MacinDoc
Sep 11, 12:34 AM
Have you seen the benchmarks?
The Xeon systems scream, even with the "slow" memory.
While some contrived tests showed real latency issues with the FB-DIMM memory, for real-life applications the faster busses and large L2 caches make it a non-issue.
Focus on *system* performance, not on a particular detail.
Aiden, it's just not like you to make a statement like this without adding the links...
The Xeon systems scream, even with the "slow" memory.
While some contrived tests showed real latency issues with the FB-DIMM memory, for real-life applications the faster busses and large L2 caches make it a non-issue.
Focus on *system* performance, not on a particular detail.
Aiden, it's just not like you to make a statement like this without adding the links...
bearcatrp
Apr 20, 10:10 AM
This is total BS. We should have been informed of this and a way to turn it off or delete the file on our own. As for the poster above who stated it only goes to your computer, I highly doubt it. This is another big brother tracking honest citizens. Hope a class action does happen. I will definitely sign on!
Renverse
Apr 17, 01:05 PM
McAfee is irrelevant, even for Windows users. They call themselves experts but their software just brings ANY computer to a grinding halt.
Anyone remember this: http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-20003074-83.html ?
Yeah.
Anyone remember this: http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-20003074-83.html ?
Yeah.
ryantheredder
Sep 19, 03:15 PM
FWIW, the average size per minute of Apple's 720p trailers are 50MB. So a 120 minute movie would be around 6GB to download or about 2 hours on an 8Mb connection. Almost watchable in real time providing perfect network conditions.
FleurDuMal
Sep 14, 08:56 AM
OH NO, don't say that. Now we'll be inundated with 600 posts of "I want a mid tower Mac, headless, for $1200.00"
Whoops. Although I'd love to see a mid-tower Mac, I don't think it'll happen. Ever.
Perhaps we'll see a genuine Photoshop competitor? A proper editing suite of some sort (either that, or real editing functions integrated into Aperture)?
OK, now I'm just clutching at straws :o .
Whoops. Although I'd love to see a mid-tower Mac, I don't think it'll happen. Ever.
Perhaps we'll see a genuine Photoshop competitor? A proper editing suite of some sort (either that, or real editing functions integrated into Aperture)?
OK, now I'm just clutching at straws :o .
KnightWRX
Apr 19, 07:03 AM
I think this may be one of those stories where the media make it sound much bigger than it is. A load of lawyers will make a ton of money and the two companies will come to some sort of licensing agreement or Apple will get a discount on some of the parts they buy.
Or this will drag out for years and be eventually settled/judged when it is completely irrelevant. Actually, this is the most likely outcome, since all civil lawsuits over IP in the states last for years.
We'll never quite know what happened nor do I believe anyone will dig deep enough so we actually know Apple's claims in all of this.
Or this will drag out for years and be eventually settled/judged when it is completely irrelevant. Actually, this is the most likely outcome, since all civil lawsuits over IP in the states last for years.
We'll never quite know what happened nor do I believe anyone will dig deep enough so we actually know Apple's claims in all of this.
McDave
Sep 4, 09:46 PM
I really doubt that Apple will put a TV tuner in this thing (if it's real). Think about it -
Point 1 - If Apple puts a tuner in then they have to deal with the myriad of different types of TV.
Point 2 - THEY SELL TV SHOWS!
Does Steve want you to Tivo the new episode of "The Office" on your "MediaMac/Airport Express Video/Super iPod" or does he want you to come to the iTunes store and download it for $2? Apple, despite most of our (including my own) beliefs is a business and they have to think of the $$$ first.
Why give something away when you can make money off it? That's still my theory as to why the mini didn't have a tuner from the start.
Too true! Why create a device to capture/de-schedule broadcast TV (with the mis-timings, satellite rain-fade & commercials) when you can sell most of the content directly, with one mouse/remote-click.
I think this will do to movies & TV what the iPod did for music, just don't forget the Blu-Ray player.
McD
Point 1 - If Apple puts a tuner in then they have to deal with the myriad of different types of TV.
Point 2 - THEY SELL TV SHOWS!
Does Steve want you to Tivo the new episode of "The Office" on your "MediaMac/Airport Express Video/Super iPod" or does he want you to come to the iTunes store and download it for $2? Apple, despite most of our (including my own) beliefs is a business and they have to think of the $$$ first.
Why give something away when you can make money off it? That's still my theory as to why the mini didn't have a tuner from the start.
Too true! Why create a device to capture/de-schedule broadcast TV (with the mis-timings, satellite rain-fade & commercials) when you can sell most of the content directly, with one mouse/remote-click.
I think this will do to movies & TV what the iPod did for music, just don't forget the Blu-Ray player.
McD
MrFirework
Oct 27, 01:19 PM
I guess I'm at a loss for what rights we have actually lost under the Bush Presidency...
BUT... BUT... BUT...
...uhhhh...
...but... ummmmmm...
...he's really STUPID!
;)
BUT... BUT... BUT...
...uhhhh...
...but... ummmmmm...
...he's really STUPID!
;)
monke
Sep 13, 09:29 PM
Shard,
Didn't you hear! The new Apple phone is powered by the newly designed low-power embedded G5 chip.
G5 power phones next Tuesday! Woo Hoo!:D :D :D :eek: :confused:
And only 6 inches thick :eek: :p :D
Didn't you hear! The new Apple phone is powered by the newly designed low-power embedded G5 chip.
G5 power phones next Tuesday! Woo Hoo!:D :D :D :eek: :confused:
And only 6 inches thick :eek: :p :D
Joshuarocks
Apr 19, 11:45 AM
I'm salaried (aka "Exempt") in my job. We used to clock in and out but they made us quit several years ago and now there is no tracking of our hours. I was told at the time it was a legal requirement that we not be made to clock in and out.
In any event, there are rules defining what jobs are and are not eligible as exempt. There are lots of references online with information.
http://www.ehow.com/facts_5179644_exempt-salary-vs_-non-exempt.html
There is an upside to being exempt. While it's true I don't get paid extra if I work 45 hours this week, I will also not be paid less if I work 35 hours next week. In my job one is just as likely as the other.
Mind me asking you how high your unemployment rate is, and do you believe what your media tells you is true, or is the rate much higher than what is known?
In any event, there are rules defining what jobs are and are not eligible as exempt. There are lots of references online with information.
http://www.ehow.com/facts_5179644_exempt-salary-vs_-non-exempt.html
There is an upside to being exempt. While it's true I don't get paid extra if I work 45 hours this week, I will also not be paid less if I work 35 hours next week. In my job one is just as likely as the other.
Mind me asking you how high your unemployment rate is, and do you believe what your media tells you is true, or is the rate much higher than what is known?
ciTiger
Apr 20, 10:01 AM
WOW this is a major privacy breach.
TheManOfSilver
Sep 5, 04:27 PM
It's Showtime. Obvious reference to movies. What do (consumers) want? What does apple like to sell? HARDWARE. Steve will introduce some sort of on-line movie service. I have no idea what it will be, other than different from other options. To me, the on-line movie store is not a bit sexy.
What will be sexy are the other three devices he will introduce that will use that service...
1) True Video iPod. With some sort of wireless transfer method. There is no point in on-line service (for apple) if it ain't mobile.
2) The Apple Movie Machine, probably looking a lot like a Mini, to interface wirelessly to your computer with your TV seamlessly, using an improved Front Row. It will have DVR capability and ability to work with streamed high quality video from iTunes movie store.
3) 23" iMac with a TV tuner, and the ability to pickup streamed movies from the ITunes movie store, and built-in DVR capacity upon which to view those nice movies.
I can skip the Video iPod for now, but I'm seriously hoping for exactly what you have for #2 and #3. I'm due for a return to the mac (I've been stuck in a PC-only world for school for the past few years) and my DVD player went belly-up last month, and I've been delaying replacing it, preferring to get a DVD-burner with HD. If Apple comes out with the big iMac and Living room wonder next week, I'll be upgrading just as soon as Leopard comes preinstalled (although the movie machine might come first).:cool:
What will be sexy are the other three devices he will introduce that will use that service...
1) True Video iPod. With some sort of wireless transfer method. There is no point in on-line service (for apple) if it ain't mobile.
2) The Apple Movie Machine, probably looking a lot like a Mini, to interface wirelessly to your computer with your TV seamlessly, using an improved Front Row. It will have DVR capability and ability to work with streamed high quality video from iTunes movie store.
3) 23" iMac with a TV tuner, and the ability to pickup streamed movies from the ITunes movie store, and built-in DVR capacity upon which to view those nice movies.
I can skip the Video iPod for now, but I'm seriously hoping for exactly what you have for #2 and #3. I'm due for a return to the mac (I've been stuck in a PC-only world for school for the past few years) and my DVD player went belly-up last month, and I've been delaying replacing it, preferring to get a DVD-burner with HD. If Apple comes out with the big iMac and Living room wonder next week, I'll be upgrading just as soon as Leopard comes preinstalled (although the movie machine might come first).:cool:
Full of Win
May 3, 10:24 AM
So hope that target display mode stays. Wish there was something more concrete that a sales reps word.
Jefferyd32
Apr 30, 02:04 PM
Where is the new Mac Mini update. I have been waiting and waiting to set up my HTPC.
Rocketman
Sep 1, 02:55 PM
While it sounds good, I don't see this happen soon at all. Also, Verizon disagrees with you, because they are pulling fiber to the homes in several (large) cities and more to come. The investment for 4G (802.16e I assume you're talking about)will be much too high while not providing enough guarantees it will be financial feasible in short and mid term to make shareholders feel confortable. But if it will, Apple will get my money :) But are there enough gadget geeks like me in the world? That will make or break the project.....
It boils down to suburban, rural, and rural-suburban access.
Currently Satellite will do it at high cost. (hughesnet.com)
2G will do it with crippled bandwidth and high cost.
POTS will do it with crippled speed and uncrippled cost.
Big cities are never the biggest nut to crack.
Rocketman
It boils down to suburban, rural, and rural-suburban access.
Currently Satellite will do it at high cost. (hughesnet.com)
2G will do it with crippled bandwidth and high cost.
POTS will do it with crippled speed and uncrippled cost.
Big cities are never the biggest nut to crack.
Rocketman
daneoni
Sep 12, 05:04 PM
Whoopidedoo, a whole $50 off. They HAD to do that because of the lack of actually updating anything worthy on the device. One could argue that it isn't enough of a price cut the way competitors music players are priced.
Anyone with half a brain will avoid these 5th G Part 2 devices like the plague, unless they want to waste money that could be spent 4 months later on a widescreen model.
Should we set up the thread now for the people that rush out and buy this version of the iPod then get burned just after Christmas when the real new iPod comes out? They'll need someplace to vent, and it's usually all over these threads. It would be nice to condense it.
My thoughts exactly.
Anyone with half a brain will avoid these 5th G Part 2 devices like the plague, unless they want to waste money that could be spent 4 months later on a widescreen model.
Should we set up the thread now for the people that rush out and buy this version of the iPod then get burned just after Christmas when the real new iPod comes out? They'll need someplace to vent, and it's usually all over these threads. It would be nice to condense it.
My thoughts exactly.
iamrawr
Apr 25, 02:38 PM
dooo iittt!!! :D so excited to get my next mbp 3-5 years from now.
spydr
Sep 26, 08:43 PM
Man..by the time I figured out how to use all the counterintuitive features in my motorola crap I already need to dump it for iPhone:confused:
Bet it is going to be awesome and amazon will give it for $75 when you sign up for a new account with cingular :D
Bet it is going to be awesome and amazon will give it for $75 when you sign up for a new account with cingular :D
dizastor
Aug 23, 06:53 PM
$100 million doesn't put a dent in Apple's reserves. It's best to just get this crap out of the way.
Seems like Creative should retire now, just make iPod accessories and license their interface.
Seems like Creative should retire now, just make iPod accessories and license their interface.
gloss
Sep 26, 08:59 AM
Yeah, this is pretty exciting news. I had already planned to call Verizon this morning to see when my contract is up.
EDIT: $175 termination fee per phone and a good while to go on the contract. Yeouch! I may just have to keep my fingers crossed that Verizon Wireless gets the iPhone late next year.
Yeah, the termination fee is harsh, but I'm honestly not sure I could last another year and a half without throwing my Razr into a trash compactor. I like the phone, but the god-awful interface that Verizon loads onto it is another story.
A cell phone should NOT require hard reboots.
EDIT: $175 termination fee per phone and a good while to go on the contract. Yeouch! I may just have to keep my fingers crossed that Verizon Wireless gets the iPhone late next year.
Yeah, the termination fee is harsh, but I'm honestly not sure I could last another year and a half without throwing my Razr into a trash compactor. I like the phone, but the god-awful interface that Verizon loads onto it is another story.
A cell phone should NOT require hard reboots.
0815
Apr 20, 12:35 PM
Doesn't every GPS based phone have something like this?
Every cell phone is tracked .... don't know how many store it on the local device (out of reach for anyone except you), but the tracking data from every cell phone is stored on the providers servers and/or government servers - law enforcement could access that information in almost real time.
Every cell phone is tracked .... don't know how many store it on the local device (out of reach for anyone except you), but the tracking data from every cell phone is stored on the providers servers and/or government servers - law enforcement could access that information in almost real time.
DMann
Sep 9, 01:55 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
MacCentral posted (http://www.macworld.com/2006/09/firstlooks/imacbench/index.php) a first look at the new Core 2 Duo iMac along with some early benchmarks.
The new iMacs which were released on Wednesday (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060906091309.shtml) incorporate the latest Core 2 Duo processor from Intel. The Core 2 Duo represents the continuation of the Core Duo line which first made its appearance in Apple computers in January. Intel has maintained that the new chips would provide roughly 20% improvement in performance.
MacCentral tested the new 17" 2GHz iMac and 20" 2.16GHz iMac and compared them to the previous 20" 2GHz Core Duo and the 2.66GHz Mac Pro.
The most direct comparison between the two processors comes between the 17" 2GHz Core 2 Duo iMac and the 20" 2GHz Core Duo iMac. The overall score was 10% better in the new model while the individual tests showed gains up to 20%.
Wonder how the 24" iMac at 2.33GHz will fare.
MacCentral posted (http://www.macworld.com/2006/09/firstlooks/imacbench/index.php) a first look at the new Core 2 Duo iMac along with some early benchmarks.
The new iMacs which were released on Wednesday (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060906091309.shtml) incorporate the latest Core 2 Duo processor from Intel. The Core 2 Duo represents the continuation of the Core Duo line which first made its appearance in Apple computers in January. Intel has maintained that the new chips would provide roughly 20% improvement in performance.
MacCentral tested the new 17" 2GHz iMac and 20" 2.16GHz iMac and compared them to the previous 20" 2GHz Core Duo and the 2.66GHz Mac Pro.
The most direct comparison between the two processors comes between the 17" 2GHz Core 2 Duo iMac and the 20" 2GHz Core Duo iMac. The overall score was 10% better in the new model while the individual tests showed gains up to 20%.
Wonder how the 24" iMac at 2.33GHz will fare.
samiwas
Apr 20, 02:47 PM
The free market would suck if it were run in the way your brain imagines it. But imagine if you ran a company, and your chief goal is to make a profit. Having happy employees who are payed fairly and receive vacation days, benefits, etc, is definitely a better business model than working your employees like slaves.
OK, so why don't more businesses do that, instead of doing everything they can to "cut costs" to "generate higher profits"? Obviously, a business needs to make a profit. But instead of just making a profit, it seems that nowadays a business is not considered successful unless that business generates massive profits, or highly increased profits over the previous year. And if a business doesn't make as much as they thought they might (even though they've pulled in billions in profit), they are considered failed and their stock tumbles.
Honestly, I don't believe the "free market" that you or any Republican/Tea Partier/Libertarian believes in would work either, except for funneling even more dough to the top (which I actually think might be the way you want to see it, and thus believe would be successful). If you really believe that without some sort of regulation, all businesses would be spending MORE on their employees, you are hopeless.
Benefits shouldn't be government regulated. However, the slave labor that you describe should most certainly not be allowed, duh. Try cutting back on the straw man argument some.
My example may have been a little over the top, but let's not pretend for one second that plenty of employers out there would think nothing of asking their employees to come in on weekends or stay late nights with no extra compensation.
Benefits should have some sort of MINIMAL regulation. The US has pretty much the fewest benefits of any developed nation, and this is considered a good thing....because it benefits the business and not the worker.
It's humorous that when people imagine a free market, they ignore that in a free market, employers would be fighting for good employees as much as employees are fighting for the employers.
Wait...what?? Employers are currently not trying to get good employees? What does this even mean?
It's sad that the government is the largest charity, because it's just so darn inefficient. I have an idea. Private charity.
Somehow, I can't imagine a private charity large enough to take care of all of America's bottom class or replace existing "entitlement programs". The largest charity in the US is the United Way with $3.8billion in income. As for current government program expenses, even Tenant-based Rental Assistance is at $18.2billion, and that's just a single line item in a portion of one part of programs. I just cannot see how private charity could have the kind of reach that the government does. And I'm guessing that the people who do run the government programs make a little less than the $715,000 salary of the head of the United Way.
For all the bleeding heart liberals I've spoken with over the years, who want crazy amounts taxed in order to support social uplift programs, I never see any of them giving away 50+% of their income to charity. It's a lot easier to ask the government to give other peoples money to charity.
I can tell you right now that my family gives >50% of its total income.
However, if you think that taxes = charity, what incentive do you have to give? (to the organizations that are 90+% efficient rather than whatever the crap the government is)
So, AFTER paying 30% in federal and state income taxes, whatever percentage in sales and property tax, you are still able give away an additional 50% or more to charity? So you are able to live on like 3% of your earnings? I would LOVE to be in that position! It's very admirable, but hardly reachable for the average person. I try to give whenever I can, but I can admit that's it's usually around $2k a year.
Anyway, the topic is about the influx of low-wage, no-benefit jobs with no worker protections during times of high profitability and skyrocketing leadership pay. Some people actually see this as good. Some see it as bad. If you see this as a good thing, then we're at an impasse.
OK, so why don't more businesses do that, instead of doing everything they can to "cut costs" to "generate higher profits"? Obviously, a business needs to make a profit. But instead of just making a profit, it seems that nowadays a business is not considered successful unless that business generates massive profits, or highly increased profits over the previous year. And if a business doesn't make as much as they thought they might (even though they've pulled in billions in profit), they are considered failed and their stock tumbles.
Honestly, I don't believe the "free market" that you or any Republican/Tea Partier/Libertarian believes in would work either, except for funneling even more dough to the top (which I actually think might be the way you want to see it, and thus believe would be successful). If you really believe that without some sort of regulation, all businesses would be spending MORE on their employees, you are hopeless.
Benefits shouldn't be government regulated. However, the slave labor that you describe should most certainly not be allowed, duh. Try cutting back on the straw man argument some.
My example may have been a little over the top, but let's not pretend for one second that plenty of employers out there would think nothing of asking their employees to come in on weekends or stay late nights with no extra compensation.
Benefits should have some sort of MINIMAL regulation. The US has pretty much the fewest benefits of any developed nation, and this is considered a good thing....because it benefits the business and not the worker.
It's humorous that when people imagine a free market, they ignore that in a free market, employers would be fighting for good employees as much as employees are fighting for the employers.
Wait...what?? Employers are currently not trying to get good employees? What does this even mean?
It's sad that the government is the largest charity, because it's just so darn inefficient. I have an idea. Private charity.
Somehow, I can't imagine a private charity large enough to take care of all of America's bottom class or replace existing "entitlement programs". The largest charity in the US is the United Way with $3.8billion in income. As for current government program expenses, even Tenant-based Rental Assistance is at $18.2billion, and that's just a single line item in a portion of one part of programs. I just cannot see how private charity could have the kind of reach that the government does. And I'm guessing that the people who do run the government programs make a little less than the $715,000 salary of the head of the United Way.
For all the bleeding heart liberals I've spoken with over the years, who want crazy amounts taxed in order to support social uplift programs, I never see any of them giving away 50+% of their income to charity. It's a lot easier to ask the government to give other peoples money to charity.
I can tell you right now that my family gives >50% of its total income.
However, if you think that taxes = charity, what incentive do you have to give? (to the organizations that are 90+% efficient rather than whatever the crap the government is)
So, AFTER paying 30% in federal and state income taxes, whatever percentage in sales and property tax, you are still able give away an additional 50% or more to charity? So you are able to live on like 3% of your earnings? I would LOVE to be in that position! It's very admirable, but hardly reachable for the average person. I try to give whenever I can, but I can admit that's it's usually around $2k a year.
Anyway, the topic is about the influx of low-wage, no-benefit jobs with no worker protections during times of high profitability and skyrocketing leadership pay. Some people actually see this as good. Some see it as bad. If you see this as a good thing, then we're at an impasse.
OS X Dude
May 3, 10:49 AM
The whole point of Thunderbolt is you can daisy-chain devices (up to 6 I think), so one port goes a long way.
Besides the three-monitor doohickery on the 27", I struggle to see why 95% of people would need two ports often. But still, nice to have :)
Besides the three-monitor doohickery on the 27", I struggle to see why 95% of people would need two ports often. But still, nice to have :)
0 comments:
Post a Comment