Cachiro
Apr 6, 04:55 PM
[QUOTE=
Xoom.... I say Fail.
[/QUOTE]
Popeye, you hit a nail on the head.
:D
Xoom.... I say Fail.
[/QUOTE]
Popeye, you hit a nail on the head.
:D
tribulation
Nov 28, 08:12 PM
what if i have no artists distributed by universal? if this takes effect then the ipod price will just go up and we all will be paying for it. what makes them think that i am even listening to any of their artists on my ipod and why should they get a cut if i dont >> or even if i do. ridiculous and better not happen.
BC2009
Apr 6, 03:28 PM
Nice...I'm glad to have a more rare piece of hardware. I love mine and have no issues, it'll only get better over time.Reminds me of the days of the RAZR, that's what the iPhone and iPad have become.
Honda sells a TON more cars than BMW by a huge factor...I'd rather drive a BMW, I guess you're all happy with the Hondas :)
I think its funny that when Google gains the edge in the smartphone marketshare battle the fandroids declare victory, but somehow the Xoom is the "BMW" of tablets when its marketshare sucks.
Xoom is NOT a terrible product, but to be called the BMW of tablets would require that it is better than the iPad. This is more like Hondas and Hyundais. Android tablets are currently the Hyundais -- trying to copy the Hondas as closely as possible (Hyundai's name is close to Honda and so is there logo, and so are most of their car styles). However, what you find is that the Hyundai while it may be priced comparably and has comparable technical specifications that it is really not built as well.
However, on the smartphone side, your analogy does in fact hold very well. Android is on high-end phones as well as the cheap freebies the carriers are giving away. There are variants of Android being used on devices that Google has no control over and behave in a far more inferior manner than regular Android phones, but are counted among the Android numbers. Android is the Chevrolet of the smartphone market (selling everything from Corvettes to Aveos) while Apple's sells only to the premier customers. People don't buy iPhone because they could not get an Android phone, but they do buy an Android phone because they could not get an iPhone for the price they wanted it. iPhone is the one that is more highly desired, though folks will settle for an Android phone because its cheaper to acquire and more widely available -- just like a Chevrolet.
Apple creates premier products. With the iPad, they were the first of such premier products and they are experiencing what Henry Ford experienced with the Model-T. Five years from now there will be a fleet of competitors that are as good or even better, but right now iPad is the standard and the competition is basically trying their best to copy or anticipate Apple's next move.
Ironically, the one area that Xoom got higher marks than iPad on Consumer Reports was "Versatility". This was because they had a Micro SD slot. I think its funny that a non-functioning Micro-SD slot is better than a $30 camera kit that includes two adapters that actually makes for a functioning SD-card connection or USB connection. I can connect SD cards to my iPad-2 all day long with my adapter. I also have a USB port via an adapter, HDMI, VGA, Composite Video, and Component Video. Sure it requires adapters, but at least I have the options -- they are all there. I also have better options at my disposal and only resort to wired connections when I have to (AirPlay >> HDMI -- wireless transfer >> SD card).
In summary.... Xoom good, iPad better (both iPad 1 and definitely iPad 2). Even the idiots at Consumer Reports can figure out that the Xoom is only as good as the comparable iPad 1 (which costs far less).
Honda sells a TON more cars than BMW by a huge factor...I'd rather drive a BMW, I guess you're all happy with the Hondas :)
I think its funny that when Google gains the edge in the smartphone marketshare battle the fandroids declare victory, but somehow the Xoom is the "BMW" of tablets when its marketshare sucks.
Xoom is NOT a terrible product, but to be called the BMW of tablets would require that it is better than the iPad. This is more like Hondas and Hyundais. Android tablets are currently the Hyundais -- trying to copy the Hondas as closely as possible (Hyundai's name is close to Honda and so is there logo, and so are most of their car styles). However, what you find is that the Hyundai while it may be priced comparably and has comparable technical specifications that it is really not built as well.
However, on the smartphone side, your analogy does in fact hold very well. Android is on high-end phones as well as the cheap freebies the carriers are giving away. There are variants of Android being used on devices that Google has no control over and behave in a far more inferior manner than regular Android phones, but are counted among the Android numbers. Android is the Chevrolet of the smartphone market (selling everything from Corvettes to Aveos) while Apple's sells only to the premier customers. People don't buy iPhone because they could not get an Android phone, but they do buy an Android phone because they could not get an iPhone for the price they wanted it. iPhone is the one that is more highly desired, though folks will settle for an Android phone because its cheaper to acquire and more widely available -- just like a Chevrolet.
Apple creates premier products. With the iPad, they were the first of such premier products and they are experiencing what Henry Ford experienced with the Model-T. Five years from now there will be a fleet of competitors that are as good or even better, but right now iPad is the standard and the competition is basically trying their best to copy or anticipate Apple's next move.
Ironically, the one area that Xoom got higher marks than iPad on Consumer Reports was "Versatility". This was because they had a Micro SD slot. I think its funny that a non-functioning Micro-SD slot is better than a $30 camera kit that includes two adapters that actually makes for a functioning SD-card connection or USB connection. I can connect SD cards to my iPad-2 all day long with my adapter. I also have a USB port via an adapter, HDMI, VGA, Composite Video, and Component Video. Sure it requires adapters, but at least I have the options -- they are all there. I also have better options at my disposal and only resort to wired connections when I have to (AirPlay >> HDMI -- wireless transfer >> SD card).
In summary.... Xoom good, iPad better (both iPad 1 and definitely iPad 2). Even the idiots at Consumer Reports can figure out that the Xoom is only as good as the comparable iPad 1 (which costs far less).
adamfilip
Jul 20, 11:48 AM
New Apple Mac Pro Dual Quad
Dual Intel Xeon 8400 Quardro processors at 3.4Ghz (2 x 4 core)
2Gb Buffered DDR2 RAM
750 Gb Sata2 Hard drive
Blue Ray Super drive 2x
Regular DVD rom in second bay
ATI X1900 video card 512mb PCI express x16
$3950
Dual Intel Xeon 8400 Quardro processors at 3.4Ghz (2 x 4 core)
2Gb Buffered DDR2 RAM
750 Gb Sata2 Hard drive
Blue Ray Super drive 2x
Regular DVD rom in second bay
ATI X1900 video card 512mb PCI express x16
$3950
bokdol
Aug 18, 09:21 AM
If one were to buy a mac pro now, is the processor upgradeable to Clovertown in the future, or is that not really worth it even if it is, because you would need a faster FSB, meaning a new logic board, to take advantage of its power?
i think it is socket 775 or what ever. and if clovertown is pin compatable it will work. i think the processor will have to deal with the slower bus. as long as it is pin compatible.
i think it is socket 775 or what ever. and if clovertown is pin compatable it will work. i think the processor will have to deal with the slower bus. as long as it is pin compatible.
Multimedia
Jul 20, 04:50 PM
So We May Be Seeing A Very Short Life For What Steve Introduces August 7. If true, this looks like Steve may be able to claim an all Quad Core plus Oct Core on top Mac Pro line PLUS Quad Core iMacs at his annual SF MacWorld SteveNote January 9,2007 perhaps with Leopard on board as well. Wouldn't that be a Merry belated Christmas and a Happiest of New Years? :eek: :D :p :cool: ;) :)
MacRumors
Apr 19, 01:21 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/19/analysis-of-apples-lawsuit-against-samsung-includes-ios-device-sales-numbers/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/19/142014-apple_samsung_lawsuit.jpg
#39;has three wedding dresses
Royal Elegance-wedding dress
royal wedding dress.
kate middleton wedding dress
Royal Wedding Gowns 2010 by
Design of Wedding Dress
Amara Royal wedding dress
royal wedding dress designs.
Royal Wedding Gowns 2010 by
royal wedding dress designs.
The Royal wedding which will
royal wedding dress designs.
Reacent Post
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/19/142014-apple_samsung_lawsuit.jpg
Full of Win
Mar 31, 09:34 PM
What is this, "let's go on an Apple fansite and act surpised that it's full of Apple fans" day?
No, it's "make up a fake day" day.
No, it's "make up a fake day" day.
takao
Dec 8, 01:22 PM
another great unlockable car: bspec the mazda miata race: Furai (?
) Concept 08
made the japanese only lvl 18 cup not only easy but the most one side race ever
with some tuning 399 kw at a 650 kg which makes it pretty mean
) Concept 08
made the japanese only lvl 18 cup not only easy but the most one side race ever
with some tuning 399 kw at a 650 kg which makes it pretty mean
shamino
Jul 20, 09:58 AM
No I think you are confused. :) I meant "Is having more cores, lets say 8, more efficient than one big core equal in processing power to the 8 cores?"
First of all, you assume that it is possible to make "one big core equal in processing power to the 8 cores". I don't think it is possible to do this (at least not with the x86 architecture using today's technology.)
But assuming such a chip exists, the answer depends on what kind of efficiency you're thinking of.
If you mean computational efficiency (meaning the most useful processing per clock-tick), then a single big core will do better. This is because single-threaded apps will be able to use the full power (whereas multiple threads are needed to take advantagte of multiple cores.) Also, the operating system can get rid of the overhead that is needed to keep software running on the multiple cores from stepping on each other.
If you mean energy efficiency (amount of processing per watt of electricity consumed), then it could go either way, depending on how the chips are made. But given today's manufacturing processes and the non-linear power curve that we see as clock speeds are increased, the multiple-core solution will almost definitely use less power.
First of all, you assume that it is possible to make "one big core equal in processing power to the 8 cores". I don't think it is possible to do this (at least not with the x86 architecture using today's technology.)
But assuming such a chip exists, the answer depends on what kind of efficiency you're thinking of.
If you mean computational efficiency (meaning the most useful processing per clock-tick), then a single big core will do better. This is because single-threaded apps will be able to use the full power (whereas multiple threads are needed to take advantagte of multiple cores.) Also, the operating system can get rid of the overhead that is needed to keep software running on the multiple cores from stepping on each other.
If you mean energy efficiency (amount of processing per watt of electricity consumed), then it could go either way, depending on how the chips are made. But given today's manufacturing processes and the non-linear power curve that we see as clock speeds are increased, the multiple-core solution will almost definitely use less power.
sjo
Aug 11, 03:34 PM
Well only about 1.25bil out of the +6 actually have cell service and I'd suspect only about 300mil in Eurpoe use cell phones (according to internetworldstats.com estimates 291mil in Europe use the internet... I'd assume cell usage is similiar).
And factor in that the US, Canada and many of the other countries with CDMA service are amongst the most wealthy in the world. Those +150mil customers are nothing to sneeze at.
Well now you ignorant yankie ;) Firstly the mobile phone penetration in Europe is about 99% or maybe slighly more. You should really travel a bit to get some perspective.
And secondly, GSM has user base of over 1 billion while CDMA as you said has some 60m users. Which one you think would be more interesting market to cover for a new mobile phone manufacturer? And there is really no question of "we'll see which one wins" because GSM won a long long time ago, hands down.
And factor in that the US, Canada and many of the other countries with CDMA service are amongst the most wealthy in the world. Those +150mil customers are nothing to sneeze at.
Well now you ignorant yankie ;) Firstly the mobile phone penetration in Europe is about 99% or maybe slighly more. You should really travel a bit to get some perspective.
And secondly, GSM has user base of over 1 billion while CDMA as you said has some 60m users. Which one you think would be more interesting market to cover for a new mobile phone manufacturer? And there is really no question of "we'll see which one wins" because GSM won a long long time ago, hands down.
Machead III
Sep 19, 08:05 AM
Engadget have the situation nailed. (http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/19/so-where-the-hell-are-our-core-2-duo-macbooks/)
portishead
Apr 9, 02:06 AM
Professional Editor for about 10 years. I came up before the DV revolution, and before Final Cut even existed. Before Non linear editing even existed really - or at least was widely used. It's crazy how far the editing world has come when I look back.
I did my first non-linear editing on an Amiga video toaster. I also learned Media 100 & Premiere. I have used FCP on and off since version 1.0. I used Avid Professionally around 5 years, and now back on FCP for about 4 years. It's not really my choice, I use what my employer uses. Avid was great when I used it but the editing world is growing so fast. I didn't like the closed system, and the expensive hardware. I will say I was faster on an Avid than I probably ever will be in Final Cut. Maybe that's my own laziness, but whatever...
So here we are in 2011. It seems Premiere has come on strong and is doing good things. I will most likely never use it though. I really like Final Cut, but if Apple ever got out of the game, I'd go back to Avid. It is my opinion that Avid is better for narrative, but Final Cut is better for a more diverse set of projects. For what I do at my job, Final Cut works fine, and I prefer it over Avid.
People spend a lot of time arguing, but they are just editing systems. They all do essentially the same thing. Some edit software may have better features, or better compatibility with certain things, but software is always changing anyway.
I think Final Cut has been ahead of the game for most of the past 10 years. In the last year, maybe 2, I think it has lost ground to Premiere and Avid. It's normal. You can't be on top all of the time. I am hoping with this next release, it will put Final Cut back on top for the foreseeable future.
Edit software is getting very good. I think we are very close to hitting a sweet spot. I cannot speak for Avid or Premiere since I haven't used them in several years but for Final Cut some things need to improve. I think the biggest problem is quicktime itself. It's become bloated with all the focus on iTunes music, and film. Apple needs to do something about this. It also needs to be 64-bit and use processing/memory better. Also better integration with Video cards. Also RGB 444 doesn't work in Final Cut. Compressor is horrible and outdated. I like Motion just fine although I would prefer a few interface tweaks which I won't get into. I don't ever use Soundtrack because I think it's horrible, and I have the luxury of having an audio guy at work.
I think Final Cut is a pretty good program and if Apple puts in a little more work it can be great. Different people have different workflows and want different things out of their edit systems. It's pointless arguing about specific features.
I LOVE ProRes and it has absolutely saved editing for me. I love editing and I'm exciting for what the next version of Final Cut will bring. Sorry for the rant this should have been a blog post instead.
I did my first non-linear editing on an Amiga video toaster. I also learned Media 100 & Premiere. I have used FCP on and off since version 1.0. I used Avid Professionally around 5 years, and now back on FCP for about 4 years. It's not really my choice, I use what my employer uses. Avid was great when I used it but the editing world is growing so fast. I didn't like the closed system, and the expensive hardware. I will say I was faster on an Avid than I probably ever will be in Final Cut. Maybe that's my own laziness, but whatever...
So here we are in 2011. It seems Premiere has come on strong and is doing good things. I will most likely never use it though. I really like Final Cut, but if Apple ever got out of the game, I'd go back to Avid. It is my opinion that Avid is better for narrative, but Final Cut is better for a more diverse set of projects. For what I do at my job, Final Cut works fine, and I prefer it over Avid.
People spend a lot of time arguing, but they are just editing systems. They all do essentially the same thing. Some edit software may have better features, or better compatibility with certain things, but software is always changing anyway.
I think Final Cut has been ahead of the game for most of the past 10 years. In the last year, maybe 2, I think it has lost ground to Premiere and Avid. It's normal. You can't be on top all of the time. I am hoping with this next release, it will put Final Cut back on top for the foreseeable future.
Edit software is getting very good. I think we are very close to hitting a sweet spot. I cannot speak for Avid or Premiere since I haven't used them in several years but for Final Cut some things need to improve. I think the biggest problem is quicktime itself. It's become bloated with all the focus on iTunes music, and film. Apple needs to do something about this. It also needs to be 64-bit and use processing/memory better. Also better integration with Video cards. Also RGB 444 doesn't work in Final Cut. Compressor is horrible and outdated. I like Motion just fine although I would prefer a few interface tweaks which I won't get into. I don't ever use Soundtrack because I think it's horrible, and I have the luxury of having an audio guy at work.
I think Final Cut is a pretty good program and if Apple puts in a little more work it can be great. Different people have different workflows and want different things out of their edit systems. It's pointless arguing about specific features.
I LOVE ProRes and it has absolutely saved editing for me. I love editing and I'm exciting for what the next version of Final Cut will bring. Sorry for the rant this should have been a blog post instead.
shelterpaw
Aug 17, 01:05 AM
You're right. I'm extremely unimpressed that the fastest xeon only days old is actually slower mhz for mhz than a G5 that is pushing 4 year old technology. Really sad.
However it's bizarre that AE was actually faster under rosetta. I gotta think these tests were'nt very accurrate. Don't forget that these aps were recently ported to the Intel platform. we may see optimizations and speed improvements over time. Also, they only ran one test in FCP, they should have run many more.
However it's bizarre that AE was actually faster under rosetta. I gotta think these tests were'nt very accurrate. Don't forget that these aps were recently ported to the Intel platform. we may see optimizations and speed improvements over time. Also, they only ran one test in FCP, they should have run many more.
KnightWRX
Apr 20, 02:11 PM
Of course, had the case been deemed totally unfounded by Apple Legal and their bunch of advisors, it wouldn't have been brought to court at all.
At the same time, if there is any chance that the case has some merit, a company will sue for sure, if points 1 and 2 above are not considered to do more damage than good.
There is probably some merit to some of the claims, so are probably more ambitious and some are probably completely sure to get thrown out. The thing is, the more claims they throw in there the better they have a footing for eventual settlement negotiations.
Just like you never open with your lowest price, you never open with only the claims you are 100% sure are going to win. ;)
At the same time, if there is any chance that the case has some merit, a company will sue for sure, if points 1 and 2 above are not considered to do more damage than good.
There is probably some merit to some of the claims, so are probably more ambitious and some are probably completely sure to get thrown out. The thing is, the more claims they throw in there the better they have a footing for eventual settlement negotiations.
Just like you never open with your lowest price, you never open with only the claims you are 100% sure are going to win. ;)
srxtr
Mar 31, 03:54 PM
This wont end androids openness. It will make is so that there is more of a consistent experience amung all android devices.
We will still be able to install from "unknown sources" for example.
Relaz macrumors.. not as big as deal as you are making it.
Openness means it should not matter whether it's consistent or not.
If every android device out there was consistent with each other, that defies the definition of openness.
Being able to install whatever you want from "unknown sources" is not the "open" OS this article is referring to.
We will still be able to install from "unknown sources" for example.
Relaz macrumors.. not as big as deal as you are making it.
Openness means it should not matter whether it's consistent or not.
If every android device out there was consistent with each other, that defies the definition of openness.
Being able to install whatever you want from "unknown sources" is not the "open" OS this article is referring to.
greenstork
Jul 14, 04:14 PM
I'm salivating for a new desktop as I have been limping along with my dual 1GHz mirrored drive door (wind tunnel) for the past few years. I'll likely buy a middle to top end Mac Pro as soon as they are released and although I'd love a dual woodcrest, I'll be happy too with a single conroe.
On a related note (rant)...
I think Apple is shooting themselves in the foot not coming out with some sort of digital media center / DVR. Along with a computer and television, it's the one electronic appliance that I cannot live without. The playing field is so ripe too -- TiVo is just establishing itself with cable companies and moving out of satellite, cable company DVR's suck, there is no easy ability to rip a DVD to your computer and put it in a library, there is no easy to use set top box option to buy movies.
Think about DAPs when the iPod came out, it's the same landscape. Sure, there were digital audio players that all paled in comparison to the iPod. I think Apple has that same opportunity with a media center/DVR.
The problem, I presume, is that the MPAA & broadcast association would never let it happen. Apple will never be granted permissions to sell movies if they come up with a device to rip DVD's or record television.
One can always hope. I know Apple could make a device that absolutely blows away everything that's out there right now, and it seems short sighted to not develop a product that begins to merge computers and television, this merger is inevitable. So while everyone's going off about FW800 ports in front and the location of the power supply, I'm wondering where the TV tuner and CableCard slots are.
On a related note (rant)...
I think Apple is shooting themselves in the foot not coming out with some sort of digital media center / DVR. Along with a computer and television, it's the one electronic appliance that I cannot live without. The playing field is so ripe too -- TiVo is just establishing itself with cable companies and moving out of satellite, cable company DVR's suck, there is no easy ability to rip a DVD to your computer and put it in a library, there is no easy to use set top box option to buy movies.
Think about DAPs when the iPod came out, it's the same landscape. Sure, there were digital audio players that all paled in comparison to the iPod. I think Apple has that same opportunity with a media center/DVR.
The problem, I presume, is that the MPAA & broadcast association would never let it happen. Apple will never be granted permissions to sell movies if they come up with a device to rip DVD's or record television.
One can always hope. I know Apple could make a device that absolutely blows away everything that's out there right now, and it seems short sighted to not develop a product that begins to merge computers and television, this merger is inevitable. So while everyone's going off about FW800 ports in front and the location of the power supply, I'm wondering where the TV tuner and CableCard slots are.
BlizzardBomb
Jul 27, 03:02 PM
I can't say much about the name. I'm not the first to offer it. But nothing else comes to mind that seems to fit well.
But its like ATI simply naming one of their chips ATI Radeon with no additional naming (being something like X1800 etc.). Why not something like Mac Plus, Mac Extra, Mac Express... I could go on.
But its like ATI simply naming one of their chips ATI Radeon with no additional naming (being something like X1800 etc.). Why not something like Mac Plus, Mac Extra, Mac Express... I could go on.
Erasmus
Jul 21, 11:55 PM
So I read in this thread that Kentsfield and Clovertown ARE compatible with Conroe and Woodcrest sockets (respectively) (Cloverton or Clovertown?)
Hope for upgrading an iMac to Quad Core is kindled! At least if Apple releases Conroe iMacs.
BTW, In my opinion, one thing a person should never, ever say is some computer has too much power, and that it will never be needed. So when 128 core CPUs come out in ~10 years time, will we still be considering dual core CPUs as fast enough for our use?
I seem to remember that when the original DOS operating system was created, its RAM was limited. I can't remember exactly to how much, but it was decided that people would never use more than a few kilobytes of memory. Now we are arguing that Mac should provide no less than a gigabyte! Now we are moving to 64 bit processing, with its capability to address a few exobytes, or millions of Terabytes of storage, it seems impossible that we will ever need 128bit computing. But, no doubt, one day we will.
When we will be able to download our entire lives, and even conciousness into a computer, as is said to happen in about 40 years (very much looking forward to), I dare say it will take a lot of memory to do, and even more processing power to manage effectively, especially if we wanted to "live" inside computers, as we will no doubt want to do someday.
So as a conclusion to my most recent rant, Please, never tell me a computer is too powerfu, has too many cores, or has too much storage capacity. If it is there to be used, it will be used. It always is.
Hope for upgrading an iMac to Quad Core is kindled! At least if Apple releases Conroe iMacs.
BTW, In my opinion, one thing a person should never, ever say is some computer has too much power, and that it will never be needed. So when 128 core CPUs come out in ~10 years time, will we still be considering dual core CPUs as fast enough for our use?
I seem to remember that when the original DOS operating system was created, its RAM was limited. I can't remember exactly to how much, but it was decided that people would never use more than a few kilobytes of memory. Now we are arguing that Mac should provide no less than a gigabyte! Now we are moving to 64 bit processing, with its capability to address a few exobytes, or millions of Terabytes of storage, it seems impossible that we will ever need 128bit computing. But, no doubt, one day we will.
When we will be able to download our entire lives, and even conciousness into a computer, as is said to happen in about 40 years (very much looking forward to), I dare say it will take a lot of memory to do, and even more processing power to manage effectively, especially if we wanted to "live" inside computers, as we will no doubt want to do someday.
So as a conclusion to my most recent rant, Please, never tell me a computer is too powerfu, has too many cores, or has too much storage capacity. If it is there to be used, it will be used. It always is.
AppliedVisual
Oct 22, 03:14 PM
I heard Leo Laporte talking about this on his KFI podcast... exciting... one question... how many softwares take advantage of multi cores? I understand that the OS can deal with it for multi tasking, but how many programs multi thread?
DD
Unfortunately not many multithreaded apps - yet. For a long time most of the multi-threaded apps were just a select few pro level things. 3D/Visualization software, CAD, database systems, etc.. Those of us who had multiprocessor systems bought them because we had a specific software in mind or group of software applications that could take advantage of multiple processors. As current CPU manufacturing processes started hitting a wall right around the 3GHz mark, chip makers started to transition to multiple CPU cores to boost power - makes sense. Software developers have been lazy for years, just riding the wave of ever-increasing MHz. Now the multi-core CPUs are here and the software is behind as many applications need to have serious re-writes done in order to take advantage of multiple processors. Intel tried to get a jump on this with their HT (Hyper Threading) implementation that essentially simulated dual-cores on a CPU by way of two virtual CPUs. Software developers didn't exactly jump on this and warm up to it. But I also don't think the software industry truly believed that CPUs would go multi-core on a mass scale so fast... Intel and AMD both said they would, don't know why the software industry doubted. Intel and AMD are uncommonly good about telling the truth about upcoming products. Both will be shipping quad-core CPU offerings by year's end.
DD
Unfortunately not many multithreaded apps - yet. For a long time most of the multi-threaded apps were just a select few pro level things. 3D/Visualization software, CAD, database systems, etc.. Those of us who had multiprocessor systems bought them because we had a specific software in mind or group of software applications that could take advantage of multiple processors. As current CPU manufacturing processes started hitting a wall right around the 3GHz mark, chip makers started to transition to multiple CPU cores to boost power - makes sense. Software developers have been lazy for years, just riding the wave of ever-increasing MHz. Now the multi-core CPUs are here and the software is behind as many applications need to have serious re-writes done in order to take advantage of multiple processors. Intel tried to get a jump on this with their HT (Hyper Threading) implementation that essentially simulated dual-cores on a CPU by way of two virtual CPUs. Software developers didn't exactly jump on this and warm up to it. But I also don't think the software industry truly believed that CPUs would go multi-core on a mass scale so fast... Intel and AMD both said they would, don't know why the software industry doubted. Intel and AMD are uncommonly good about telling the truth about upcoming products. Both will be shipping quad-core CPU offerings by year's end.
Matthew Yohe
Apr 7, 10:23 PM
Quota? Are these guys idiots?
Best Buy isn't the only place to buy these... I've thought through the various marketing gimmicks, and really none apply here. Why would they do this...
Best Buy isn't the only place to buy these... I've thought through the various marketing gimmicks, and really none apply here. Why would they do this...
DrRadon
Mar 22, 01:11 PM
Blackberry playbook = The IPad 2 killer - you heard it here first.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Looking at these specs will be awsome while iPad users actualy have a ******** of Apps to actualy use their specs on. :rolleyes:
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Looking at these specs will be awsome while iPad users actualy have a ******** of Apps to actualy use their specs on. :rolleyes:
Silentwave
Jul 14, 06:22 PM
320 would be the standard. you could upgrade to a terabyte if there are still two HDD bays.
Heck you could have 1.5TB with the new Seagate 750GB drives!
Heck you could have 1.5TB with the new Seagate 750GB drives!
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 11, 03:42 PM
A good chunk of the remaining 19% is CDMA.
Ever heard of DoCoMo?
Ever heard of DoCoMo?
0 comments:
Post a Comment