Number 41
Apr 6, 04:24 PM
If you bought 2 Xooms would you have a Mazda?
That's fantastic.
That's fantastic.
Nuck81
Dec 9, 10:02 AM
Anyone else have trouble leveling up your B-Spec driver? Mine really sucks and can't even finish the FF race in whatever car he drives.
Mine is a level 21.
It's worth doing as it gives you some amazing cars, like a Pagani Zonda R, and a Toyota 7 race car.
You have to keep your guy level headed, especially at the beginning. After he levels up a bit, you can generally let him be and he'll pull out the victory...
Mine is a level 21.
It's worth doing as it gives you some amazing cars, like a Pagani Zonda R, and a Toyota 7 race car.
You have to keep your guy level headed, especially at the beginning. After he levels up a bit, you can generally let him be and he'll pull out the victory...
wiestlingjr
Jun 9, 07:23 PM
Bibbz,
I have a couple questions.. I want to preorder with radioshack. I am NOT the primary account holder, but I am an authorized user. I also know the last 4 digits of the account holders social. Will this be a problem when picking up the phone?
I also have a FAN account. Will these be a problem?
I have a couple questions.. I want to preorder with radioshack. I am NOT the primary account holder, but I am an authorized user. I also know the last 4 digits of the account holders social. Will this be a problem when picking up the phone?
I also have a FAN account. Will these be a problem?
zacman
Apr 19, 02:59 PM
Hmm.
What about this:
http://www.comscore.com/Press_Events/Press_Releases/2011/4/comScore_Reports_February_2011_U.S._Mobile_Subscriber_Market_Share
http://www.comscore.com/Press_Events/Press_Releases/2011/3/comScore_Reports_January_2011_U.S._Mobile_Subscriber_Market_Share
That's US mobile subscribers marketshare for Jan and Feb '11. My numbers are worldwide smartphone marketshare. Completly different things.
What about this:
http://www.comscore.com/Press_Events/Press_Releases/2011/4/comScore_Reports_February_2011_U.S._Mobile_Subscriber_Market_Share
http://www.comscore.com/Press_Events/Press_Releases/2011/3/comScore_Reports_January_2011_U.S._Mobile_Subscriber_Market_Share
That's US mobile subscribers marketshare for Jan and Feb '11. My numbers are worldwide smartphone marketshare. Completly different things.
eeboarder
Jul 27, 07:44 PM
With those frequent speed bumps I begin to worry that my G5 imac will not be fast enough to run Leopard...
It absolutely will!!! Leopard is just going to be mostly beneficial for dual-core machines. Read this article:
http://macosrumors.com/20060710A1.php
Leopard sounds FAST!
It absolutely will!!! Leopard is just going to be mostly beneficial for dual-core machines. Read this article:
http://macosrumors.com/20060710A1.php
Leopard sounds FAST!
nerveosu
Aug 7, 04:23 PM
It says somewhere on the apple web site that macs with G3s will be supported with Leopard.. any word on specific computers that will be supported? I have a iMac DV 400 G3 that I am curious about.
mobilehavoc
Apr 6, 02:00 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 :)
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 :)
twoodcc
Aug 5, 04:42 PM
i just wish Monday would just get here already......
nagromme
Aug 7, 04:08 PM
I'm kinda bummed that even with Vista sneaking up that Aqua hasn't changed much.
Aqua is great and doesn't NEED to change much--it badly needs to be gone over for consistency, but it's already light years ahead of Vista in consistency, looks (MS loves clutter), and most importantly, functionality. Change for change's sake can be fun, but it can also get in the way.
That said, I think we haven't seen all the changes that next year will bring.
Anyway, Vista is not "sneaking up"... it still looks like a fiasco that nothing can save. It will sell well even so--that's a monopoly for you--but it doesn't threaten Tiger, much less Leopard (which we haven't even seen all of yet).
Aqua is great and doesn't NEED to change much--it badly needs to be gone over for consistency, but it's already light years ahead of Vista in consistency, looks (MS loves clutter), and most importantly, functionality. Change for change's sake can be fun, but it can also get in the way.
That said, I think we haven't seen all the changes that next year will bring.
Anyway, Vista is not "sneaking up"... it still looks like a fiasco that nothing can save. It will sell well even so--that's a monopoly for you--but it doesn't threaten Tiger, much less Leopard (which we haven't even seen all of yet).
joemama
Nov 28, 07:54 PM
Jobs should walk into negotiations with the attitude of - "We would like more of a royalty for every song sold because if we didn't sell them on iTunes, people would simply download them illegally."
"...And if you don't adhere to this, we will stop selling Universal music and this is exactly what will happen."
Apple may be out 20 cents a song, but people will still buy iPods.
Think how much Universal will be losing.
"...And if you don't adhere to this, we will stop selling Universal music and this is exactly what will happen."
Apple may be out 20 cents a song, but people will still buy iPods.
Think how much Universal will be losing.
yoak
Apr 11, 08:28 AM
Then that just begs the question, "why haven't these people left already?" FCP has been fairly stagnant for years. There are plenty of other alternatives, so doesn't that kinda make them fanboyish too for sticking it out when up to this point Apple has given zero hints about when or how it will take FCP to the next level?
I'm not in the video editing biz, but if the pro s/w I use in my profession hobbled my efficiency and workflow the way you are carping about FCP, and there were viable alternatives, I would abandon it quicker than pigeon can snatch a bread crumb. Just sayin'.
It's costly to change. It takes time to learn new software, time that could be spent working instead. Then it's all the money already invested in the platform.
At least here, premiere is not really an option if you work in broadcast or film since everyone either use final cut or avid
I'm not in the video editing biz, but if the pro s/w I use in my profession hobbled my efficiency and workflow the way you are carping about FCP, and there were viable alternatives, I would abandon it quicker than pigeon can snatch a bread crumb. Just sayin'.
It's costly to change. It takes time to learn new software, time that could be spent working instead. Then it's all the money already invested in the platform.
At least here, premiere is not really an option if you work in broadcast or film since everyone either use final cut or avid
shamino
Jul 14, 05:26 PM
Kind of odd/funny how we seem to be going backwards in processor speeds. Instead of 3.6 GHz Pentiums, we are looking at 2.x GHz Intel Cores. It would be interesting to see how well a single Core processor matches up to PowerPC, or a Pentium, or AMD.
It just means that Intel has finally publicly recognized the validity of the MHz Myth.
Raw clock speed is meaningless. You can get better performance at a slower clock speed if you can increase parallelism. This includes features like superscalar architecture (where multiple instructions are executed per clock), deep pipelining, hyperthreading, SIMD instructions, and multi-core chips.
However, I am finding one of my predicitions finally happen...it appears that a ceiling has been currently met on how fast the current line of processors can go, and now we are relying on multiple cores/processors to distribute work, instead of relying on just one fast chip.
That's a part of the equation, but not all of it.
Higher clock speeds are possible, but it's not worth the effort. Pumping up the clock speed creates serious problems in terms of power consumption and heat dissipation. Leaving the clock speed lower, but increasing parallelism will also boost performance, and keeps the power curve down at manageable levels.
It's worth noting that Intel has shipped P4-series chips at 3.4GHz. But the new chips (Woodcrest and Conroe) aren't being sold at speeds above 3GHz.
So when will we start seeing 8 chips in a computer? Perhaps this will become the new measurement...not processor speeds, but the number of processors (or cores).
Pay attention. The answer is "sooner than you think".
There have already been technology briefings from Intel that talk about 4-core chips in early and 32-core chips by 2010. Similar offerings are expected from AMD.
And the Xeon-MP series processors (which will, of course, eventually get all this tech) are designed with 8-way SMP in mind. A theoretical Xeon-MP based on this 32-core tech would produce a system with 256 cores. Of course, it is doubtful that anything other than a large server would be able to take proper advantage of this, so I wouldn't ever expect to find one on a desktop.
(FWIW, Intel is looking to Sun as a rival here. Sun's latest chip - the UltraSPARC T1 (http://www.sun.com/processors/UltraSPARC-T1/) - currently ships in an 8-core configuration, with each core capable of running four threads at a time, and only consuming 72W of power. Even at 1.2GHz - the top speed they're currently shipping at - this makes for a very nice server.)
It just means that Intel has finally publicly recognized the validity of the MHz Myth.
Raw clock speed is meaningless. You can get better performance at a slower clock speed if you can increase parallelism. This includes features like superscalar architecture (where multiple instructions are executed per clock), deep pipelining, hyperthreading, SIMD instructions, and multi-core chips.
However, I am finding one of my predicitions finally happen...it appears that a ceiling has been currently met on how fast the current line of processors can go, and now we are relying on multiple cores/processors to distribute work, instead of relying on just one fast chip.
That's a part of the equation, but not all of it.
Higher clock speeds are possible, but it's not worth the effort. Pumping up the clock speed creates serious problems in terms of power consumption and heat dissipation. Leaving the clock speed lower, but increasing parallelism will also boost performance, and keeps the power curve down at manageable levels.
It's worth noting that Intel has shipped P4-series chips at 3.4GHz. But the new chips (Woodcrest and Conroe) aren't being sold at speeds above 3GHz.
So when will we start seeing 8 chips in a computer? Perhaps this will become the new measurement...not processor speeds, but the number of processors (or cores).
Pay attention. The answer is "sooner than you think".
There have already been technology briefings from Intel that talk about 4-core chips in early and 32-core chips by 2010. Similar offerings are expected from AMD.
And the Xeon-MP series processors (which will, of course, eventually get all this tech) are designed with 8-way SMP in mind. A theoretical Xeon-MP based on this 32-core tech would produce a system with 256 cores. Of course, it is doubtful that anything other than a large server would be able to take proper advantage of this, so I wouldn't ever expect to find one on a desktop.
(FWIW, Intel is looking to Sun as a rival here. Sun's latest chip - the UltraSPARC T1 (http://www.sun.com/processors/UltraSPARC-T1/) - currently ships in an 8-core configuration, with each core capable of running four threads at a time, and only consuming 72W of power. Even at 1.2GHz - the top speed they're currently shipping at - this makes for a very nice server.)
theOtherGeoff
Mar 22, 04:55 PM
samsung designs and builds stuff in factories they OWN. Not all of their manufacturing is outsourced, unlike apple. Yes samsung provides ram, LCD (?), and A5 for apple's ipad. It was rumored that TSMC would also make A5 for apple so that apple is not so dependent on samsung but from what I saw in teardowns, samsung is still making some, if not all, of A5.
The difference is Samsung outsources it's OS development, it's developer community management, it's app ecosystem.
Cost competitive doesn't experience competitive.
I think for 'spec' people (hard core coders, corp types that need to control configuration), Samsung (and more importantly, when HP gets in the game HP), will compete there.... HOWEVER, this is a consumer run market, and much like a Sony WalkMan back in the day, or RollerBlades([tm]... the rest were 'inline skates'), Apple is 'defining' the market... and the rest are just knockoffs.
And unlike the old BMW pricing explanation(excuse) for Macs (equal specs and quality... from Apple HP and Dell are about the same in price) Apple is pushing iPad's experience at the BMW levels, but at Honda prices.
And RIM and samsung are pushing mid 80's GM quality against a 2012 BMW at honda prices, when the market will probably demand Kia prices for the 'experience'
The difference is Samsung outsources it's OS development, it's developer community management, it's app ecosystem.
Cost competitive doesn't experience competitive.
I think for 'spec' people (hard core coders, corp types that need to control configuration), Samsung (and more importantly, when HP gets in the game HP), will compete there.... HOWEVER, this is a consumer run market, and much like a Sony WalkMan back in the day, or RollerBlades([tm]... the rest were 'inline skates'), Apple is 'defining' the market... and the rest are just knockoffs.
And unlike the old BMW pricing explanation(excuse) for Macs (equal specs and quality... from Apple HP and Dell are about the same in price) Apple is pushing iPad's experience at the BMW levels, but at Honda prices.
And RIM and samsung are pushing mid 80's GM quality against a 2012 BMW at honda prices, when the market will probably demand Kia prices for the 'experience'
tanbo
Jun 22, 05:40 PM
According to Radio Shack, the full, non-contract price, for the iPhone 4 will be $649.99 for the 16GB and $749.99 for the 32GB.
Seems pretty high to me.
http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=10150207691250542
Seems pretty high to me.
http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=10150207691250542
Trekkie
Sep 13, 01:08 PM
does anyone know how much the clovertown chips are going to be?
if it follows typical intel transitions price point replace. So the same price as woodcrests. They might introduce faster ones though that cost more. We'll see before the end of the year.
Would it be smart to wait for these 8 core mac pros or are they still a long ways away?
Quad core is supposed to be out before EOY 2006.
Will Apple release it before then is the question...
if it follows typical intel transitions price point replace. So the same price as woodcrests. They might introduce faster ones though that cost more. We'll see before the end of the year.
Would it be smart to wait for these 8 core mac pros or are they still a long ways away?
Quad core is supposed to be out before EOY 2006.
Will Apple release it before then is the question...
jettredmont
Apr 10, 05:26 PM
Interesting news, but the bit about booting competitors is downright disgusting.
Umm, it's a Final Cut Users' Group, not an Avid user's group. I think they are a little more interested in the next big step in Fincal Cut Pro, moreso than what Avid and Adobe are doing. Apple demanded all stage time, because they have a lot to cover, and want the rest of the meet available to talk about what they demo. Seems completely kosher to me.
Now, if this was Apple going to something like NAB and telling them to boot out all their non-Apple demos, that would be different. But while this is at NAB, it is quite specifically the group of self-identified folks who care more about FCP than anything else. So no big deal.
Umm, it's a Final Cut Users' Group, not an Avid user's group. I think they are a little more interested in the next big step in Fincal Cut Pro, moreso than what Avid and Adobe are doing. Apple demanded all stage time, because they have a lot to cover, and want the rest of the meet available to talk about what they demo. Seems completely kosher to me.
Now, if this was Apple going to something like NAB and telling them to boot out all their non-Apple demos, that would be different. But while this is at NAB, it is quite specifically the group of self-identified folks who care more about FCP than anything else. So no big deal.
freakonguitar
Aug 26, 03:55 PM
well...then maybe we will see a new macbook pro and possibly some other things in the next few weeks to come. :) but from some of the rumors, mermon has worse battery life and more heat than yonah :( ....which is too bad, cause we could use a cpu that gives at least just as good performance but less heat!
coder12
Mar 22, 09:30 PM
I hear that the PlayBook is really easy to hold one-handed. If you know what I mean.
Hmm... yah, I think I get it! (I assume you're holding coffee in the other hand ;) ;) )
Hmm... yah, I think I get it! (I assume you're holding coffee in the other hand ;) ;) )
skunk
Mar 4, 04:43 PM
Are they affiliated with WBC?
kiljoy616
Mar 26, 01:40 AM
Dam I just got updating Windows 7 SP1:( just two weeks ago and Apple already has a new OS coming out. What is MS doing over there in Washington oh yeah using one hand. :p
ccrandall77
Aug 11, 01:59 PM
As I said before GSM has 81% of the market. UMTS (W-CDMA) enable hand-over back and forth UMTS and GSM. CDMA2000 can not do hand-over between GSM and CDMA2000. (See Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W-CDMA): "The CDMA family of standards (including cdmaOne and CDMA2000) are not compatible with the W-CDMA family of standards that are based on ITU standards.")
Hence all networks that has GSM will transfer to UMTS since this decrases their initial investment as they transfer from 2/2.5G to 3G. Changing network standad is expensive, but the GSM/EDGE marketshare has been growing in US and will most likely continue to grow. At the same time CDMA is non-existant in europe.
The conclusion is simple - CDMA2000 is in the long run as dead as betamax.
If long run is 10yrs, I'll grant you that. But in the US and much of Asia (Australia maybe) where there's CDMA carriers, CDMA2000 1x-EVDx is going to be around for a while.
Actually WCDMA also inherits much of it's tech from CDMA/IS-95 and I have seen some documentation that shows that WCDMA can be compatible with CDMA2000 just like UTMS/WCDMA is compatible with GSM. But it sounds as if the upgrade path for GSM/GPRS/EDGE to WCDMA is easier than going from CDMA2000 1x to WCDMA.
But since for the next several years CDMA2000 1x-EVDO will be better than the GSM related technologies. And by the time WCDMA takes over, the iPhone will be as antiquated as the Newton.
Apple needs to create both versions as CDMA has about 5x% of the US market... and Apple has and probably will continue to cater to the US market first.
Hence all networks that has GSM will transfer to UMTS since this decrases their initial investment as they transfer from 2/2.5G to 3G. Changing network standad is expensive, but the GSM/EDGE marketshare has been growing in US and will most likely continue to grow. At the same time CDMA is non-existant in europe.
The conclusion is simple - CDMA2000 is in the long run as dead as betamax.
If long run is 10yrs, I'll grant you that. But in the US and much of Asia (Australia maybe) where there's CDMA carriers, CDMA2000 1x-EVDx is going to be around for a while.
Actually WCDMA also inherits much of it's tech from CDMA/IS-95 and I have seen some documentation that shows that WCDMA can be compatible with CDMA2000 just like UTMS/WCDMA is compatible with GSM. But it sounds as if the upgrade path for GSM/GPRS/EDGE to WCDMA is easier than going from CDMA2000 1x to WCDMA.
But since for the next several years CDMA2000 1x-EVDO will be better than the GSM related technologies. And by the time WCDMA takes over, the iPhone will be as antiquated as the Newton.
Apple needs to create both versions as CDMA has about 5x% of the US market... and Apple has and probably will continue to cater to the US market first.
gnasher729
Apr 25, 03:08 PM
it looks like a different world from today,
but really it's less than 70 years ago that we had the NAZI regime here in germany. it's less than 25 years ago that we had an repressive surveillance society in east germany. if there is no apparent good in tracking personal data, one should object to it.
you shouldn't have to reason against collecting and storing personal data if it isnt a real necessity.
there's enough data stored about you, me and anyone in todays digitalized world as is.
1. The phone company knows roughly where you are whenever you use a mobile phone. They have to, it is technically unavoidable, because your phone has to contact a cell tower to work, and they have to know which cell tower. And if you call me, they also have to know what cell tower I am connected to because they need to send your voice from your cell tower to my cell tower.
2. Everyone who is close to your WiFi router knows where it is, because it continuously transmits its MAC number to the world (within 100 meters if you are lucky). Again, it is technically unavoidable, so that your device knows who to talk to, and not to your neighbours WiFi router which transmits a different MAC number.
3. Your computer sends an IP address every time you go to any website. And again, it has to, because otherwise no server that you talk to would know where to send a reply.
So whatever you do, you are identifiable. MacRumors has your IP address. I suppose that they will never use it, except if you post something that would get the police interested, in which case I assume they will find out who you are.
What's annoying is that I think about six months ago Apple had to give an official answer about what data they collect and keep and why and so on, and that was all on show here on MacRumors as well. And now someone finds this file, and all the conspiracy theories come out, and the most obvious argument against all these conspiracy theories is that if Apple was up to something evil, you wouldn't know about it.
but really it's less than 70 years ago that we had the NAZI regime here in germany. it's less than 25 years ago that we had an repressive surveillance society in east germany. if there is no apparent good in tracking personal data, one should object to it.
you shouldn't have to reason against collecting and storing personal data if it isnt a real necessity.
there's enough data stored about you, me and anyone in todays digitalized world as is.
1. The phone company knows roughly where you are whenever you use a mobile phone. They have to, it is technically unavoidable, because your phone has to contact a cell tower to work, and they have to know which cell tower. And if you call me, they also have to know what cell tower I am connected to because they need to send your voice from your cell tower to my cell tower.
2. Everyone who is close to your WiFi router knows where it is, because it continuously transmits its MAC number to the world (within 100 meters if you are lucky). Again, it is technically unavoidable, so that your device knows who to talk to, and not to your neighbours WiFi router which transmits a different MAC number.
3. Your computer sends an IP address every time you go to any website. And again, it has to, because otherwise no server that you talk to would know where to send a reply.
So whatever you do, you are identifiable. MacRumors has your IP address. I suppose that they will never use it, except if you post something that would get the police interested, in which case I assume they will find out who you are.
What's annoying is that I think about six months ago Apple had to give an official answer about what data they collect and keep and why and so on, and that was all on show here on MacRumors as well. And now someone finds this file, and all the conspiracy theories come out, and the most obvious argument against all these conspiracy theories is that if Apple was up to something evil, you wouldn't know about it.
HORTENSE
Apr 7, 10:20 PM
So they DID have my Black 64GB ATT. I'm stuck with this Verizon model ,'-,
mwswami
Jul 23, 07:12 PM
That's what Kentsfield is for. It is a single quad core chip, which is expected to fit into the cheaper motherboards for Conroe instead of the much more expensive motherboards for Woodcrest.
Two recent quotes: On their earnings release, Apple said that they are on track to finish the Intel transition by the end of the year. And Intel said that Kentsfield will be available in the last quarter of this year. A single chip Woodcrest is nonsense (much more expensive than Conroe at same performance). Complete line with dual chip times dual core Woodcrest is too expensive for the cheapest mode. By waiting for Kentsfield, Apple can avoid designing two motherboards and still have quad cores.
So you don't expect the Mac Pro at WWDC?? Or only a dual core version using Conroe?
I agree single Woodcrest doesn't make sense. So we have two options for Quad core - Dual Woodcrest and single Kentsfield. Of course 2xWodcrest is going to be more expensive but I wonder by how much more. I am guessing $400. But, if you do that, you have the same motherboard across the Mac Pro (and possibly shared with XServe as well) and for that $400 you also get FB-DIMM and higher RAM ceiling. Also, the same platform can be used with Clovertown to scale to 8 core workstation early Q1'07. If Kentsfield is used then 4 core is the end of the line.
So I don't expect Mac Pro to exclusively use Conroe/Kentsfield. Either two different boards - Conroe/Kentsfield on the low end and Woodcrest/Clovertown on the high end. Or Woodcrest/Clovertown across the board. Given the reasons above, I expect it will be the latter.
Conroe deserves to be in the Apple lineup. I expect it will be in the upgraded (perhaps a larger i.e. 23") iMac. Apple may also release another desktop to fill the gap between the Mini and the Pro. That option has been discussed here as well.
Two recent quotes: On their earnings release, Apple said that they are on track to finish the Intel transition by the end of the year. And Intel said that Kentsfield will be available in the last quarter of this year. A single chip Woodcrest is nonsense (much more expensive than Conroe at same performance). Complete line with dual chip times dual core Woodcrest is too expensive for the cheapest mode. By waiting for Kentsfield, Apple can avoid designing two motherboards and still have quad cores.
So you don't expect the Mac Pro at WWDC?? Or only a dual core version using Conroe?
I agree single Woodcrest doesn't make sense. So we have two options for Quad core - Dual Woodcrest and single Kentsfield. Of course 2xWodcrest is going to be more expensive but I wonder by how much more. I am guessing $400. But, if you do that, you have the same motherboard across the Mac Pro (and possibly shared with XServe as well) and for that $400 you also get FB-DIMM and higher RAM ceiling. Also, the same platform can be used with Clovertown to scale to 8 core workstation early Q1'07. If Kentsfield is used then 4 core is the end of the line.
So I don't expect Mac Pro to exclusively use Conroe/Kentsfield. Either two different boards - Conroe/Kentsfield on the low end and Woodcrest/Clovertown on the high end. Or Woodcrest/Clovertown across the board. Given the reasons above, I expect it will be the latter.
Conroe deserves to be in the Apple lineup. I expect it will be in the upgraded (perhaps a larger i.e. 23") iMac. Apple may also release another desktop to fill the gap between the Mini and the Pro. That option has been discussed here as well.
No comments:
Post a Comment