lfc
May 3, 02:34 AM
First of all, this looks like this only works when you are in LaunchPad mode so there, it makes perfect sense. I truly doubt the press/hold/jiggle works in the Applications folder, where it would be very out-of-place.
Imagine that Apple did not put in the feature there in LaunchPad which is suppose to be iPad-like... people would come out of the woodwork to piss/moan about how Apple was lame to not unify the process with the press/hold/jiggle.
Secondly, this only works for Apps that have been downloaded from the App store,... this is probably implemented so that when you say YES, delete this, it will then give you an option to rate the App while simply deleting the App with a Command-Delete or a drag to the Trash would not invoke such a Rating option.
Thirdly, it's not like Apple is taking away the other options of trashing an App. Use the method that you're like and MYOB and STHU. Honestly.
50% of Mac buyers are new users so they're use to this from iPhones/iPads/iPods. Let them be comfortable. I've been on a Mac since 1995 but I realize that Apple needs to help switchers be comfortable. All the changes to Mac OS X that I've seen so far, I'm really looking forward. If you don't want 'em. Don't upgrade. Oh... and STHU.
Exactly. Completely agree except for the rating on delete thing. That was taken out of iOS since iOS4 so it's not likely to be in LaunchPad.
Imagine that Apple did not put in the feature there in LaunchPad which is suppose to be iPad-like... people would come out of the woodwork to piss/moan about how Apple was lame to not unify the process with the press/hold/jiggle.
Secondly, this only works for Apps that have been downloaded from the App store,... this is probably implemented so that when you say YES, delete this, it will then give you an option to rate the App while simply deleting the App with a Command-Delete or a drag to the Trash would not invoke such a Rating option.
Thirdly, it's not like Apple is taking away the other options of trashing an App. Use the method that you're like and MYOB and STHU. Honestly.
50% of Mac buyers are new users so they're use to this from iPhones/iPads/iPods. Let them be comfortable. I've been on a Mac since 1995 but I realize that Apple needs to help switchers be comfortable. All the changes to Mac OS X that I've seen so far, I'm really looking forward. If you don't want 'em. Don't upgrade. Oh... and STHU.
Exactly. Completely agree except for the rating on delete thing. That was taken out of iOS since iOS4 so it's not likely to be in LaunchPad.
Slix
May 2, 07:28 PM
Also forgot to say, isn't the Library folder hidden by default in Lion? For the standard user, why would you want to delete the files that you don't even know that are there?
rjohnstone
Apr 26, 02:15 PM
ding ding ding. I agree.
The store is called the App Store. You can't copy someones store name.
Yes you can... to a certain extent.
Two stores can be named the same if the name is generic in nature.
Apple didn't create the word "App Store". This has been proven in many threads about this very topic.
They popularized it and then went so far as to even give it generic meaning.
Steve did that himself. Now he's trying to lay claim to it after the fact.
Will he win... who knows.
But nothing is as black and white as many claim to believe it is.
Trademark law is complicated.
The store is called the App Store. You can't copy someones store name.
Yes you can... to a certain extent.
Two stores can be named the same if the name is generic in nature.
Apple didn't create the word "App Store". This has been proven in many threads about this very topic.
They popularized it and then went so far as to even give it generic meaning.
Steve did that himself. Now he's trying to lay claim to it after the fact.
Will he win... who knows.
But nothing is as black and white as many claim to believe it is.
Trademark law is complicated.
vvv
Nov 29, 09:46 AM
So. Microsoft’s mouse market share is so large that everyone is Logitech is peeing their pants? How about Microsoft’s total dominance of the Apple ][+ CPM card market?
Give me a break. Show me one area where Microsoft’s hardware has lead to a market share the size of iPod’s hold on MP3 players? I can’t think of a single one, can you?
They have been in the console biz for 1.2 generations, and their second generation console, a "moderate success", is looking like it will "win" this generation of console wars, I know I'm not alone in thinking that.
But I can think of a lot of software plays: Windows, Office, Visual Studio, Project/Visio. I can think of some moderate successes: Windows CE in embedded space, Xbox 360. As well as a lot of failures: Tablet PC, Pocket PC, Windows Mobile, UPMC, Windows Media Center, Plays For Sure, Xbox.
Their software sales are driven by getting in on the ground floor, windows for example, Office, and then trying to destroy all other comers (through various, often unscrupulous means), where as in the hardware market they play catch up, xbox, etc. I think we can all agree it's much easier to get in on the ground floor, than when everyone else is on floor 13.
I don't think MS is as worried about their mice as they are multimedia products, the xbox and the new zune brand are much more important than that, making the MS brand "nicer" more friendly etc. As more and more people want a computer in their living room, MS wants to be there to give it to them. Their mice are fairly well respected the last time I checked anyways.
See, unlike your narrow minded Microsoft fanboy-ism, I realize that the iPod dominance rests under three legs: iTunes, iTunes Music Store, and the iPod. Over the last five(!) years, Microsoft has used canon fodder to attack the latter two while it provided the first and the DRM for the second. Now the Zune is a direct attack, because two people at the top of Microsoft are jealous that after all these years QuickTime is still alive and well. They remember when they told Avi and Jobs to "knife the baby" and it’s really a thorn when they, the most profitable tech company in history, can’t back up that threat with action.
Fanboyism, well when the debate is lost, the loser resorts to slander, I believe socrates said that. Anyways, I'm not a ms fanboy, but I realise that they have tons of money to burn, and that is not going to change any time soon. They own a good portion of apple if I'm not wrong.... They have no reason to not want apple to succeed, nor do I, competition breeds excellence, as I said, if apple is affraid of competition, then it's time for some.
But until Microsoft wipes out Samsung and Creative, I think the burden of proof is on you. I pretty much destroyed your “Xbox is the shiznit” crap: it is, in no way, trending to dominate the market, and it won't even stop bleeding money until 2Q 2007. They’re just hoping Sony stumbles (which they are, but it looks like Nintendo is the primary recipient of Sony’s largess).
How did you destroy the xbox crap? They entered the market, and now with a second generation product are looking like they will have the most market share of all of the next gen consoles, going against a 3rd and 6-7th generation products. It sold more ps3's or wii's on their opening weekend. I own a wii btw, and probably will own a ps3 in a bit. Xbox 360 has sold about 8 million, so far, I believe. It's pretty much agreed upon that they will own the N.A. console market, it's the other markets which are in contention.
As for hoping Sony stumbles... Uh, the reason that sony looks like they are stumbling is because the ps3's online capability is being compared to XBL, that their console is being compared to the xbox, the fact that the ps3 can't output 1080i, wtf is that, and hey that may not be firmware fixable, they retracted that statement, etc etc etc. Go read any review of the PS3, they will mention things that are in direct comparison to the xbox. MS got it right this time, sony didn't. The only thing that is saving sony is their playstation brand name. Again, I'll own a ps3, but not for a while. I was REALLY excited about the ps3, and was a huge ps2 fan, but sony is pissing me off, and many, many other gamers as well. 600 dollars, comon, we all know that is crap, they loaded it with blueray and want us to pay for the pleasure of them shoving their format down our throats, perhaps we would like to play games, not watch your movies sony.
Do you think it is a coincidence that the partner that Microsoft tapped to launch the Zune (Toshiba) was the only major player with less that 2% of the market? And while we are on the topic. Why the hell is Microsoft introducing a hard drive player when the units that Apple is selling and having trouble stocking are flash-based?
Why did ms do that stuff, why are you asking me, I don't know. But maybe just maybe they don't care what apple is doing? Seems plausible to me, they got in on the console market by doing it completely different. Which I know, the 360 is a moderate success, sure, in japan sure.
[I made a tiny error. Xbox sold 1.6 million units its launch quarter. They sold .9 million units last quarter. I got those two quarters confused.]
ps3 has 250K units world wide so far, and most of those are on ebay. lol
Give me a break. Show me one area where Microsoft’s hardware has lead to a market share the size of iPod’s hold on MP3 players? I can’t think of a single one, can you?
They have been in the console biz for 1.2 generations, and their second generation console, a "moderate success", is looking like it will "win" this generation of console wars, I know I'm not alone in thinking that.
But I can think of a lot of software plays: Windows, Office, Visual Studio, Project/Visio. I can think of some moderate successes: Windows CE in embedded space, Xbox 360. As well as a lot of failures: Tablet PC, Pocket PC, Windows Mobile, UPMC, Windows Media Center, Plays For Sure, Xbox.
Their software sales are driven by getting in on the ground floor, windows for example, Office, and then trying to destroy all other comers (through various, often unscrupulous means), where as in the hardware market they play catch up, xbox, etc. I think we can all agree it's much easier to get in on the ground floor, than when everyone else is on floor 13.
I don't think MS is as worried about their mice as they are multimedia products, the xbox and the new zune brand are much more important than that, making the MS brand "nicer" more friendly etc. As more and more people want a computer in their living room, MS wants to be there to give it to them. Their mice are fairly well respected the last time I checked anyways.
See, unlike your narrow minded Microsoft fanboy-ism, I realize that the iPod dominance rests under three legs: iTunes, iTunes Music Store, and the iPod. Over the last five(!) years, Microsoft has used canon fodder to attack the latter two while it provided the first and the DRM for the second. Now the Zune is a direct attack, because two people at the top of Microsoft are jealous that after all these years QuickTime is still alive and well. They remember when they told Avi and Jobs to "knife the baby" and it’s really a thorn when they, the most profitable tech company in history, can’t back up that threat with action.
Fanboyism, well when the debate is lost, the loser resorts to slander, I believe socrates said that. Anyways, I'm not a ms fanboy, but I realise that they have tons of money to burn, and that is not going to change any time soon. They own a good portion of apple if I'm not wrong.... They have no reason to not want apple to succeed, nor do I, competition breeds excellence, as I said, if apple is affraid of competition, then it's time for some.
But until Microsoft wipes out Samsung and Creative, I think the burden of proof is on you. I pretty much destroyed your “Xbox is the shiznit” crap: it is, in no way, trending to dominate the market, and it won't even stop bleeding money until 2Q 2007. They’re just hoping Sony stumbles (which they are, but it looks like Nintendo is the primary recipient of Sony’s largess).
How did you destroy the xbox crap? They entered the market, and now with a second generation product are looking like they will have the most market share of all of the next gen consoles, going against a 3rd and 6-7th generation products. It sold more ps3's or wii's on their opening weekend. I own a wii btw, and probably will own a ps3 in a bit. Xbox 360 has sold about 8 million, so far, I believe. It's pretty much agreed upon that they will own the N.A. console market, it's the other markets which are in contention.
As for hoping Sony stumbles... Uh, the reason that sony looks like they are stumbling is because the ps3's online capability is being compared to XBL, that their console is being compared to the xbox, the fact that the ps3 can't output 1080i, wtf is that, and hey that may not be firmware fixable, they retracted that statement, etc etc etc. Go read any review of the PS3, they will mention things that are in direct comparison to the xbox. MS got it right this time, sony didn't. The only thing that is saving sony is their playstation brand name. Again, I'll own a ps3, but not for a while. I was REALLY excited about the ps3, and was a huge ps2 fan, but sony is pissing me off, and many, many other gamers as well. 600 dollars, comon, we all know that is crap, they loaded it with blueray and want us to pay for the pleasure of them shoving their format down our throats, perhaps we would like to play games, not watch your movies sony.
Do you think it is a coincidence that the partner that Microsoft tapped to launch the Zune (Toshiba) was the only major player with less that 2% of the market? And while we are on the topic. Why the hell is Microsoft introducing a hard drive player when the units that Apple is selling and having trouble stocking are flash-based?
Why did ms do that stuff, why are you asking me, I don't know. But maybe just maybe they don't care what apple is doing? Seems plausible to me, they got in on the console market by doing it completely different. Which I know, the 360 is a moderate success, sure, in japan sure.
[I made a tiny error. Xbox sold 1.6 million units its launch quarter. They sold .9 million units last quarter. I got those two quarters confused.]
ps3 has 250K units world wide so far, and most of those are on ebay. lol
BC2009
Apr 26, 01:11 PM
First the Verizon iPhone rumors come to fruition. Now comes the long-awaited White iPhone 4......
Now we can all start rumors about if and when "App Store" will become a trademark. Personally, I think Apple should get the trademark given precedents out there, but if they don't, I really don't care. After a decision is rendered in this case it will be old news in 48 hours and nobody will care.
What strikes me is how clear it is that Apple is leading the way and trying to fend off so many folks who are trying to mimic and dilute their brand or copy their every move. Everybody wants to ride the wave that is Apple's success.
Personally, I applaud Microsoft a bit here. Sure they have copied Mac OS X elements in Windows for years, but Windows Phone has its own unique user interface and Kinect is an extremely innovative accomplishment. Would be nice if more companies were innovating and making cool stuff for us to buy, rather than just trying to copy Apple. I'm so tired of Google's "let's make it close enough to iOS and claim it runs Flash and is 'open'" strategy and Samsung's "let's just make it look like an Apple device" strategy.
Now we can all start rumors about if and when "App Store" will become a trademark. Personally, I think Apple should get the trademark given precedents out there, but if they don't, I really don't care. After a decision is rendered in this case it will be old news in 48 hours and nobody will care.
What strikes me is how clear it is that Apple is leading the way and trying to fend off so many folks who are trying to mimic and dilute their brand or copy their every move. Everybody wants to ride the wave that is Apple's success.
Personally, I applaud Microsoft a bit here. Sure they have copied Mac OS X elements in Windows for years, but Windows Phone has its own unique user interface and Kinect is an extremely innovative accomplishment. Would be nice if more companies were innovating and making cool stuff for us to buy, rather than just trying to copy Apple. I'm so tired of Google's "let's make it close enough to iOS and claim it runs Flash and is 'open'" strategy and Samsung's "let's just make it look like an Apple device" strategy.
MattSepeta
May 2, 05:42 PM
Another iOS feature implemented in a desktop OS.
Fan-frickin-tastic :(
Fan-frickin-tastic :(
timerollson
Nov 26, 12:05 PM
Bought this today on a whim. I ****ing love it!:
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4131/5209638998_fe2eaf5b2c.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4089/5209659858_9e4b8ab4af.jpg
Took advantage of Amazon's DVD sales and bought these:
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51%2By8xib7UL._SL500_AA300_.jpg
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51Ak7iiEAlL._SL500_AA300_.jpghttp://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41EDIanxpWL._SL500_AA300_.jpghttp://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41DsibIifuL._SL500_AA300_.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4131/5209638998_fe2eaf5b2c.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4089/5209659858_9e4b8ab4af.jpg
Took advantage of Amazon's DVD sales and bought these:
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51%2By8xib7UL._SL500_AA300_.jpg
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51Ak7iiEAlL._SL500_AA300_.jpghttp://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41EDIanxpWL._SL500_AA300_.jpghttp://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41DsibIifuL._SL500_AA300_.jpg
Macky-Mac
Mar 19, 01:39 PM
.......I think this action is probably too late to bring about a collapse of the Gadaffi regime. It may well lead to an extended stalemate, with different parts of the country run by Gadaffi and the rebels.
It will probably drag on, and be messy.
yes, as you say this is probably too late to be a knock-out to Gadaffi.......and noting that icons of the international revolutionary left such as Castro, Ortega, Chavez et al were quick to support Gadaffi, it seems likely he'll get some support in rearming as necessary
It will probably drag on, and be messy.
yes, as you say this is probably too late to be a knock-out to Gadaffi.......and noting that icons of the international revolutionary left such as Castro, Ortega, Chavez et al were quick to support Gadaffi, it seems likely he'll get some support in rearming as necessary
picklescott
Jul 19, 12:20 AM
An article regarding this is now front page on Netscape's home page.
http://www.netscape.com/
http://www.netscape.com/
jtaylr77
Jan 1, 05:39 PM
Jobs receives a call during keynote and reaches into his pocket...
...audience errupts with joyful tears...
...pulls out iTunes compatible motorola phone....
...audience sighs....and cries....
....Steve gets another call 5 mintues later...
...pulls out iPhone
...geeks bumrush the stage and carry Steve off on their shoulders
...audience errupts with joyful tears...
...pulls out iTunes compatible motorola phone....
...audience sighs....and cries....
....Steve gets another call 5 mintues later...
...pulls out iPhone
...geeks bumrush the stage and carry Steve off on their shoulders
leftbanke7
Mar 19, 10:57 AM
People have been hollering for a cheaper Mac every since there has been Macintosh. You must realize that Apple, unlike most computer companies, is in the business of creating quality products. Were Apple to release a cheap Mac it would shatter Apple's reputation of making slick quality products that are a joy to own. If you want a cheap pile of crap computer that you'll have to throw away in a year, go buy Dell of whatever. That's not Apple's target market.
I don't necessarity agree with that one. While bargain Wintel PCs can be huge piles of garbage, I think Apple could successfully market a bargain desktop that wouldn't be junk in a year. Most people would agree that an eMac is a quality machine (minus the lack of base RAM issue). You take the low end model, subtract the cost for the monitor and you have a computer that is sitting in the $500.00 - $600.00 range. Many people already have monitors and if not, you can find a decent one for relatively low cost. Apple is very much capable of putting those components in a sleek case, giving it a decent name and perhaps the abilty to be expanable and there you go. The low cost Mac that won't be your foot stool next year.
Would this take some sales from the PowerMacs? Very little if any at all. Most people who buy PowerMacs are people who need the power. I don't think a whole lot of people buy a PowerMac and use it only for word processing, internet/e-mail and iTunes. The people who use Macs for the above reasons are buying the iMacs and eMacs. The "headless iMac/eMac" would just be one more quality option in the lower-end/consumer priced area.
And in my humble opinion, I think a large reason that many bargain PCs only last a year is because Intel has brainwashed society into believing the Megahertz Myth and Bargain PC dealers go along with it as it generates new sales. I don't know how many times I had to explain this to my PC friends who said they'd never own a Mac b/c they were too slow.
I don't necessarity agree with that one. While bargain Wintel PCs can be huge piles of garbage, I think Apple could successfully market a bargain desktop that wouldn't be junk in a year. Most people would agree that an eMac is a quality machine (minus the lack of base RAM issue). You take the low end model, subtract the cost for the monitor and you have a computer that is sitting in the $500.00 - $600.00 range. Many people already have monitors and if not, you can find a decent one for relatively low cost. Apple is very much capable of putting those components in a sleek case, giving it a decent name and perhaps the abilty to be expanable and there you go. The low cost Mac that won't be your foot stool next year.
Would this take some sales from the PowerMacs? Very little if any at all. Most people who buy PowerMacs are people who need the power. I don't think a whole lot of people buy a PowerMac and use it only for word processing, internet/e-mail and iTunes. The people who use Macs for the above reasons are buying the iMacs and eMacs. The "headless iMac/eMac" would just be one more quality option in the lower-end/consumer priced area.
And in my humble opinion, I think a large reason that many bargain PCs only last a year is because Intel has brainwashed society into believing the Megahertz Myth and Bargain PC dealers go along with it as it generates new sales. I don't know how many times I had to explain this to my PC friends who said they'd never own a Mac b/c they were too slow.
cube
Mar 24, 05:00 PM
OpenGL is much more like Direct3D. A part of DirectX. DirectX is just a collection of multiple API's. DirectSound is like OpenAL for example.
You seem to think that DirectX 10.1 cards can't support OpenCL. Well newsflash, they can. DirectX is irrelevant in this conversation not only because it has nothing to do with Mac OS X but because it also has nothing to do with what you're associating it with. The equivalent to OpenCL is DirectCompute.
I am talking about graphics capabilities now.
You seem to think that DirectX 10.1 cards can't support OpenCL. Well newsflash, they can. DirectX is irrelevant in this conversation not only because it has nothing to do with Mac OS X but because it also has nothing to do with what you're associating it with. The equivalent to OpenCL is DirectCompute.
I am talking about graphics capabilities now.
ltgator333
Mar 28, 11:54 PM
wow... this lack of faith in Apple is suprising really. This company has been sitting about where it's at right now for the last 10 years or so, and all the sudden they're just gonna die? I think the reasons why this will not happen have been beaten to death, so I spair you repeating them.
The whole thing with Adobe/M$ pulling products is ridiculous as well. This has happened a million times, Apple makes an app and a third party realizes they can't compete with this new app and either lowers the amount of effort they put into their app or just pull the plug on it. Anyone remember MacAmp? Toast? The examples are readily available.
As for cheap Macs, hell yeah I'd like to see some. The whole reason you see a PC listed under the computers I personally own is because it was cheaper for me to build my own dual proc PC workstation that buy a Mac- other than a non-upgradeable computer that also to me isn't all that good looking, the iMac or eMac. The problem is Apple's business model works, and even though Apple makes computers, being they are a business, making money is still the #1 thing, if they're making $ there's no reason to change anything real drasticly.
I would like to see Apple come out with a headless desktop, but not have it be a direct replacement for iMac or eMac, an interim of upgradeability between the PMac line (which as for how desktop machines go, this thing is very upgrade freindly on a whole, the PMac G4's especially) and the iMac with virtually none. A machine that has a AGP slot, processor can be removed/upgraded, one HD and one optical drive bay and maybe 1 or 2 PCI-X slots would be a perfect fit upgradeability wise between they're high and low end. I beleive that if they were to do this I would price it similarly to the iMac, basicly a trade-off monitor for upgrades.. put the right spin on it and I think there's a market for a machine like this.
The whole thing with Adobe/M$ pulling products is ridiculous as well. This has happened a million times, Apple makes an app and a third party realizes they can't compete with this new app and either lowers the amount of effort they put into their app or just pull the plug on it. Anyone remember MacAmp? Toast? The examples are readily available.
As for cheap Macs, hell yeah I'd like to see some. The whole reason you see a PC listed under the computers I personally own is because it was cheaper for me to build my own dual proc PC workstation that buy a Mac- other than a non-upgradeable computer that also to me isn't all that good looking, the iMac or eMac. The problem is Apple's business model works, and even though Apple makes computers, being they are a business, making money is still the #1 thing, if they're making $ there's no reason to change anything real drasticly.
I would like to see Apple come out with a headless desktop, but not have it be a direct replacement for iMac or eMac, an interim of upgradeability between the PMac line (which as for how desktop machines go, this thing is very upgrade freindly on a whole, the PMac G4's especially) and the iMac with virtually none. A machine that has a AGP slot, processor can be removed/upgraded, one HD and one optical drive bay and maybe 1 or 2 PCI-X slots would be a perfect fit upgradeability wise between they're high and low end. I beleive that if they were to do this I would price it similarly to the iMac, basicly a trade-off monitor for upgrades.. put the right spin on it and I think there's a market for a machine like this.
Gatesbasher
Apr 3, 12:56 PM
wow an ipad 2 being used in the dark and it doesnt leak light! where can i buy one?;)
LOL! "Light bleed" was yesterday's talking point! Better check your instructions for this morning and get with the program.
LOL! "Light bleed" was yesterday's talking point! Better check your instructions for this morning and get with the program.
EGT
Oct 23, 07:42 AM
Please let this bring something. I'm getting sick of the constantly repetitive threads.
They're never going away. After this release, there'll be posts about the next processor/upgrade. "Should I buy or should I wait!!?" :p
Anyway, Macbook Pro updates tomorrow, woohoo. :cool:
They're never going away. After this release, there'll be posts about the next processor/upgrade. "Should I buy or should I wait!!?" :p
Anyway, Macbook Pro updates tomorrow, woohoo. :cool:
wheezy
Nov 15, 06:37 PM
That really depends on the program, on how "parallelizable" the application is.
The simplest way to think of it is like this: Let's say you have a program that first has to calculate A. Then, when it's done that, it uses the result of A to calculate B. Then, when it's done that, uses the result of B to calculate C, then C to D, and so on. That's a *serial* problem there. The calculation of B can't begin until A is done, so it doesn't matter how many processors you have running, all computation is held up on one spot.
On the other hand, let's say you have an application that needs to calculate A, B, C and D, but those four values are not dependent on each other at all. In that case, you can use four processors at the same time, to calculate all four values at the same time.
Think of it like baking a cake. You can't start putting on the icing until the cake is done baking. And you can't start baking the cake until the ingredients are all mixed together. But you can have people simultaneously getting out and measuring the ingredients.
So that problem is partially parallelizable, but the majority of its workload is a serial process.
Some software applications, just by their very nature, will never be able to do anything useful with multiple processors.
What a very lovely analogy. Thank you.
For me... 8 cores for the bragging rights only... so I guess I won't get one anytime soon. I'm sure 4 would suit me fine though, I need to upgrade my 1Ghz G4!!!
The simplest way to think of it is like this: Let's say you have a program that first has to calculate A. Then, when it's done that, it uses the result of A to calculate B. Then, when it's done that, uses the result of B to calculate C, then C to D, and so on. That's a *serial* problem there. The calculation of B can't begin until A is done, so it doesn't matter how many processors you have running, all computation is held up on one spot.
On the other hand, let's say you have an application that needs to calculate A, B, C and D, but those four values are not dependent on each other at all. In that case, you can use four processors at the same time, to calculate all four values at the same time.
Think of it like baking a cake. You can't start putting on the icing until the cake is done baking. And you can't start baking the cake until the ingredients are all mixed together. But you can have people simultaneously getting out and measuring the ingredients.
So that problem is partially parallelizable, but the majority of its workload is a serial process.
Some software applications, just by their very nature, will never be able to do anything useful with multiple processors.
What a very lovely analogy. Thank you.
For me... 8 cores for the bragging rights only... so I guess I won't get one anytime soon. I'm sure 4 would suit me fine though, I need to upgrade my 1Ghz G4!!!
sunfast
Aug 24, 06:23 PM
One day I'll buy a mini - they look so sweet. And with a C2D they'll go sweet too!
iJawn108
Aug 7, 03:51 AM
*hopes for 802.11n airports!*;)
bluebomberman
Nov 29, 01:38 PM
Where else can they go? The brain, I guess?
VPrime
Jan 5, 10:21 PM
Sounds good then, but keep in mind the sheer downtime you will have, even if you do the repairs yourself.
FTR my E36 was a complete cream puff, one owner, full service records and regular maintenance--and it was the biggest piece of crap I ever had. I unloaded it needing $4500 worth of work, on top of the massive piles of money I had to throw into it over my four years.
Good luck, but you have been warned.;)
heh down time is nothing. My last toy was down for 2 years ;)
FTR my E36 was a complete cream puff, one owner, full service records and regular maintenance--and it was the biggest piece of crap I ever had. I unloaded it needing $4500 worth of work, on top of the massive piles of money I had to throw into it over my four years.
Good luck, but you have been warned.;)
heh down time is nothing. My last toy was down for 2 years ;)
KnightWRX
Apr 10, 03:10 PM
Harley-Davidson doesn't make automatics. I never learned to drive automatic anyhow, I wouldn't have the first clue what to do in one of them. What does P R N D 2 1 even mean ?
daneoni
Jan 5, 06:10 AM
I dont get why people are saying we will get updates to MacBook Pros/iMacs, what will they be updated with?. The Core 2 Duo chips are still the newest chips from intel. Santa Rosa is yet to debut.
I dont see any updates to them im afraid at MWSF. Maybe we'll see the ultrathin MBP but i highly doubt it...
I dont see any updates to them im afraid at MWSF. Maybe we'll see the ultrathin MBP but i highly doubt it...
viggin
Apr 12, 11:43 PM
Here's the deal...(and I just realized that the way this is written might make it look like I have earlier posts in this thread. I don't. I'm jumping in right here.)
The reason that I think pros fear "dumbed down" isn't so much because they want something that is difficult to use, but rather because sometimes making difficult things easy makes things that were previously easy difficult, or impossible.
So just this week I had to help somebody with an iMovie problem. There was a part where they had 3 overlapping audio tracks. Movie audio, voiceover, and music. Try as they might, and try as I might, we could not get the movie audio to actually go away -- even though we had set it's volume level to "0%."
Oh...and did I mention that they're on a white iBook? Fine machine, but a little slow. So I copy their iMovie stuff onto an external drive so we can look at it on my Core i7 iMac instead.
Except iMovie on my iMac won't recognize the project on an external drive. I know that supposedly iMovie is supposed to...but it won't work. So I have to copy the files onto my iMac, and then iMovie magically sees them...because they're in the spot that iMovie wants files to be in.
Well the only way to get the clips to work right that I could come up with, was to actually run all their clips through Quicktime 7 and just delete the audio track off them. Voila! No audio track for iMovie to play, when it's not supposed to.
My point is that I spent 30 minutes dinking around with the "Easy" iMovie to do what would have taken me 10 seconds to do in Final Cut. (Select audio. Delete.)
And that's pretty much my experience every time I get lulled into trying to run a quick project through iMovie. Everything seems to be going well, I'm even sort of enjoying myself (Don't tell anyone), then I hit a snag or a wall...bump up into some limitation of iMovie that there isn't a very good work-around to...and wish that I'd just used Final Cut to begin with.
So while I agree that there are those who want pro tools to be difficult simply for the sake of having a high barrier of entry...
...I also think there are a ton of us that are just afraid that the cost of these new and handy features will be that some of the things we rely on doing, especially things that are a little "hackish," will become difficult/impossible. In the name of simplicity.
It's like my iPhone. I love it to pieces, and I don't plan to have any other type of phone any time soon, but sometimes I wish for a few more advanced features...features that are available (Usually through third-party tools) on Android. Instead I'm stuck hoping and wishing and praying that Apple will implement them.
The reason that I think pros fear "dumbed down" isn't so much because they want something that is difficult to use, but rather because sometimes making difficult things easy makes things that were previously easy difficult, or impossible.
So just this week I had to help somebody with an iMovie problem. There was a part where they had 3 overlapping audio tracks. Movie audio, voiceover, and music. Try as they might, and try as I might, we could not get the movie audio to actually go away -- even though we had set it's volume level to "0%."
Oh...and did I mention that they're on a white iBook? Fine machine, but a little slow. So I copy their iMovie stuff onto an external drive so we can look at it on my Core i7 iMac instead.
Except iMovie on my iMac won't recognize the project on an external drive. I know that supposedly iMovie is supposed to...but it won't work. So I have to copy the files onto my iMac, and then iMovie magically sees them...because they're in the spot that iMovie wants files to be in.
Well the only way to get the clips to work right that I could come up with, was to actually run all their clips through Quicktime 7 and just delete the audio track off them. Voila! No audio track for iMovie to play, when it's not supposed to.
My point is that I spent 30 minutes dinking around with the "Easy" iMovie to do what would have taken me 10 seconds to do in Final Cut. (Select audio. Delete.)
And that's pretty much my experience every time I get lulled into trying to run a quick project through iMovie. Everything seems to be going well, I'm even sort of enjoying myself (Don't tell anyone), then I hit a snag or a wall...bump up into some limitation of iMovie that there isn't a very good work-around to...and wish that I'd just used Final Cut to begin with.
So while I agree that there are those who want pro tools to be difficult simply for the sake of having a high barrier of entry...
...I also think there are a ton of us that are just afraid that the cost of these new and handy features will be that some of the things we rely on doing, especially things that are a little "hackish," will become difficult/impossible. In the name of simplicity.
It's like my iPhone. I love it to pieces, and I don't plan to have any other type of phone any time soon, but sometimes I wish for a few more advanced features...features that are available (Usually through third-party tools) on Android. Instead I'm stuck hoping and wishing and praying that Apple will implement them.
Danksi
Dec 31, 12:54 AM
What do I see the iTV for? Streaming media, a glorified IP TV box, an easier way to bring the iPod to the living room. I really don't see it doing anything else. I'm hoping that I'm wrong.
This is how iTV was originally presented, at least from what I recall, accessing your iTunes/iPhoto content on a TV. There's a hint there may be more, but I don't think so.
My interest is the convenience of not having to plug my iBook into the TV and then mount the media drive inside the MacPro located upstairs, to watch some family movies or something I've downloaded. This certainly isn't convenient for the rest of the family.
I've been shoving everything Music/Video related into iTunes, which has made access loads easier/quicker from both the iBook and my wife's Windows XP laptop (using iTunes) - but it's still not on the TV, without cables etc (and no remote)
Unfortunately I've also noticed that not all movies/video-podcasts are shared properly, some are fixed by re-importing, some by re-tagging with 'lostify', but others are stubborn - this 'bug' needs fixing!
This is how iTV was originally presented, at least from what I recall, accessing your iTunes/iPhoto content on a TV. There's a hint there may be more, but I don't think so.
My interest is the convenience of not having to plug my iBook into the TV and then mount the media drive inside the MacPro located upstairs, to watch some family movies or something I've downloaded. This certainly isn't convenient for the rest of the family.
I've been shoving everything Music/Video related into iTunes, which has made access loads easier/quicker from both the iBook and my wife's Windows XP laptop (using iTunes) - but it's still not on the TV, without cables etc (and no remote)
Unfortunately I've also noticed that not all movies/video-podcasts are shared properly, some are fixed by re-importing, some by re-tagging with 'lostify', but others are stubborn - this 'bug' needs fixing!
No comments:
Post a Comment