CalBoy
Mar 21, 12:32 AM
There are homeopathic apps in the AppStore. Those won't work any better than this 'pray the gay away' app, but they still are allowed in the store.
Then I think Apple might be exposed to the same potential liabilities for homeopathic remedies too. Mind you I don't think (or know definitely) anyone has successfully maintained that companies that knowingly permit the propagation of dangerous materials should be held liable. I do, however, think that it would be a fair standard to apply if the company is going to trumpet it's own "protective" prowess.
Apple is being inconsistent with its policies on the App Store. Either any offensive or potentially dangerous app should be barred, or none of them should be. By trying to play the part of the micromanager, Apple is revealing its own limitations.
No-one could possibly be offended by homeopathy.
I disagree. The level of offense might be lower than this gay-be-gone app, but I'm sure many physicians, nurses, and skeptics are not too fond of junk science being spread.
Moreover, it isn't just about what offends; that is merely a measuring stick to figure out what Apple's priorities are. I'm sure there is an app to offend everyone in the app store (does the Auduban Society approve of Angry Birds?). The question is which of these apps represents a real problem for users? As much as I disagree with Jobs about porn in the app store, there is at least some minimal possibility of utility in leaving porn out of the app store in that parents will be better able to decide what their kids download (not that there aren't other means of doing so, or that the kids haven't already seen porn). Sure it isn't a fantastic reason, but at least there's plausibility.
I think something similar can be said for this gay-be-gone app or a homeopathic app. In these situations the dangers from app use are not only higher, but they also run contrary to what medical professionals the world over recommend. If Apple is so willing to ban something for its plausible dangers, why not ban something for its very real dangers?
I think that should be a more important metric over offense. An app that is offensive but which doesn't hurt anyone either directly on indirectly should be scrutinized much less than one that does. In this light, it becomes more clear that what Apple really wanted to do all along was keep porn out of the App Store. Not because it's offensive or dangerous, but because it would make their devices easier to sell even in the most conservative of markets.
Then I think Apple might be exposed to the same potential liabilities for homeopathic remedies too. Mind you I don't think (or know definitely) anyone has successfully maintained that companies that knowingly permit the propagation of dangerous materials should be held liable. I do, however, think that it would be a fair standard to apply if the company is going to trumpet it's own "protective" prowess.
Apple is being inconsistent with its policies on the App Store. Either any offensive or potentially dangerous app should be barred, or none of them should be. By trying to play the part of the micromanager, Apple is revealing its own limitations.
No-one could possibly be offended by homeopathy.
I disagree. The level of offense might be lower than this gay-be-gone app, but I'm sure many physicians, nurses, and skeptics are not too fond of junk science being spread.
Moreover, it isn't just about what offends; that is merely a measuring stick to figure out what Apple's priorities are. I'm sure there is an app to offend everyone in the app store (does the Auduban Society approve of Angry Birds?). The question is which of these apps represents a real problem for users? As much as I disagree with Jobs about porn in the app store, there is at least some minimal possibility of utility in leaving porn out of the app store in that parents will be better able to decide what their kids download (not that there aren't other means of doing so, or that the kids haven't already seen porn). Sure it isn't a fantastic reason, but at least there's plausibility.
I think something similar can be said for this gay-be-gone app or a homeopathic app. In these situations the dangers from app use are not only higher, but they also run contrary to what medical professionals the world over recommend. If Apple is so willing to ban something for its plausible dangers, why not ban something for its very real dangers?
I think that should be a more important metric over offense. An app that is offensive but which doesn't hurt anyone either directly on indirectly should be scrutinized much less than one that does. In this light, it becomes more clear that what Apple really wanted to do all along was keep porn out of the App Store. Not because it's offensive or dangerous, but because it would make their devices easier to sell even in the most conservative of markets.
Tonsko
Jan 7, 10:29 AM
I'm hanging onto my MkIV (daily driver) for now - in the vain hope that it will eventually start to go up in value. What's your read on that? What makes me think that is that they will be a future classic, and that there were only 2000-odd brought into the UK in the first place. I could just be pissing in the wind, however. :D
Having said that, the fuel cost is a sting. The g/f has also decided she wants to be driven to the church in it on our wedding day. Haha!
Having said that, the fuel cost is a sting. The g/f has also decided she wants to be driven to the church in it on our wedding day. Haha!
JRM PowerPod
Aug 7, 04:42 AM
Not too brag or anything :D but it works out great for us in UK. Get in from work 5.30pm / open a beer / macrumors / keynote 6pm / tears of joy / rob bank 9pm / buy mac pro :D
Yeah, but you have to live in the UK. It all works out
Yeah, but you have to live in the UK. It all works out
Alan-in-NC
Mar 23, 08:03 PM
I cracked open my 5th gen 80GB last year and replaced it with a 220GB kit from Apricorn, so I'm not sure why this drive has been described as "new".
Regardless, like many people here, my library is huge (over 12K songs, plus videos, podcasts, etc), so a flash-based iPod wasn't a solution for me. I'm glad they'll keep the Classic going for awhile longer.
Regardless, like many people here, my library is huge (over 12K songs, plus videos, podcasts, etc), so a flash-based iPod wasn't a solution for me. I'm glad they'll keep the Classic going for awhile longer.
goobot
Apr 2, 09:13 PM
so basically they are telling us the only difference is that it is faster lighter and thinner and we should buy a new one for that. O ya we got a back camera that is useless to 99% of us and a front for facetime which again almost no one uses.
Frobozz
Mar 25, 09:40 AM
Nop... consider.
2x CPUs 130W rated. So thats 260W, right there. However, no CPU consumes the rated, so it's give or take ~260W.
Each 5770 is ~108W, given two, that's ~216 W. Right off the bat we have ~476 W being consumed. Not bad; however let's look at the side where its not a dual 5770 setup.
The PSU on the Mac Pro is rated for 980 W of power, but for simplicity sake let's say 1 kW. Now, factor in the Super drive, Ethernet, Airport, at least 1 HDD and peripheral docks/cards you are looking at ~100 W. Take into account a 20 W per 1GB of memory (assume 6GB) and you've got ~120 W more. So far ~ 220 W more.
Now we have ~480 W [~260W + ~220W]consumption leaving only ~520 W left for a GPU. Currently, the HD 6970 requires 2x 8-pin connectors to provide 150 W per pin. That's 300W right off. So we are left with ~220 W in the system. Now, factor in that PCIe slot power draw at 75 W and we've got a ~145 W left over. ~145 W is cutting it too close and something will yield (yes I do realize 145 W is a lot more, but read on). Now, the sad part, we were assuming 1kW PSU which is not the case; it's 980 W meaning there will be less power, ~125 W. Now, also take into consideration no PSU is 100% efficient, hence there will be greater power outlet draw and the PSU will be operating at high voltage/amps and its life span will decrease dramatically over very high usage.
In other words the current PSU may come up short. Add to that the fact that all current shipping and past model Mac Pros don't have extra dual 8-pin connectors. They have dual 6-pins. There is an adapter to make a 6-pin into an 8-pin, but it is risky at best, big no-no.
So as you can see an HD 6970 would be barely supported on current models. Future models? Perhaps yes assuming Apple bumps to 1.1kW or 1.2kW PSU.
Take into account this was calculated assuming 6GB of memory and 1 HDD, anymore RAM (20 W/1GB) or HDDs (10W/disc) and the consumption will go up. Also, assuming nothing is hooked up to peripheral ports; like a small external drive that draws 5-10 W.
I have an 850 watt PSU in my gaming rig with a 4870x2 and custom coolers all around on the CPU, GPU, and case. I think your calculations are pretty close to correct if you wanted to run everything in the case at once. But that's not typical to run everything at max all at once. I suppose Apple might not want to get in the business of telling people it's okay to buy this honking huge GPU as long as you're not running a lot of extra hard drives and extra PCI-E cards.
But, for people looking to simply drop in a fast GPU and not have a lot of extra bells and whistles (read: a gaming rig), they would be fine with 850 watts or so, even with a 6970. Or at least damn close.
The tricky part with GPU's is that the high end units commonly exceed rated specifications at max load, so these calculations are tricky. And your point about running too close to your max is also a good one. It's fair to say that when you add up all your max dissipation, add 20% or so, and that's the wattage your PSU needs.
2x CPUs 130W rated. So thats 260W, right there. However, no CPU consumes the rated, so it's give or take ~260W.
Each 5770 is ~108W, given two, that's ~216 W. Right off the bat we have ~476 W being consumed. Not bad; however let's look at the side where its not a dual 5770 setup.
The PSU on the Mac Pro is rated for 980 W of power, but for simplicity sake let's say 1 kW. Now, factor in the Super drive, Ethernet, Airport, at least 1 HDD and peripheral docks/cards you are looking at ~100 W. Take into account a 20 W per 1GB of memory (assume 6GB) and you've got ~120 W more. So far ~ 220 W more.
Now we have ~480 W [~260W + ~220W]consumption leaving only ~520 W left for a GPU. Currently, the HD 6970 requires 2x 8-pin connectors to provide 150 W per pin. That's 300W right off. So we are left with ~220 W in the system. Now, factor in that PCIe slot power draw at 75 W and we've got a ~145 W left over. ~145 W is cutting it too close and something will yield (yes I do realize 145 W is a lot more, but read on). Now, the sad part, we were assuming 1kW PSU which is not the case; it's 980 W meaning there will be less power, ~125 W. Now, also take into consideration no PSU is 100% efficient, hence there will be greater power outlet draw and the PSU will be operating at high voltage/amps and its life span will decrease dramatically over very high usage.
In other words the current PSU may come up short. Add to that the fact that all current shipping and past model Mac Pros don't have extra dual 8-pin connectors. They have dual 6-pins. There is an adapter to make a 6-pin into an 8-pin, but it is risky at best, big no-no.
So as you can see an HD 6970 would be barely supported on current models. Future models? Perhaps yes assuming Apple bumps to 1.1kW or 1.2kW PSU.
Take into account this was calculated assuming 6GB of memory and 1 HDD, anymore RAM (20 W/1GB) or HDDs (10W/disc) and the consumption will go up. Also, assuming nothing is hooked up to peripheral ports; like a small external drive that draws 5-10 W.
I have an 850 watt PSU in my gaming rig with a 4870x2 and custom coolers all around on the CPU, GPU, and case. I think your calculations are pretty close to correct if you wanted to run everything in the case at once. But that's not typical to run everything at max all at once. I suppose Apple might not want to get in the business of telling people it's okay to buy this honking huge GPU as long as you're not running a lot of extra hard drives and extra PCI-E cards.
But, for people looking to simply drop in a fast GPU and not have a lot of extra bells and whistles (read: a gaming rig), they would be fine with 850 watts or so, even with a 6970. Or at least damn close.
The tricky part with GPU's is that the high end units commonly exceed rated specifications at max load, so these calculations are tricky. And your point about running too close to your max is also a good one. It's fair to say that when you add up all your max dissipation, add 20% or so, and that's the wattage your PSU needs.
danielwsmithee
Nov 27, 03:28 PM
If Apple wasn't satisfied with the number of units they were moving, and had a markup far above their (real) competitors, I would think Apple would lower it's prices, don't you? That would be the only way to make money if they weren't actually selling the monitors.Exactly that is why Apple needs a refresh to the prices. We both see eye-to-eye on the quality of their product and it's superiority. I'm just stating that their prices are stale and need a refresh. Something on the order of $499 (20"), $899 (23"), and $1699 (30").
prady16
Oct 23, 08:12 AM
I hope to have it order Tuesday and delivered by the end of the week?
Any chance?
I highly doubt it!
Any chance?
I highly doubt it!
Fubar1977
Apr 17, 10:46 AM
The German and Japanese stuff seems to be the best from a quality point of view.
My Mitsubishi had a really nice old-school auto box in it.
My Mitsubishi had a really nice old-school auto box in it.
Mobster Sauce
Apr 2, 07:08 PM
Nicely done.
twoodcc
Mar 1, 12:45 PM
congrats to SciFrog for 5 million points for MacRumors!
IbisDoc
Mar 25, 06:03 PM
http://itunes.apple.com/ca/app/dead-space/id396018321?mt=8
http://itunes.apple.com/ca/app/dead-space-for-ipad/id396019894?mt=8
http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/ultimate-mortal-kombat-3/id408070814?mt=8
http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/infinity-blade/id387428400?mt=8&v0=WWW-NAUS-ITSTOP100&ign-mpt=uo%3D2
http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/contract-killer/id406351386?mt=8
http://itunes.apple.com/ca/app/hunters-episode-one-hd/id415284093?mt=8
I could go one, but the list would be too long.
So what's it like being stuck in two years ago? Is the Palm Pre still a hot item? LOL
I was referring to touchscreen gaming on a BIGSCREEN, separate from the actual touchscreen. You know, the actual topic being discussed in this thread. In what way are examples of touchscreen games made for the actual touchscreen relevant here? Sorry it wasn't clear for you.
http://itunes.apple.com/ca/app/dead-space-for-ipad/id396019894?mt=8
http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/ultimate-mortal-kombat-3/id408070814?mt=8
http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/infinity-blade/id387428400?mt=8&v0=WWW-NAUS-ITSTOP100&ign-mpt=uo%3D2
http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/contract-killer/id406351386?mt=8
http://itunes.apple.com/ca/app/hunters-episode-one-hd/id415284093?mt=8
I could go one, but the list would be too long.
So what's it like being stuck in two years ago? Is the Palm Pre still a hot item? LOL
I was referring to touchscreen gaming on a BIGSCREEN, separate from the actual touchscreen. You know, the actual topic being discussed in this thread. In what way are examples of touchscreen games made for the actual touchscreen relevant here? Sorry it wasn't clear for you.
RITZFit
Apr 17, 12:01 AM
Do you have to double clutch or can you float based on the Tach and Speedometer?
Naa, the tranny's syncros eliminate the need for double clutching. Technically you can float gears (only if you're quick enough to catch that quick window of time after you lift off the throttle) but I don't recommend it (but hell, if you can rent a cheap stick car for the day I guess you could try it out :D )
Naa, the tranny's syncros eliminate the need for double clutching. Technically you can float gears (only if you're quick enough to catch that quick window of time after you lift off the throttle) but I don't recommend it (but hell, if you can rent a cheap stick car for the day I guess you could try it out :D )
kepner
Mar 31, 01:30 AM
Are you able to download System Voices in DP2?
No, unfortunately.
No, unfortunately.
digitaldean
Feb 26, 10:54 PM
I currently have a 4.7L V8 Dodge Dakota. I'd buy a diesel version of it in a heartbeat. I could still get the power/hauling ability needed but have the mileage to justify having the pickup.
But now with the possibility of having $5/gal gas looming, the 18 HWY MPG may force my hand.
Had the truck for over 5 years, but it may get too cost prohibitive to keep.
But now with the possibility of having $5/gal gas looming, the 18 HWY MPG may force my hand.
Had the truck for over 5 years, but it may get too cost prohibitive to keep.
rasmasyean
Mar 19, 05:01 PM
As if we need to be told that.
This forum needs a delete post function. Maybe it's just me, but sometimes I get confused and even post accross a different forum by accident. lol Too much multitasking! :p
This forum needs a delete post function. Maybe it's just me, but sometimes I get confused and even post accross a different forum by accident. lol Too much multitasking! :p
jav6454
Mar 24, 01:30 PM
Mac Pro's have big power supplies but thats mainly for the CPU and Ram, adding a 6970 would be pushing its limits, especially for gaming.
Getting a Mac Pro for gaming is such a waste of cash. The only real benefit of the Mac Pro is the dual CPU nature. However, games now a days are not CPU bounded, but rather GPU bounded. Another nail on the coffin for Mac Pro gaming.
Getting a Mac Pro for gaming is such a waste of cash. The only real benefit of the Mac Pro is the dual CPU nature. However, games now a days are not CPU bounded, but rather GPU bounded. Another nail on the coffin for Mac Pro gaming.
aafuss1
Aug 7, 06:54 AM
[B]Leopard
-Native NTFS write
-Soltaire game as a dashboard widget
-PC-run Mac OS X, but only via virtualization
-Tabs in Finder and Safari be draggable, Dragon Drop style tabbed windows-like OS 9, and be easily recalled-bookmarks.
-Native NTFS write
-Soltaire game as a dashboard widget
-PC-run Mac OS X, but only via virtualization
-Tabs in Finder and Safari be draggable, Dragon Drop style tabbed windows-like OS 9, and be easily recalled-bookmarks.
twoodcc
Feb 4, 05:09 PM
congrats to badlight for 1 million points!
Mulyahnto
Jul 19, 04:03 PM
Actually, they were completely off base with their Mac estimates. Since it appears that most people on Wall St. think that Apple only makes iPods, this is no surprise.
Most estimates were for around 1 million Macs sold. Apple came in at 1.3 million. There's the margin difference right there.
This is what page 1 reported a couple days ago:
They predict Apple sales results that are close to but slightly lower than the Wall Street consensus estimates, with iPod quarterly sales between 7.7 and 8.3 million units, Mac sales of 1.2 to 1.23 million units, and revenue of $4.6 billion and $0.48 earnings per share, compared to Wall Street estimates for revenue of $4.95 billion and $0.52 earnings per share.
Most estimates were for around 1 million Macs sold. Apple came in at 1.3 million. There's the margin difference right there.
This is what page 1 reported a couple days ago:
They predict Apple sales results that are close to but slightly lower than the Wall Street consensus estimates, with iPod quarterly sales between 7.7 and 8.3 million units, Mac sales of 1.2 to 1.23 million units, and revenue of $4.6 billion and $0.48 earnings per share, compared to Wall Street estimates for revenue of $4.95 billion and $0.52 earnings per share.
nagromme
Sep 6, 04:55 PM
The bottom model is now a great deal, but I agree that bringing in a cheaper model would be nice. $499 Core Solo would be power to spare for a lot of people. I know it's more power than the G4 I'm typing on has :)
There's a good reason apple didn't go Core2 on the mini...it would make it too close to the new minitower they'll be announcing soon!
I like where your head is :)
There's a good reason apple didn't go Core2 on the mini...it would make it too close to the new minitower they'll be announcing soon!
I like where your head is :)
Met
May 3, 12:37 AM
I see myself simply sticking with AppZapper. I prefer to have the control over which of the files get deleted when I'm uninstalling the app. I'm expecting this feature "just works" and doesn't give you this flexibility.
tonydickinson
Mar 25, 09:41 PM
I would advise people not to take too seriously the words of tonymacx86 who admittedly does a great deal to help the junior hackintosh brigade, but he is not well respected by many serious OSX86 supporters, who claims he uses a lot of stolen code, and asks for money from people who cannot do it themselves.
Macrumors needs to seriously consider using this tonymacx86 as a reliable source. As I stated before he gets info from other sources, and this is often highlighted by others
See this quote ex Netkas...
6950 AND 6970 DO NOT WORK IN ANY CURRENTLY AVAILABLE VERSION OF OSX FOR MACS OR HACKS !!!!
THE NEWS STORIES THAT WERE LIFTED FROM HERE ARE INCORRECT !!!!!
DON'T BUY A 69XX CARD UNLESS YOU CAN AFFORD TO WAIT A FEW WEEKS (OR MONTHS) TO USE IT IN OSX !!!!!
OK, done my part. And if you still think they work, go ask your buddy "Tony" how to make them work.
Sad but macrumors - please take more care.
Macrumors needs to seriously consider using this tonymacx86 as a reliable source. As I stated before he gets info from other sources, and this is often highlighted by others
See this quote ex Netkas...
6950 AND 6970 DO NOT WORK IN ANY CURRENTLY AVAILABLE VERSION OF OSX FOR MACS OR HACKS !!!!
THE NEWS STORIES THAT WERE LIFTED FROM HERE ARE INCORRECT !!!!!
DON'T BUY A 69XX CARD UNLESS YOU CAN AFFORD TO WAIT A FEW WEEKS (OR MONTHS) TO USE IT IN OSX !!!!!
OK, done my part. And if you still think they work, go ask your buddy "Tony" how to make them work.
Sad but macrumors - please take more care.
I WAS the one
Jun 23, 08:30 PM
iOS and Mac OS will merge. Very slowly over the years. Eventually,This sounds great to me! I can imagine Photoshop don't count on adobe products pal, Apple wants you to use Apple products and grab to your seat ... I bet it will be just one way to install apps... The AppStore pro. We are screwed.
No comments:
Post a Comment