zacman
Apr 6, 03:55 PM
It seems nobody learned from Apple's iPhone debacle:
"Hahaha, look at Android they only ship 1/10 of iPhones!!!" - 12 months later: "Uh, ok, Android outsells iOS 3:1 but Apple only ships 1 phone!!!!"
Now with tablets:
"Hahaha, look at the Android tablets, they only ship 1/10 of iPads." - 12 months later: Well you know...
"Hahaha, look at Android they only ship 1/10 of iPhones!!!" - 12 months later: "Uh, ok, Android outsells iOS 3:1 but Apple only ships 1 phone!!!!"
Now with tablets:
"Hahaha, look at the Android tablets, they only ship 1/10 of iPads." - 12 months later: Well you know...
JFreak
Aug 19, 03:11 AM
this kinds of benchmarks show clearly that the world is not yet ready for Universally Better appplications. Quad G5 still rocks as a production system, but it would surely be nice to give those new Mac Pro's a test drive; however, it would be rather lame, as not nearly all audio plugins have been converted. For myself -- for that very reason -- the Intel-era begins in 2008 at the earliest. I want zero crashes when I mix.
bibbz
Jun 15, 02:54 PM
We ran out of pins within an hour. Ridiculous.
shamino
Jul 21, 10:07 AM
With all these new technologies with 4, 8 and eventually 24-core capacities (some time in the not too distant future) all running at 64-bit, we musn't forget that software also has tobe developed for these machienes in order to get the most out of the hardware. At the moment we aren't even maximising core-duo, let alone a quad core and all the rest!!!!
It really depends on your application.
On the desktop, if you're a typical user that's just interested in web surfing, playing music files, organizing your photo collection, etc., more than two cores will probably not be too useful. For these kinds of users, even two cores may be overkill, but two are useful for keeping a responsive UI when an application starts hogging all the CPU time.
If you start using higher-power applications (like video work - iMovie/iDVD, for instance) then more cores will speed up that kind of work (assuming the app is properly multithreaded, of course.) 4-core systems will definitely benefit this kind of user.
With current applications, however, I don't think more than 4 cores will be useful. The kind of work that will make 8 cores useful is the kinds that requires expensive professional software - which most people don't use.
If you get away from the desktop and look to the server market, however, the picture changes. A web server may only be running one copy of Apache, but it may create a thread for every simultaneous connection. If you have 8 cores, then you can handle 8 times as many connections as a 1-core system can (assuming sufficient memory and I/O bandwidth, of course.) Ditto for database, transaction, and all kinds of other servers. More cores means more simultaneous connections without performance degradation.
Cluster computing has similar benefits. With 8 cores in each processor, it is almost as good as having 8 times as many computers in the cluster, and a lot less expensive. This concept will scale up as the number of cores increases, assuming motherbaords can be designed with enough memory and FSB bandwidth to keep them all busy.
I think we might see a single quad-core chip in consumer systems, like the iMac. I think it is likely that we'll see them in Pro systems, like the Mac Pro (including a high-end model with two quad-core chips.)
I think processors with more than 4 cores will never be seen outside of servers - Xserves and maybe some configurations of Mac Pro. Mostly because that's where there is a need for this kind of power.
It really depends on your application.
On the desktop, if you're a typical user that's just interested in web surfing, playing music files, organizing your photo collection, etc., more than two cores will probably not be too useful. For these kinds of users, even two cores may be overkill, but two are useful for keeping a responsive UI when an application starts hogging all the CPU time.
If you start using higher-power applications (like video work - iMovie/iDVD, for instance) then more cores will speed up that kind of work (assuming the app is properly multithreaded, of course.) 4-core systems will definitely benefit this kind of user.
With current applications, however, I don't think more than 4 cores will be useful. The kind of work that will make 8 cores useful is the kinds that requires expensive professional software - which most people don't use.
If you get away from the desktop and look to the server market, however, the picture changes. A web server may only be running one copy of Apache, but it may create a thread for every simultaneous connection. If you have 8 cores, then you can handle 8 times as many connections as a 1-core system can (assuming sufficient memory and I/O bandwidth, of course.) Ditto for database, transaction, and all kinds of other servers. More cores means more simultaneous connections without performance degradation.
Cluster computing has similar benefits. With 8 cores in each processor, it is almost as good as having 8 times as many computers in the cluster, and a lot less expensive. This concept will scale up as the number of cores increases, assuming motherbaords can be designed with enough memory and FSB bandwidth to keep them all busy.
I think we might see a single quad-core chip in consumer systems, like the iMac. I think it is likely that we'll see them in Pro systems, like the Mac Pro (including a high-end model with two quad-core chips.)
I think processors with more than 4 cores will never be seen outside of servers - Xserves and maybe some configurations of Mac Pro. Mostly because that's where there is a need for this kind of power.
BRLawyer
Aug 26, 02:54 PM
Let's make it clear. The first revision of any highly integrated system is produced with an acceptable failure rate. With results coming in, failures recorded and internal testing continuous between the life of the first and second revision you will see a drop in failures in the next revision.
Every item that is in the next revision will have been tested, more flaws removed, etc. No piece of hardware is released with zero defects. [human interference aside such as dropping the product, overheating it, intentionally forcing failure]
If for every 1000 systems shipped approximately 20 fail, after a minimum predicted total hours, this 2% attrition rate is highly desirable. If you can't accept it you can stop using technology, now.
For every ten people bitching on this board about failures there is over 1,000 that don't.
That's exactly what I wanted to say...there are 10 whiners in this MR board that make a lot of noise, compared to 1,000,000 out there that don't...so we always have the impression that Apple is faltering, which is totally nonsense.
What matter are the independent reports and the statistical data that show, continuously, how Apple leads the pack in terms of support, reliability and MTBF; the rest is anecdotal evidence.
It's not only about industrial quality, which often depends on outsourced companies, overseas workers and contractual enforcement. It's also about giving the support a customer needs...and Apple is second to none in that.
Every item that is in the next revision will have been tested, more flaws removed, etc. No piece of hardware is released with zero defects. [human interference aside such as dropping the product, overheating it, intentionally forcing failure]
If for every 1000 systems shipped approximately 20 fail, after a minimum predicted total hours, this 2% attrition rate is highly desirable. If you can't accept it you can stop using technology, now.
For every ten people bitching on this board about failures there is over 1,000 that don't.
That's exactly what I wanted to say...there are 10 whiners in this MR board that make a lot of noise, compared to 1,000,000 out there that don't...so we always have the impression that Apple is faltering, which is totally nonsense.
What matter are the independent reports and the statistical data that show, continuously, how Apple leads the pack in terms of support, reliability and MTBF; the rest is anecdotal evidence.
It's not only about industrial quality, which often depends on outsourced companies, overseas workers and contractual enforcement. It's also about giving the support a customer needs...and Apple is second to none in that.
Macnoviz
Jul 21, 02:22 AM
<offtopic>
That would require Artificial Intelligence. If a computer can understand your speech, recognise your choice of words and understands that you don't neccessarily mean what you say all the time, then that's AI. If it can recognise specific objects in an "analogue" media such as a photograph, (I don't care if its a digital photo or not), it's AI. If it can then implement what it has learned alongside its infinite computational precision to remake a photo, while keeping it completely realistic, and making it look exactly how we wanted it to look, that's amazing, and lots of people will be out of jobs.
-Macnoviz
Woah. Well, there's more than raw computing involved there, there is context for the computer to understand. What is the "sun" what does "Dominant" really mean? What are power lines? What does "remove" really mean? And let's not go into what kind of DB would be needed to describe all of the differences a person's face exhibits over a lifetime!
I'm sure we'll get there and such 'life' DB's built I hope there is a standard set! Who says we don't need this really big drives!
That's where the internet comes in. Of course, it's a pipe dream, at least for the next thirthy years. But who knows, maybe some day they will unleash a web crawler with a rough AI onto the internet to soak up all information, thus creating one superbrain, connected to the internet. Isaac Asimov anyone?
That would require Artificial Intelligence. If a computer can understand your speech, recognise your choice of words and understands that you don't neccessarily mean what you say all the time, then that's AI. If it can recognise specific objects in an "analogue" media such as a photograph, (I don't care if its a digital photo or not), it's AI. If it can then implement what it has learned alongside its infinite computational precision to remake a photo, while keeping it completely realistic, and making it look exactly how we wanted it to look, that's amazing, and lots of people will be out of jobs.
-Macnoviz
Woah. Well, there's more than raw computing involved there, there is context for the computer to understand. What is the "sun" what does "Dominant" really mean? What are power lines? What does "remove" really mean? And let's not go into what kind of DB would be needed to describe all of the differences a person's face exhibits over a lifetime!
I'm sure we'll get there and such 'life' DB's built I hope there is a standard set! Who says we don't need this really big drives!
That's where the internet comes in. Of course, it's a pipe dream, at least for the next thirthy years. But who knows, maybe some day they will unleash a web crawler with a rough AI onto the internet to soak up all information, thus creating one superbrain, connected to the internet. Isaac Asimov anyone?
MCIowaRulz
Apr 5, 08:44 PM
I agree I for see FCP needing Mac OS X Lion
Durendal
Apr 5, 07:10 PM
About time. FCP is aging poorly. The engine is still Carbon and based around the old QT, which means that a lot of functions only use two cores at the most. I think we'll finally see Apple seriously leveraging GCD, OpenCL, etc here, although don't expect video compression to use OpenCL if the lousy quality of CUDA encodes is any indicator. Maybe Apple will add support for QuickSync on Sandy Bridge.
Also, Compressor is a damned joke. When your "Pro" software encoder gives you less options and lower quality with longer render times than free alternatives, you really need to go back to the drawing board. Yes, a lot of folks use hardware encoders, but really, if you're going to include a software encoder, at least make it as good as free software...
Also, Compressor is a damned joke. When your "Pro" software encoder gives you less options and lower quality with longer render times than free alternatives, you really need to go back to the drawing board. Yes, a lot of folks use hardware encoders, but really, if you're going to include a software encoder, at least make it as good as free software...
ergle2
Sep 13, 02:40 PM
So what do you think they meant with M/C/W being a derived arch and Penryn,etc being unified archs?
From what I understood, they'll stop having different characteristics (FSB,RAM,Cache) and instead just differentiate them with MHz and core count. Hence all the stories that future Intel chips (starting with Penryn I presume) won't use FSB.
I believe you've got it backwards. Penryn is a derived arch (check the diagram) -- it's derived from Conroe/Merom, etc., ie it's based on them with "more" -- faster FSB, more cache, a die shrink (which is technically less... :) ) etc.
Unified just means the micro-arch itself the same rather than the entire CPU. This is already true of Core2, and is significantly cheaper in terms production costs. Merom/Conroe are literally the same core in a different package, specified for different voltage/clockspeeds. I'm not sure if Woodcrest is but it seems highly likely.
The one oddity I am aware of is Allendale isn't a Conroe with half the cache disabled, it's actually a specific die. The rest of the microarch itself is the same, however.
Nehalem, etc. aren't derived because they're a new microarch. (Interestingly, Nehalem was originally intended for launch early 2007).
CSI replacing FSB was originally planned for 2006 in older roadmaps. It now looks like a 2008 debut with Tukwila (Itanium, not x86), and will no doubt work its way down from there.
From what I understood, they'll stop having different characteristics (FSB,RAM,Cache) and instead just differentiate them with MHz and core count. Hence all the stories that future Intel chips (starting with Penryn I presume) won't use FSB.
I believe you've got it backwards. Penryn is a derived arch (check the diagram) -- it's derived from Conroe/Merom, etc., ie it's based on them with "more" -- faster FSB, more cache, a die shrink (which is technically less... :) ) etc.
Unified just means the micro-arch itself the same rather than the entire CPU. This is already true of Core2, and is significantly cheaper in terms production costs. Merom/Conroe are literally the same core in a different package, specified for different voltage/clockspeeds. I'm not sure if Woodcrest is but it seems highly likely.
The one oddity I am aware of is Allendale isn't a Conroe with half the cache disabled, it's actually a specific die. The rest of the microarch itself is the same, however.
Nehalem, etc. aren't derived because they're a new microarch. (Interestingly, Nehalem was originally intended for launch early 2007).
CSI replacing FSB was originally planned for 2006 in older roadmaps. It now looks like a 2008 debut with Tukwila (Itanium, not x86), and will no doubt work its way down from there.
hexor
Mar 26, 08:24 AM
People may not realize that Mac OS X Server will be INCLUDED with the client version of OS X Lion. This in itself was a several hundred dollar product. Not only does it make running your own server even easier for non-techies it simplifies the OS X product version choices from 2 down to 1. And licensing for that broken up into single or family pack.
How many different versions of Windows does MS sell? :p I can't even figure out the number of versions of Windows MS makes, it is at least a couple dozen while Apple provides the same equivalent functionality in only 2 (single/family pack). The overhead in managing all those different versions is mind-bongling.
How many different versions of Windows does MS sell? :p I can't even figure out the number of versions of Windows MS makes, it is at least a couple dozen while Apple provides the same equivalent functionality in only 2 (single/family pack). The overhead in managing all those different versions is mind-bongling.
LanPhantom
Mar 31, 02:35 PM
The biggest advantage always given for Android over iOS is that it's "open source." Well, clearly that's not the case anymore. So, I can't think of any other reason to use Android over iOS, or even Windows 7. It looks like junk, and it's just a cheap ripoff of iOS.
I've been wanting to say this for a very long time. Google's OS has no advantage over iOS. You could even say it has a disadvantage. Having to create a vanilla code base that needs to function on multiple pieces of hardware is complex, more complexity creates weaker system.
But here's my point. The ONLY ONLY reason why Android market share is anywhere near what it is today is because of the Buy One Get One options at most phone retailers. iOS has NEVER done that and hopefully never will. If you didn't care about the phone or service but needed two "Newer Smart Phones" one for you and one for your wife, why not go with the "Blah Blah" model from Verizon where if I buy one today I get the second for free (two year agreement and activation fees required).
Market share means nothing. This platform is doomed unless Google reins it in and get control over it. If they do, providers will be less willing to work with them, if they don't, by by Android.
My Two Cents.
-LanPhantom
I've been wanting to say this for a very long time. Google's OS has no advantage over iOS. You could even say it has a disadvantage. Having to create a vanilla code base that needs to function on multiple pieces of hardware is complex, more complexity creates weaker system.
But here's my point. The ONLY ONLY reason why Android market share is anywhere near what it is today is because of the Buy One Get One options at most phone retailers. iOS has NEVER done that and hopefully never will. If you didn't care about the phone or service but needed two "Newer Smart Phones" one for you and one for your wife, why not go with the "Blah Blah" model from Verizon where if I buy one today I get the second for free (two year agreement and activation fees required).
Market share means nothing. This platform is doomed unless Google reins it in and get control over it. If they do, providers will be less willing to work with them, if they don't, by by Android.
My Two Cents.
-LanPhantom
shawnce
Aug 18, 10:14 PM
So You are saying 10 seconds from OFF to the Grey Apple then 5 more seconds to the desktop? With 3 GB of New Egg + 2GB RAM? That's still very fast. Quad G5 is almost as fast as that though.
A little random trivia I learned at WWDC 06...
- When you see the Apple symbol on an Intel Mac that means EFI boot loader is active.
- When you see the spinning progress indicator that means the kernel has taken over from EFI boot loader.
- When you see the the switch to blue with progress dialog then the logininwindow is active (launchd has been loading required boot time services by this point).
If you hold down option while booting and get into the traditional boot disk selection screen on a Intel based Mac you can add and remove storage devices and they will appear/disappear automatically (EFI allows for much faster scanning and dynamic add/remove of devices). Additionally they will use the volume icon if one is found and for fun you can use your IR remote to make your boot selection.
A little random trivia I learned at WWDC 06...
- When you see the Apple symbol on an Intel Mac that means EFI boot loader is active.
- When you see the spinning progress indicator that means the kernel has taken over from EFI boot loader.
- When you see the the switch to blue with progress dialog then the logininwindow is active (launchd has been loading required boot time services by this point).
If you hold down option while booting and get into the traditional boot disk selection screen on a Intel based Mac you can add and remove storage devices and they will appear/disappear automatically (EFI allows for much faster scanning and dynamic add/remove of devices). Additionally they will use the volume icon if one is found and for fun you can use your IR remote to make your boot selection.
Mattie Num Nums
Apr 19, 02:21 PM
Sigh, you're entirely missing the point of this case. No one's arguing that there's been a grid of icons before, it's just that Samsung went the extra step. See, Android itself doesn't have a near-identical desktop, but TouchWiz does. TouchWiz is what you see here, the icons have been made into squares (like the iPhone), there's now a Dock with frequently used apps with a grey background to distinguish it (like the iPhone), it has a black background (meh) but it uses white dots to note the page it's on (like the iPhone). They went the extra mile to provide an iPhone-like experience for their Android devices.
It appears from the F700's standpoint though the natural progression became TouchWiz.
It appears from the F700's standpoint though the natural progression became TouchWiz.
apolloa
Mar 22, 02:20 PM
I think the Playbook is better then the iPad because it's smaller. The interface is more interesting too IMO. Apple really need to get a 7" screen device out there.
slackpacker
Apr 10, 06:29 AM
Well I bet they handle Formats differently.
Gone is Pulldown. Gone is Film Support...replaced with the best web movie rendering support in the industry. Also Apple will change the antiquated delivery method for productions. Once your done you publish to the itunes store and you have now distributed your movie. The interface will be a multitrack version of iMovie. From watching this clip and all the industry big wigs saying "its wonderful" Ya its great but in a different way ... because whats going to be released is not FCP studio 4. I'm sure its a whole new thing. So all the iMovie 7 users who had to keep using it because iMovie 8 was a total re-write because of no legacy no pluggin support will happen to FC Editors. This will force Editors who use Studio 3 to continue to use S3 until they build up the features of this "new" editor. Its going to be a very interesting NAB. Avid and Premiere are going to gain a lot of new friends if this is true. But the larger batch of new editors who really could care less about 99% of what this small market needs will be very happy. I also bet the price is quite a bit lower as well.
This will be the everything is gone and changed upgrade.
Gone is Pulldown. Gone is Film Support...replaced with the best web movie rendering support in the industry. Also Apple will change the antiquated delivery method for productions. Once your done you publish to the itunes store and you have now distributed your movie. The interface will be a multitrack version of iMovie. From watching this clip and all the industry big wigs saying "its wonderful" Ya its great but in a different way ... because whats going to be released is not FCP studio 4. I'm sure its a whole new thing. So all the iMovie 7 users who had to keep using it because iMovie 8 was a total re-write because of no legacy no pluggin support will happen to FC Editors. This will force Editors who use Studio 3 to continue to use S3 until they build up the features of this "new" editor. Its going to be a very interesting NAB. Avid and Premiere are going to gain a lot of new friends if this is true. But the larger batch of new editors who really could care less about 99% of what this small market needs will be very happy. I also bet the price is quite a bit lower as well.
This will be the everything is gone and changed upgrade.
diamond.g
Apr 11, 02:44 PM
and i got an HTC INspire for $20 that is better than my old 3GS
At some point and time there will be a free (American) iPhone. I seem to remember our colleagues in other countries mentioning that they get free iPhones if they pay for the more expensive service.
At some point and time there will be a free (American) iPhone. I seem to remember our colleagues in other countries mentioning that they get free iPhones if they pay for the more expensive service.
shamino
Jul 20, 09:32 AM
Is having more cores more energy efficient than having one big fat ass 24Ghz processor? Maybe thats a factor in the increasing core count.
Actually, this is well documented.
There are serious electrical and physical problems with jacking up clock speeds much further than they are now. Intel managed to push their chips to 3.4GHz, but the power consumed was tremendous.
When you can't ramp up the clock speed, your next best alternative is to go for as much parallelism as you can - increase the number of instructions you can execute in a single clock.
Chip makers achieve this in a wide variety of ways, including multiple CPU packages on a motherboard, multiple cores per CPU package, multiple threads per core, and multiple functional units per thread.
And yes, a single CPU at 3GHz can easily consume more power than two CPUs (or two cores) at 1.5GHz.
As for your theoretical 24GHz processor, such a thing is simply not possible with today's technology. (Well, there were some university experiments that hit insanely fast speeds, but don't expect commercial products any time soon.) Given the heat/power curves of today's chips, I wouldn't want to think about the cooling requirements of a 24GHz chip if you could somehow manage to build one.
Of course, breakthroughs do happen, and higher clock speeds might become practical in the future. But multi-core tech isn't going away - we'll simply end up with multiple cores at higher clock speeds.
Actually, this is well documented.
There are serious electrical and physical problems with jacking up clock speeds much further than they are now. Intel managed to push their chips to 3.4GHz, but the power consumed was tremendous.
When you can't ramp up the clock speed, your next best alternative is to go for as much parallelism as you can - increase the number of instructions you can execute in a single clock.
Chip makers achieve this in a wide variety of ways, including multiple CPU packages on a motherboard, multiple cores per CPU package, multiple threads per core, and multiple functional units per thread.
And yes, a single CPU at 3GHz can easily consume more power than two CPUs (or two cores) at 1.5GHz.
As for your theoretical 24GHz processor, such a thing is simply not possible with today's technology. (Well, there were some university experiments that hit insanely fast speeds, but don't expect commercial products any time soon.) Given the heat/power curves of today's chips, I wouldn't want to think about the cooling requirements of a 24GHz chip if you could somehow manage to build one.
Of course, breakthroughs do happen, and higher clock speeds might become practical in the future. But multi-core tech isn't going away - we'll simply end up with multiple cores at higher clock speeds.
KnightWRX
Mar 23, 04:32 AM
Probably someone mentioned before, but "a tablet for professionals" named PLAYbook?
I smell an identity crisis.
Yes, someone did mention it before and that person got told that a PLAYbook is a book of strategies, not some kind of book for kids to play with. Think professional sports, the coach has his "playbook" with him with all the different "plays" in it that he's planning to use.
It translates well to the corporate world where company strategies are made and store on this device and communicated through it.
It's mostly non-english speakers that are trying desperately to find a problem with the name that see any sort of identity crisis. Most of us understand why RIM picked the name.
I smell an identity crisis.
Yes, someone did mention it before and that person got told that a PLAYbook is a book of strategies, not some kind of book for kids to play with. Think professional sports, the coach has his "playbook" with him with all the different "plays" in it that he's planning to use.
It translates well to the corporate world where company strategies are made and store on this device and communicated through it.
It's mostly non-english speakers that are trying desperately to find a problem with the name that see any sort of identity crisis. Most of us understand why RIM picked the name.
manu chao
Apr 25, 01:49 PM
Ah, the perfect storm! A (probable) bug that does not clip the data the way Google does it,
Natually this leads to stupid lawsuits. This is America, dammit!
And Google occasionally stores random data from any unsecured WiFi network its StreetView cars come by.
I now there were rumblings about government investigations into Google's data grab (which was transmitted and stored onto Google's computers) but was there also a lawsuit?
Not that Apple should not have fixed this presumed bug when it first was reported last year. Either nobody at Apple was really paying attention to what other people managed to extract in terms of 'forensic information' or they were not organised (or motivated) enough to get fix done. I cannot help myself but thinking that a scenario in which Apple knew about this but decided to fix it only with iOS 5 is not that unlikely.
Natually this leads to stupid lawsuits. This is America, dammit!
And Google occasionally stores random data from any unsecured WiFi network its StreetView cars come by.
I now there were rumblings about government investigations into Google's data grab (which was transmitted and stored onto Google's computers) but was there also a lawsuit?
Not that Apple should not have fixed this presumed bug when it first was reported last year. Either nobody at Apple was really paying attention to what other people managed to extract in terms of 'forensic information' or they were not organised (or motivated) enough to get fix done. I cannot help myself but thinking that a scenario in which Apple knew about this but decided to fix it only with iOS 5 is not that unlikely.
n-abounds
Sep 19, 12:31 AM
-- How about some new textures for the case, such as brushed copper? I think that would look sharp.
The day Apple makes a copper computer is the day it goes out of business.
Seriously DONT GET THAT COMPUTER WET. Leave it inside if it's humid out...:D
I don't want my computer looking like the statue of liberty.
The day Apple makes a copper computer is the day it goes out of business.
Seriously DONT GET THAT COMPUTER WET. Leave it inside if it's humid out...:D
I don't want my computer looking like the statue of liberty.
GenesisST
Mar 31, 02:53 PM
Oh, then I can take the Honeycomb source code and do whatever I want with it?
Oh, wait, I can't? Then how doesn't this make Android 'closed source'?
At least with Gingerbread (2.3), the source code wasn't available until it was officially released (on android.git.kernel.org). A few days after the release of Gingerbread, I could see the gingerbread branch.
Honeycomb is still not released as far as I know. When it's released and the code is not available, then we can talk.
Until then, it like a G5 powerbook :-D
Oh, wait, I can't? Then how doesn't this make Android 'closed source'?
At least with Gingerbread (2.3), the source code wasn't available until it was officially released (on android.git.kernel.org). A few days after the release of Gingerbread, I could see the gingerbread branch.
Honeycomb is still not released as far as I know. When it's released and the code is not available, then we can talk.
Until then, it like a G5 powerbook :-D
ictiosapiens
Aug 17, 04:37 AM
Does anyone seriously believe games today will show any significant improvement on a Mac Pro?
1. The video cards are underclocked compared to their PC equivalents on the Mac.
2. Generally, you are limited to a framerate of 60Hz anyway.
3. Most games are old ports, and need to run thru Rosetta.
When playing a game on a PC, you have DirectX to take full advantage of the hardware, and your processor is usually tagged consuming any and all cycles it can for the game. On a Mac, multithreading, and sharing the processor among apps seems to be the flow of the computing experience.
I'd predict a single Core2 Duo Extreme would still outdo a dual processor 3.0 Ghz Xeon Mac Pro when memory timings are nearly half of the Xeon on the Core2.
Bootcamp???
1. The video cards are underclocked compared to their PC equivalents on the Mac.
2. Generally, you are limited to a framerate of 60Hz anyway.
3. Most games are old ports, and need to run thru Rosetta.
When playing a game on a PC, you have DirectX to take full advantage of the hardware, and your processor is usually tagged consuming any and all cycles it can for the game. On a Mac, multithreading, and sharing the processor among apps seems to be the flow of the computing experience.
I'd predict a single Core2 Duo Extreme would still outdo a dual processor 3.0 Ghz Xeon Mac Pro when memory timings are nearly half of the Xeon on the Core2.
Bootcamp???
OllyW
Mar 26, 06:54 AM
Got to wait for the results from the beta testers who buy 10.7 on release. Learn the lessons of 10.6, I waited until 10.6.2 was out!
I'll get it and try it on the release day but I'll have a clone of my Snow Leopard HD ready incase it all goes tits up. :)
I'll get it and try it on the release day but I'll have a clone of my Snow Leopard HD ready incase it all goes tits up. :)
Erasmus
Nov 28, 11:22 PM
So, this proposed cost is to counter profit losses due to piracy?
Well... If that's so, we all know what we must do if this occurs...
PIRATE PIRATE PIRATE!!!
:)
And pirate Microsoft products because they made this happen... Wait... We were all already doing that, so... Pirate More? I dunno.
The music industry is just desperate because they know that they won't be around much longer. Once big music groups start putting their songs straight on iTMS instead of going through big companies like Universal, well they are screwed, and everyone else wins.
Then again, you could look at it this way... Universal is becoming redundant, and they want their redundancy payment, as we all would.
Well... If that's so, we all know what we must do if this occurs...
PIRATE PIRATE PIRATE!!!
:)
And pirate Microsoft products because they made this happen... Wait... We were all already doing that, so... Pirate More? I dunno.
The music industry is just desperate because they know that they won't be around much longer. Once big music groups start putting their songs straight on iTMS instead of going through big companies like Universal, well they are screwed, and everyone else wins.
Then again, you could look at it this way... Universal is becoming redundant, and they want their redundancy payment, as we all would.
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق