quarter just ended March 31st). Perhaps BB made their number for the quarter from Jan 1 to Mar 31 and want to get a running start on this current one.
With cost of inventory being fairly high, why would you stop if you met a "quota"?
The only reason I can think of (and I know nothing down these lines) is to push more revenue into this quarter (the last quarter just ended March 31st). Perhaps BB made their number for the quarter from Jan 1 to Mar 31 and want to get a running start on this current one.
blahblah100
Mar 31, 05:51 PM
I used to have a friend who would spend days tweaking the LINUX OS code so that his browser would look super duper cool.
How many people like that do you know?
Really? I would have thought he would have tweaked the code to the actual browser.
How many people like that do you know?
Really? I would have thought he would have tweaked the code to the actual browser.
NAG
Apr 27, 08:50 AM
And here I thought that data wasn't sent to Apple? At least they encrypted it so that you can't tell what actually is sent.
Edit:
But really, they are doing the right thing by truncating the size, removing it from files being backuped, and encrypting the file.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the wasn't sent argument was short for wasn't sent to Apple to track you personally. You're always sending out some sort of location data whether it be your IP or the wifi data. This was announced as a feature back when they first showed of location tracking on the iPhone (so you can't say it was secret). I guess the assumption was that people would remember context of what was said before. The context was that we knew about the anonymous wifi data and people were claiming location database on the phone was being used by Apple to track people personally (the 3rd party local access as a reasonable concern although a bit unlikely). I guess we should have been more explicit in and hoped people try to understand context instead of only becoming irrationally angry at the words "location". Oh well.
Oh, and I like how people are claiming the non-encryption was said by Apple to be a bug and then acting incredulous. Yeah, that tends to happen when you make something up. The only thing that was a bug was the cache not getting culled over time or deleted completely when location services is off. Encryption is a new feature (that arguably should have been there to start) and the file being backed up was probably an oversight. I have no idea how Apple handles their audits but they should probably look into it since they messed up here and only addressed it after we got yet another "-gate" in the media. (Do they even have a fence at this point or is it just a bunch of gates? Maybe they should make a "-gate" for that.) Informing people is, of course, good. However hysterics and hyperbole don't really do a very good job of that.
Edit:
But really, they are doing the right thing by truncating the size, removing it from files being backuped, and encrypting the file.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the wasn't sent argument was short for wasn't sent to Apple to track you personally. You're always sending out some sort of location data whether it be your IP or the wifi data. This was announced as a feature back when they first showed of location tracking on the iPhone (so you can't say it was secret). I guess the assumption was that people would remember context of what was said before. The context was that we knew about the anonymous wifi data and people were claiming location database on the phone was being used by Apple to track people personally (the 3rd party local access as a reasonable concern although a bit unlikely). I guess we should have been more explicit in and hoped people try to understand context instead of only becoming irrationally angry at the words "location". Oh well.
Oh, and I like how people are claiming the non-encryption was said by Apple to be a bug and then acting incredulous. Yeah, that tends to happen when you make something up. The only thing that was a bug was the cache not getting culled over time or deleted completely when location services is off. Encryption is a new feature (that arguably should have been there to start) and the file being backed up was probably an oversight. I have no idea how Apple handles their audits but they should probably look into it since they messed up here and only addressed it after we got yet another "-gate" in the media. (Do they even have a fence at this point or is it just a bunch of gates? Maybe they should make a "-gate" for that.) Informing people is, of course, good. However hysterics and hyperbole don't really do a very good job of that.
orthodoc
Nov 28, 08:22 PM
Actually, they do. They also got paid on every blank tape sold when cassettes were big. I think it is crazy for everyone to think that the music industry is greedy when it getting squeezed out of all of their revenue streams. So, Apple makes hundreds of millions off of their back on the itunes site, and a billion off of iPod sales, and they cannot share in the wealth?
It doesn't cost the consumer any more, why wouldn't you want the people who actually make the music you are listening to get compensated?
This debate is stale. People want something for nothing.
Getting squeezed out of a revenue stream is just part of being in business. Either adapt or go away. Nothing entitles them to a portion of the iPod sales. They make their money off of the sale of the actual music they produce. Should they get a portion of each computer sold as well? After all, the computer is used to both download and play the music. Dumb argument.
It doesn't cost the consumer any more, why wouldn't you want the people who actually make the music you are listening to get compensated?
This debate is stale. People want something for nothing.
Getting squeezed out of a revenue stream is just part of being in business. Either adapt or go away. Nothing entitles them to a portion of the iPod sales. They make their money off of the sale of the actual music they produce. Should they get a portion of each computer sold as well? After all, the computer is used to both download and play the music. Dumb argument.
KnightWRX
Apr 20, 07:47 AM
However the Galaxy devices are so close to Apple's products in appearance and design, it's very hard to tell them apart. THAT is the problem.
Don't let a few cherry picked pictures trick you, most Galaxy models don't look at all like an iPhone :
http://www.rogers.com/cms/images/en/Wireless/CellPhoneDetail/Banners/banner01_i896blkr.png
This one can go either way. Of course the Apple biased media are cherry picking their pictures. I'd doubt you'd have a hard time telling both devices apart in the real world with both in front of you.
Especially consdiring the Samsung doesn't use the icon grid on its homescreen at all, contrary to what the pictures are trying to show.
Don't let a few cherry picked pictures trick you, most Galaxy models don't look at all like an iPhone :
http://www.rogers.com/cms/images/en/Wireless/CellPhoneDetail/Banners/banner01_i896blkr.png
This one can go either way. Of course the Apple biased media are cherry picking their pictures. I'd doubt you'd have a hard time telling both devices apart in the real world with both in front of you.
Especially consdiring the Samsung doesn't use the icon grid on its homescreen at all, contrary to what the pictures are trying to show.
tk421
Nov 28, 09:34 PM
I'll just say what I said here (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=3036851#post3036851) again:
“It’s a major change for the industry,” David Geffen told N.Y. Times reporter Jeff Leeds, who broke the story. “Each of these devices is used to store unpaid-for material. This way, on top of the material people do pay for, the record companies are getting paid on the devices storing the copied music.”
"This agreement with Microsoft around Zune is a significant milestone for our company and our artists," said Morris in a statement. “This move demonstrates there can be a win-win situation where consumers have a great experience while labels and artists are also fairly compensated. We applaud Microsoft for its innovative and consumer-friendly Zune store and device."
Microsoft Corporate VP of Entertainment & Devices Bryan Lee chimed in: "This is an industry in transition, and we at Zune feel that artists should be paid fairly. The agreement we are announcing today is one of many innovations we plan on introducing to the entertainment industry with our partners and highlights our commitment to growing the digital music space. We believe that the music consumer will appreciate knowing that when they buy a Zune device, they are helping their favorite artists get paid."
It sounds to me like they are saying anyone that buys a digital music player is a thief. They are broadly accusing each of us of stealing from artists. I don't appreciate that, and I think we should all voice our disapproval.
Universal Music Group:
USA (212) 841 8000
France +33 1 44 41 91 91
UK +44 0 20 77 47 4000
feedback_fr@vivendi.com
Phone calls are more effective than email, but feel free to do either.
Do we really want the music labels getting a cut of our hardware purchases?!?
“It’s a major change for the industry,” David Geffen told N.Y. Times reporter Jeff Leeds, who broke the story. “Each of these devices is used to store unpaid-for material. This way, on top of the material people do pay for, the record companies are getting paid on the devices storing the copied music.”
"This agreement with Microsoft around Zune is a significant milestone for our company and our artists," said Morris in a statement. “This move demonstrates there can be a win-win situation where consumers have a great experience while labels and artists are also fairly compensated. We applaud Microsoft for its innovative and consumer-friendly Zune store and device."
Microsoft Corporate VP of Entertainment & Devices Bryan Lee chimed in: "This is an industry in transition, and we at Zune feel that artists should be paid fairly. The agreement we are announcing today is one of many innovations we plan on introducing to the entertainment industry with our partners and highlights our commitment to growing the digital music space. We believe that the music consumer will appreciate knowing that when they buy a Zune device, they are helping their favorite artists get paid."
It sounds to me like they are saying anyone that buys a digital music player is a thief. They are broadly accusing each of us of stealing from artists. I don't appreciate that, and I think we should all voice our disapproval.
Universal Music Group:
USA (212) 841 8000
France +33 1 44 41 91 91
UK +44 0 20 77 47 4000
feedback_fr@vivendi.com
Phone calls are more effective than email, but feel free to do either.
Do we really want the music labels getting a cut of our hardware purchases?!?
ClimbingTheLog
Jul 20, 12:56 PM
Anyone else think this is getting out of hand? Two cores, great improvement. Four cores, ehh it's faster but Joe can't tell. Eight cores, now thats just stupid.
Let me guess it will only come with 512mb of Ram :p (ok it will be at least a GB).
Have you ever owned a machine that hasn't been CPU bound? I know I haven't.
you need to do your math better, extra core = 1.5x - 1.8x speed increase. but still the same power usage as a normal core!
Where do you get these magical free electrons to drive the second core? That's some fancy silicon that uses 0W.
eight cores + Tiger = Octopussy?!?
Even Apple isn't that cool. Alas, I fear "Mac Pro 8x3.2"
How fast do you want mail to go? The main reasons you need good processors is not for browsing, e-mail, text, and such and such. I highly doubt someone who does all these things on a five year old computer will be much slower than someone on a 16 GB RAM top of the line Powermac
Have you ever done a search on a large volume of mail with AppleMail? That can eat my CPU for hours on a large IMAP mailstore on a 1.5 year old Mac. How about using Firefox with a number of useful extensions? CPU pegged for minutes when loading up the day's news stories from my RSS reader, and that's with a 2-year old Mac.
Bring the speed.
Let me guess it will only come with 512mb of Ram :p (ok it will be at least a GB).
Have you ever owned a machine that hasn't been CPU bound? I know I haven't.
you need to do your math better, extra core = 1.5x - 1.8x speed increase. but still the same power usage as a normal core!
Where do you get these magical free electrons to drive the second core? That's some fancy silicon that uses 0W.
eight cores + Tiger = Octopussy?!?
Even Apple isn't that cool. Alas, I fear "Mac Pro 8x3.2"
How fast do you want mail to go? The main reasons you need good processors is not for browsing, e-mail, text, and such and such. I highly doubt someone who does all these things on a five year old computer will be much slower than someone on a 16 GB RAM top of the line Powermac
Have you ever done a search on a large volume of mail with AppleMail? That can eat my CPU for hours on a large IMAP mailstore on a 1.5 year old Mac. How about using Firefox with a number of useful extensions? CPU pegged for minutes when loading up the day's news stories from my RSS reader, and that's with a 2-year old Mac.
Bring the speed.
JAT
Apr 20, 12:15 PM
Not at all. I'm only showing where Apple has done what they don't like being done to them. Only a die hard defends them at all cost.
No, only an irrational person defends them at all cost. A die hard is one who puts up with occasional mistakes in the products.
Did threads just get merged again? Because the last dozen posts are complete rehashes of earlier posts.
No, only an irrational person defends them at all cost. A die hard is one who puts up with occasional mistakes in the products.
Did threads just get merged again? Because the last dozen posts are complete rehashes of earlier posts.
MacinDoc
Aug 26, 08:39 PM
I agree. But I refuse to buy any "So-Called" MacBook Pro until they have implemented the easy access HD professional feature they put in the MacBook. I would rather buy a C2D MacBook with that feature than ever buy a MBP without it. :mad:
Apple has, on occasion, introduced new or upgraded features on its consumer computers when those computers were refreshed between refresh cycles of their professional computers. For example, at one time, the iMac had a faster SuperDrive than the Power Mac. Of course, with the next refresh of the pro computers, the new/upgraded features seen previously in the consumer products have always been added.
Apple has, on occasion, introduced new or upgraded features on its consumer computers when those computers were refreshed between refresh cycles of their professional computers. For example, at one time, the iMac had a faster SuperDrive than the Power Mac. Of course, with the next refresh of the pro computers, the new/upgraded features seen previously in the consumer products have always been added.
NJRonbo
Jun 14, 06:04 PM
Wait a sec...
Had to read that again...
If I get a PIN tomorrow at 1pm EST I am guaranteed
a phone on launch day? I don't have to stand in line
that morning?
They told me differently when I called the store citing
NO RESERVATIONS.
Had to read that again...
If I get a PIN tomorrow at 1pm EST I am guaranteed
a phone on launch day? I don't have to stand in line
that morning?
They told me differently when I called the store citing
NO RESERVATIONS.
NJRonbo
Jun 14, 06:27 PM
I hate Radio Shack.
Salesman have their heads up their butts
or corporate does not know what to tell them.
The 4th store I called said if you have a PIN
you are guaranteed a phone.
Salesman have their heads up their butts
or corporate does not know what to tell them.
The 4th store I called said if you have a PIN
you are guaranteed a phone.
Simiber
Apr 25, 01:54 PM
I'm not from the US so if someone with some legal background over there could point out to me how this would work..? Where I'm from you have to have suffered damages in order to sue someone, otherwise a government regulator would just impose a fine on the company or require them to stop what they are doing..? How have these people (who are suing apple) suffered losses as a result of this apparent spying technology..?
zero2dash
Sep 13, 12:11 PM
How is this Apple "innovating"? Anandtech just put pre-release quad-core Intel-processor in to an Apple-computer. Apple itself had nothing to do with it. They could have used quad-core Dell-machine just as well.
The OS takes advantage of the extra 4 cores already therefore its ahead of the technology curve, correct? Gee, no innovation here...please move along folks. :rolleyes:
As for using a Dell, sure they could've used that. Would Windows use the extra 4 cores? Highly doubtful. Microsoft has sketchy 64 bit support let alone dual core support; I'm not saying "impossible" but I haven't read jack squat about any version of Windows working well with quad cores. You think those fools (the same idiots who came up with Genuine Advantage) actually optimized their OS to run in an 8 core setup? Please pass along what you're smoking. :rolleyes:
The OS takes advantage of the extra 4 cores already therefore its ahead of the technology curve, correct? Gee, no innovation here...please move along folks. :rolleyes:
As for using a Dell, sure they could've used that. Would Windows use the extra 4 cores? Highly doubtful. Microsoft has sketchy 64 bit support let alone dual core support; I'm not saying "impossible" but I haven't read jack squat about any version of Windows working well with quad cores. You think those fools (the same idiots who came up with Genuine Advantage) actually optimized their OS to run in an 8 core setup? Please pass along what you're smoking. :rolleyes:
deconai
Aug 11, 03:42 PM
i just want a cell phone that works.
all these phones today(by all these phones i mean the motorolas i have had, so mayby motorola's jsut suck) have this ridiculous amount of latency when you are navigating the menus. cause they have to have all this fancy crap flyin around. its like phones are using the same technology from 5 years ago but they are just piling these features into them so they dog down. overall phones today seem to suck just a bit. my nokia 8260 was the best phone i ever had and it was monochrome with no camera or video or stupid crap like that...
I used to have a Motorola loaded with everything but the kitchen sink (that is, until my wife decided to wash it in the washing machine :P ). I got a cheap Samsung SGH-E317 to replace it and I swear it works 100% faster than my Moto. It seems to receive the signal stronger as well.
all these phones today(by all these phones i mean the motorolas i have had, so mayby motorola's jsut suck) have this ridiculous amount of latency when you are navigating the menus. cause they have to have all this fancy crap flyin around. its like phones are using the same technology from 5 years ago but they are just piling these features into them so they dog down. overall phones today seem to suck just a bit. my nokia 8260 was the best phone i ever had and it was monochrome with no camera or video or stupid crap like that...
I used to have a Motorola loaded with everything but the kitchen sink (that is, until my wife decided to wash it in the washing machine :P ). I got a cheap Samsung SGH-E317 to replace it and I swear it works 100% faster than my Moto. It seems to receive the signal stronger as well.
gnasher729
Apr 8, 02:21 AM
On the other hand, if you have some sort of special needs (e.g. needing a long cable in an area with lots of interference while transferring data with a high bandwidth), then a $5 cable might not be up-to-scratch. But it that is unlikely, so it's worth trying the $5 cable first.
Well, I can't run my 1920x1200 monitor at that resolution on my MBP with a �5 mini-dvi to DVI adapter, only up to 1600x1200 :mad: Had to buy the Apple one. Still worth the attempt.
Well, I can't run my 1920x1200 monitor at that resolution on my MBP with a �5 mini-dvi to DVI adapter, only up to 1600x1200 :mad: Had to buy the Apple one. Still worth the attempt.
twoodcc
Aug 13, 10:36 PM
You originally said...
...which as I've said, a few times now, is incorrect. If you only count 4 games, as you originally said in that quote, that only totals 46M. And besides, if you check that link I originally provided, which is FROM POLYPHONY THEMSELVES, you would see that the total worldwide is only 56M. At least if you're going to quote the number in the wrong context, use the right number.
well i did have demos just before that quote. but yes, what i meant to say, and what i actually typed, was two different things. but i think you can see what i was trying to say, and is clear: NFS has sold more, but has more games out there.
Yay, let's play the "Twist The Numbers To Fit Our Needs" game....
100M / 15 years = 6.66M per year (Need for Speed)
56M / 13 years = 4.31M per year (Gran Turismo)
So yea, Need for Speed sells 50% more per year. YAY, math is fun!!!
math is fun, and yes, per year, NFS has sold more. but they released more games to do it. and on more consoles, to break it down even further
It is. I don't like the direction Polyphony has taken the game. A game that used to be my favorite game. It disappoints me. Thus my frustration. I bought my PS3 with the hopes
did you buy GT5: prologue?
for someone who at one point really liked the games/series, i don't see why you wouldn't give this game a shot, at least after reading reviews first. i find it very frustrating to see people make judgements before the game is even out
Can I buy one and drive it to work? No? Then it isn't real, intentions or not.
no matter what anyone says, it is a fact that they intended to build a car specifically for Gran Turismo. that in itself is very impressive to me.
Then according to you, Wii Play is the "greatest" video game of all time. Just reading that sentence should show you exactly why sales have very little to do with the quality of a game.
i never said that the most sold game is the greatest. but i do think sales is one aspect to consider.
I keep saying this, but it seems people don't really understand it. Sales, which deal with numbers, are an objective measure of something. Greatness, which deals with personal preferences, is a subjective measure. You can think GT, or the iPhone, or Star Wars, or whatever, is great. That is fine, and a personal opinion. But, the sales of those things can't be "great". They can be large, and they are, but they can't be great.
i understand this, but i don't think you understand what i am trying to point out. you are correct in that what makes something great is personal preference, and when many people have that same personal preference, it turns into many sales.
let's try this analogy. take tennis for example. who is a "greater" player - Roger Federer or Andy Roddick? Roddick has played some great games, and has a great serve, but Federer has many more championships. almost everyone would say Federer is greater (if there is such a term).
think of championships as sales in this case. i know it's not the best analogy, but the first thing i could think of.
And really, if someone uses the sales of something to qualify the greatness of it to themselves, that is kind of sad. Quite a few of my favorite things, which I consider great, didn't sell very well. That doesn't make them any less great to me.
you do make a very good point here, but again, i think you are taking my point out of context.
my whole point in all of this, is not that i think GT is the greatest series of all time or whatever, or that they have sold the most, blah blah. all i'm trying to say is that they have a very respectable racing series, one of the best, and i think this next game will continue their success. and i pointed out that past sales show that they have had much success. that's all i'm really saying here
But anyway, I don't even know why I'm arguing about this. I'm not even going to be buying this game. I'm done with this thread now. I'll just tip my hat, and bid you adieu.
it seems we are arguing just to argue. i hope you at least read some reviews once the game is out before making a choice like that. and i also hope that this thread hasn't led you to that decision
It's refreshing that I don't have to go to gamespot forums to see a pointless immature fanboy pissing match :rolleyes:
sorry for the inconvenience. you don't have to read this you know.
...which as I've said, a few times now, is incorrect. If you only count 4 games, as you originally said in that quote, that only totals 46M. And besides, if you check that link I originally provided, which is FROM POLYPHONY THEMSELVES, you would see that the total worldwide is only 56M. At least if you're going to quote the number in the wrong context, use the right number.
well i did have demos just before that quote. but yes, what i meant to say, and what i actually typed, was two different things. but i think you can see what i was trying to say, and is clear: NFS has sold more, but has more games out there.
Yay, let's play the "Twist The Numbers To Fit Our Needs" game....
100M / 15 years = 6.66M per year (Need for Speed)
56M / 13 years = 4.31M per year (Gran Turismo)
So yea, Need for Speed sells 50% more per year. YAY, math is fun!!!
math is fun, and yes, per year, NFS has sold more. but they released more games to do it. and on more consoles, to break it down even further
It is. I don't like the direction Polyphony has taken the game. A game that used to be my favorite game. It disappoints me. Thus my frustration. I bought my PS3 with the hopes
did you buy GT5: prologue?
for someone who at one point really liked the games/series, i don't see why you wouldn't give this game a shot, at least after reading reviews first. i find it very frustrating to see people make judgements before the game is even out
Can I buy one and drive it to work? No? Then it isn't real, intentions or not.
no matter what anyone says, it is a fact that they intended to build a car specifically for Gran Turismo. that in itself is very impressive to me.
Then according to you, Wii Play is the "greatest" video game of all time. Just reading that sentence should show you exactly why sales have very little to do with the quality of a game.
i never said that the most sold game is the greatest. but i do think sales is one aspect to consider.
I keep saying this, but it seems people don't really understand it. Sales, which deal with numbers, are an objective measure of something. Greatness, which deals with personal preferences, is a subjective measure. You can think GT, or the iPhone, or Star Wars, or whatever, is great. That is fine, and a personal opinion. But, the sales of those things can't be "great". They can be large, and they are, but they can't be great.
i understand this, but i don't think you understand what i am trying to point out. you are correct in that what makes something great is personal preference, and when many people have that same personal preference, it turns into many sales.
let's try this analogy. take tennis for example. who is a "greater" player - Roger Federer or Andy Roddick? Roddick has played some great games, and has a great serve, but Federer has many more championships. almost everyone would say Federer is greater (if there is such a term).
think of championships as sales in this case. i know it's not the best analogy, but the first thing i could think of.
And really, if someone uses the sales of something to qualify the greatness of it to themselves, that is kind of sad. Quite a few of my favorite things, which I consider great, didn't sell very well. That doesn't make them any less great to me.
you do make a very good point here, but again, i think you are taking my point out of context.
my whole point in all of this, is not that i think GT is the greatest series of all time or whatever, or that they have sold the most, blah blah. all i'm trying to say is that they have a very respectable racing series, one of the best, and i think this next game will continue their success. and i pointed out that past sales show that they have had much success. that's all i'm really saying here
But anyway, I don't even know why I'm arguing about this. I'm not even going to be buying this game. I'm done with this thread now. I'll just tip my hat, and bid you adieu.
it seems we are arguing just to argue. i hope you at least read some reviews once the game is out before making a choice like that. and i also hope that this thread hasn't led you to that decision
It's refreshing that I don't have to go to gamespot forums to see a pointless immature fanboy pissing match :rolleyes:
sorry for the inconvenience. you don't have to read this you know.
Ahheck01
Apr 12, 05:00 PM
BTW, apparently this site is doing live blogging:
http://www.finalcutmtl.org/2011/04/10/supermeet-live-sur-final-cut-mtl
That's about all I could find.
And for you english-only forum members, here's the translated version:
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fr&u=http://www.finalcutmtl.org/2011/04/10/supermeet-live-sur-final-cut-mtl&ei=rsmkTfiKLsL-rAHd44WGCw&sa=X&oi=translate&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCEQ7gEwAA&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dhttp://www.finalcutmtl.org/2011/04/10/supermeet-live-sur-final-cut-mtl%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Doff%26prmd%3Divns
http://www.finalcutmtl.org/2011/04/10/supermeet-live-sur-final-cut-mtl
That's about all I could find.
And for you english-only forum members, here's the translated version:
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fr&u=http://www.finalcutmtl.org/2011/04/10/supermeet-live-sur-final-cut-mtl&ei=rsmkTfiKLsL-rAHd44WGCw&sa=X&oi=translate&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCEQ7gEwAA&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dhttp://www.finalcutmtl.org/2011/04/10/supermeet-live-sur-final-cut-mtl%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Doff%26prmd%3Divns
.jpg "new york state flower and ird")
guzhogi
Sep 13, 08:53 AM
A bit pointless given that no software utilises the extra cores yet. But nice to know, I guess.
I'm still getting used to having two cores in my laptop!
This is a bit of a chicken and the egg problem. Hardware companies don't want to release multicore hardware b/c no software is out to support it and software people don't want to ship multiprocessor software b/c no multiproc hardware is out. Since there are a few multiproc computers out now, some software companies might start multithreading their apps, most people probably don't have it them yet.
Also, some apps won't really benefit from being multithreaded. Take a basic calculator. Why would you really need it to take advantage of multiproc computers? It isn't that processor heavy to do 2+2. AV software, like iTunes, Final Cut Pro, etc., could greatly benefit from multiproc systems. One core can do the audio while the other does the video for FC or iTunes could use one core for playing music and the other for ripping.
Something I'd like to see is to have AV stuff offloaded to the sound or graphics card to speed it up. I've heard of a company called Aspex Semiconductors (www.aspex-semi.com) that designs PCI cards that speed up MPEG encoding. Might be nice for video pros.
I'm still getting used to having two cores in my laptop!
This is a bit of a chicken and the egg problem. Hardware companies don't want to release multicore hardware b/c no software is out to support it and software people don't want to ship multiprocessor software b/c no multiproc hardware is out. Since there are a few multiproc computers out now, some software companies might start multithreading their apps, most people probably don't have it them yet.
Also, some apps won't really benefit from being multithreaded. Take a basic calculator. Why would you really need it to take advantage of multiproc computers? It isn't that processor heavy to do 2+2. AV software, like iTunes, Final Cut Pro, etc., could greatly benefit from multiproc systems. One core can do the audio while the other does the video for FC or iTunes could use one core for playing music and the other for ripping.
Something I'd like to see is to have AV stuff offloaded to the sound or graphics card to speed it up. I've heard of a company called Aspex Semiconductors (www.aspex-semi.com) that designs PCI cards that speed up MPEG encoding. Might be nice for video pros.
Cougarcat
Mar 26, 05:21 PM
The only reason to not move to the new OS would be lack of support for current hardware.
Or software...bye-bye Rosetta. :(
Or software...bye-bye Rosetta. :(
ender1122333
Apr 5, 08:47 PM
This could make me very happy.
Any news on a Logic studio refresh happening any time soon?
Any news on a Logic studio refresh happening any time soon?
01civicman
Apr 8, 08:12 AM
I am also a work at BB. I can tell you how it works for me. If we are getting shipments, its being kept from the associates (at least in my store). My store is small and if they were some where in plain sight, we'd see them. Plus I'm pretty close to a lot of inventory guys. The Daily Quota thing doesn't make much sense, because in the end, its a month end budget that we have to meet. If we miss by 2K one day, but are over by 5K the next, it doesn't really matter. Sure the managers want to hit every day, but it doesn't really make that much sense.
As for the $100 pre-sale, my store stopped it at about 10 people, so its not like we did that to a ton of people, and about a week ago, 6 of them got their iPad, so our "list" is almost empty.
Also, having the iPad, definitely brings foot traffic in to potentially make money elsewhere, but in the end, if we sell 20,000 iPads (and nothing else), the store just lost money.
As for the $100 pre-sale, my store stopped it at about 10 people, so its not like we did that to a ton of people, and about a week ago, 6 of them got their iPad, so our "list" is almost empty.
Also, having the iPad, definitely brings foot traffic in to potentially make money elsewhere, but in the end, if we sell 20,000 iPads (and nothing else), the store just lost money.
milo
Jul 20, 04:34 PM
I think Logic can only use two cores/processors with a cludge to use the other two on a quad (by pretending it's a remote machine). Someone told me this though so I'm not 100% on that.
This is true. Logic will use up to about half the available processing power. Using the kludge (which is pretty simple but has some limitations) you can get close to all of it. Which allows for a ton more power than any of the dual G5s.
Still, apple needs to update Logic ASAP to use the full power without a hack. I can't believe it's taken them this long, they BETTER make the fix for all quad machines and not just intel boxes.
I hate to burst everyone's bubble, but Kentsfield will not be appearing in any of the Pro machines for some time.
Apple will be using them exclusively in the Xserves, at for the most part of 2007. This will finally give Apple another way to distinguish their server line from their pro line.
I don't buy that. Apple needs a workstation machine with the fastest available chips. PC's will use them in workstations, it would make no sense to cripple the top of the line desktop machine! Servers are distinguished from the pro line because they have a completely different form factor and feature set, no need to add artificial distincions.
Neither Apple or Dell operate in bubbles. They both realize that these chips belong in real servers and also requires an OS that can support such chips.
You don't think ANY pc makers will ship workstations with kentsfield? Why not? This is a chip that would be perfect for a workstation, you think nobody will take the opportunity to use it? The chips are fast as hell, what makes you think they only belong in servers? Are there features that can only be taken advantage of in a server and not in a workstation?
This is true. Logic will use up to about half the available processing power. Using the kludge (which is pretty simple but has some limitations) you can get close to all of it. Which allows for a ton more power than any of the dual G5s.
Still, apple needs to update Logic ASAP to use the full power without a hack. I can't believe it's taken them this long, they BETTER make the fix for all quad machines and not just intel boxes.
I hate to burst everyone's bubble, but Kentsfield will not be appearing in any of the Pro machines for some time.
Apple will be using them exclusively in the Xserves, at for the most part of 2007. This will finally give Apple another way to distinguish their server line from their pro line.
I don't buy that. Apple needs a workstation machine with the fastest available chips. PC's will use them in workstations, it would make no sense to cripple the top of the line desktop machine! Servers are distinguished from the pro line because they have a completely different form factor and feature set, no need to add artificial distincions.
Neither Apple or Dell operate in bubbles. They both realize that these chips belong in real servers and also requires an OS that can support such chips.
You don't think ANY pc makers will ship workstations with kentsfield? Why not? This is a chip that would be perfect for a workstation, you think nobody will take the opportunity to use it? The chips are fast as hell, what makes you think they only belong in servers? Are there features that can only be taken advantage of in a server and not in a workstation?
happyduck42
Apr 19, 02:08 PM
Alright, I was originally going to take Apple's side on this, since I could clearly see it looks a lot like iOS, but having looked at Samsung's F700, I don' think Apple has any right to sue..
Although the Samsung F700 has very simple icons, Apple clearly has the same placement of icons, even looking at the bottom you find the four dock like icons..
http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/9559/samsungf700cellular.jpg
I'd say that Apple copied Samsung :P.. Honestly I'm not one to take sides just because I like Apple Products, I just think its wrong to sue since Samsung clearly had this type of UI first.. Apple has no right to sue..
That phone was announced Feb Just after the iPhone. http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_f700-1849.php
"Announced 2007, February. Released December"
Although the Samsung F700 has very simple icons, Apple clearly has the same placement of icons, even looking at the bottom you find the four dock like icons..
http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/9559/samsungf700cellular.jpg
I'd say that Apple copied Samsung :P.. Honestly I'm not one to take sides just because I like Apple Products, I just think its wrong to sue since Samsung clearly had this type of UI first.. Apple has no right to sue..
That phone was announced Feb Just after the iPhone. http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_f700-1849.php
"Announced 2007, February. Released December"
Multimedia
Sep 14, 05:56 PM
:eek: :eek: What's planned after 8 core processors? 16 cores on a chip? Seriously?? :confused: :confused:Not sure about beyond 8 which can be paired into a 16 core Mac. Perhaps. Too far out to tell although it is casually mentioned in the roadmap.