Malligator
Mar 31, 03:49 PM
And the Apple haters do yet another 180...
1. Macs
1995 to 2007: Don't use a Mac. Noone uses Macs.
2007 to Present: Don't use a Mac. Everyone uses a Mac.
2. Apps
1995 to 2/22/2011: Don't use Apple. There is no software and they can't do anything.
2/22 to Present: Apps? Who needs Apps as long as you have a robust UI?
3. Open
2007 to Today: Apple is a walled garden that only stupid lemmings use.
Today going forward: Controlling the OS is necessary and good for the consumer.
1. Macs
1995 to 2007: Don't use a Mac. Noone uses Macs.
2007 to Present: Don't use a Mac. Everyone uses a Mac.
2. Apps
1995 to 2/22/2011: Don't use Apple. There is no software and they can't do anything.
2/22 to Present: Apps? Who needs Apps as long as you have a robust UI?
3. Open
2007 to Today: Apple is a walled garden that only stupid lemmings use.
Today going forward: Controlling the OS is necessary and good for the consumer.
wmmk
Aug 17, 03:32 PM
And for what purpose? Would any of you drop the $3500 needed to upgrade to the latest Mac Pro? Or is it just the drool factor, like when you look through Car and Driver and drool over an $80K sports car?
Some people do things called graphic design and video editing for a living. Sometimes, when you want to make money and put food on the table, you want top of the line equipment.:rolleyes:
Some people do things called graphic design and video editing for a living. Sometimes, when you want to make money and put food on the table, you want top of the line equipment.:rolleyes:
chubad
Aug 11, 07:37 PM
If Apple makes a phone, I will order one on the spot. If the interface is as well thought out and simple as the iPod, then it will be a smash hit.:D
ergle2
Sep 15, 01:08 PM
On an unrelated note, wouldnt it been cool to effectivly install a whole OS on RAM. That would be noticably quicker....
The OS would be faster but unless you had tons of RAM, the Apps ... :)
Modern OSes use RAM not used by apps to cache recently used files/data, since it makes more sense to keep around stuff the system mind need again. Most OS files aren't needed (just look at the size of the OS itself on any system!).
Of course, back in my Amiga days, pretty much all the OS was running from ROM/RAM, and it had pre-emptive multitasking but no VM system. As a result, it was incredibly snappy to use, despite being a 7.14MHz 68K. I've occasionally seen real Amigas since then and I'm always impressed by how "fast" it feels, even if the system itself seems rather primative by modern standards.
I imagine the early Macs were somewhat similar in this regard, but I didn't use one properly til the early 90's, by which time I was more interested in Unix, VMS, etc.
The OS would be faster but unless you had tons of RAM, the Apps ... :)
Modern OSes use RAM not used by apps to cache recently used files/data, since it makes more sense to keep around stuff the system mind need again. Most OS files aren't needed (just look at the size of the OS itself on any system!).
Of course, back in my Amiga days, pretty much all the OS was running from ROM/RAM, and it had pre-emptive multitasking but no VM system. As a result, it was incredibly snappy to use, despite being a 7.14MHz 68K. I've occasionally seen real Amigas since then and I'm always impressed by how "fast" it feels, even if the system itself seems rather primative by modern standards.
I imagine the early Macs were somewhat similar in this regard, but I didn't use one properly til the early 90's, by which time I was more interested in Unix, VMS, etc.
FF_productions
Aug 15, 01:04 PM
has adobe dropped any hints as to when CS3 will be available
2nd quarter of 2007 is what I'm hearing.
Beat me to it.
2nd quarter of 2007 is what I'm hearing.
Beat me to it.
ergle2
Sep 19, 12:56 PM
thx for your reply,
i will go for the mac pro quad know (i'm updating my home computer wich is a G3, but i'm used to work on a dual G5 for my projects) and yeah i will allways be able then to update later, but how about ram, when DDR3 comes out, i read that its going to replace FB-DIMMs so will that be upgradeble too???
cause these FB-DIMMS are so ********** expensive :) thx
DDR and FB aren't mutually exclusive technologies. Current FB-DIMMs use DDR2 chips. Newer FB-DIMMs will use DDR3 chips but due to the way FB-DIMMs work -- the buffer and control hardware essentially sit between the memory and the MCH -- you should still be able to use them in a Mac Pro. Note, should, not will.
You won't be able to use regular DDR3 DIMMs just like you can't use regular DDR2 DIMMs tho'. That's something that'd require a major design change to the motherboard.
So, memory will still be damn' expensive compared to that found in the cheap desktops...
i will go for the mac pro quad know (i'm updating my home computer wich is a G3, but i'm used to work on a dual G5 for my projects) and yeah i will allways be able then to update later, but how about ram, when DDR3 comes out, i read that its going to replace FB-DIMMs so will that be upgradeble too???
cause these FB-DIMMS are so ********** expensive :) thx
DDR and FB aren't mutually exclusive technologies. Current FB-DIMMs use DDR2 chips. Newer FB-DIMMs will use DDR3 chips but due to the way FB-DIMMs work -- the buffer and control hardware essentially sit between the memory and the MCH -- you should still be able to use them in a Mac Pro. Note, should, not will.
You won't be able to use regular DDR3 DIMMs just like you can't use regular DDR2 DIMMs tho'. That's something that'd require a major design change to the motherboard.
So, memory will still be damn' expensive compared to that found in the cheap desktops...
Full of Win
Mar 31, 07:19 PM
Exactly. What we need are more objective, balanced and rational sounding opinions like yours.
What he said was spot on. Gruber is the archetypical Apple sycophant, second only to Andy Ifatso from MacBreak Weekly.
What he said was spot on. Gruber is the archetypical Apple sycophant, second only to Andy Ifatso from MacBreak Weekly.
tmofee
Mar 25, 10:44 PM
i wonder if apple will release a version in the app store???
Fabio_gsilva
Jul 27, 07:55 PM
http://www.alienware.com/product_detail_Pages/area-51_alx/area-51_overview.aspx?SysCode=PC-AREA51-ALX-R5&SubCode=SKU-DEFAULT
Man, alienware is ready to ship new Area 51 ALX PC wuth Core 2 duo Extreme processors. This must be huge!!!
I'd love to see one in real life...
Man, alienware is ready to ship new Area 51 ALX PC wuth Core 2 duo Extreme processors. This must be huge!!!
I'd love to see one in real life...
Willis
Jul 27, 04:02 PM
Roz Ho? said at Macworld SF that Microsoft BU was commiting at least 5 more years of mac software.
they say they like the platform... go figure.
ADD: just a thought aswell. Wonder if we may see the next Office at WWDC?
they say they like the platform... go figure.
ADD: just a thought aswell. Wonder if we may see the next Office at WWDC?
maelstromr
Apr 19, 05:33 PM
Is that we here in ka world know our Apple products....
But out in the Minnesota farmlands.... They may not have seen the ads....
Met up with another farming buddy... A couple of beers.
Gone to a tech shop to buy a smartphone n thought through the beer bottle they bought themselves a samsung iPhone.
:rolleyes:
/sarcasm
So what's your point? The presence of competition does not harm a competitor? Seems contrary to that whole "competition" word.
And your next point is what? A successful company should allow a competitor to use it's technology/patents to compete with it? All at the same time as just taking it from all the competitors that sue Apple on the other companies' patents, right?
How many anti-Apple suing trolls here are also pro-other company suing Apple trolls in other threads?
So you don't like the way IP law works? Vote for someone who will change the legal structure. Until then, corporations are going to work in the environment your legislators and courts created. Hate the game, not the player.
But out in the Minnesota farmlands.... They may not have seen the ads....
Met up with another farming buddy... A couple of beers.
Gone to a tech shop to buy a smartphone n thought through the beer bottle they bought themselves a samsung iPhone.
:rolleyes:
/sarcasm
So what's your point? The presence of competition does not harm a competitor? Seems contrary to that whole "competition" word.
And your next point is what? A successful company should allow a competitor to use it's technology/patents to compete with it? All at the same time as just taking it from all the competitors that sue Apple on the other companies' patents, right?
How many anti-Apple suing trolls here are also pro-other company suing Apple trolls in other threads?
So you don't like the way IP law works? Vote for someone who will change the legal structure. Until then, corporations are going to work in the environment your legislators and courts created. Hate the game, not the player.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 25, 01:59 PM
Good. Hopefully Apple takes action to change this and set up an open process for monitoring what is tracked. The lawsuit would hopefully be dropped at that point.
This isn't good and has to stop.
This isn't good and has to stop.
azzurri000
Sep 18, 11:51 PM
1. It's Merom. Not Memrom, Menron, Memron or even L. Ron.
I got a good laugh out of the MacRumors Memron movement (of sorts)!
I got a good laugh out of the MacRumors Memron movement (of sorts)!
vincenz
Apr 27, 07:58 AM
A "bug" right? ;)
Dagless
Aug 19, 10:19 AM
Bugger, well I hope there is plenty of access to Premium cars. I intend to play this game in the driver camera view since I'll be playing this on a 3DTV.
MacRumors
Aug 7, 03:14 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Also during Apple's WWDC keynote, Steve Jobs previewed Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard). Among the features demonstrated were:
- 64 bit (http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/64bit.html) application support extended throughought the User Interface layer of the OS, allowing "full" 64-bit application development and deployment.
- Time Machine (http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/timemachine.html), automatic backup and restoring of files corrupted or accidentally deleted or overwritten by the user.
- Spaces (http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/spaces.html), Apple's implementation of virtual desktops.
- Core Animation (http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/coreanimation.html)
- Enhancements to Dashboard (http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/dashboard.html), Spotlight (http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/spotlight.html), Mail (http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/mail.html), iCal (http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/ical.html) and Universal Access (http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/accessibility.html)
- Boot Camp, and "next generation" Front Row, and Photo Booth bundled
Apple plan to release Leopard in "Spring 2007."
More information can be found at Apple's Leopard Sneak Peek (http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/) pages.
Also during Apple's WWDC keynote, Steve Jobs previewed Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard). Among the features demonstrated were:
- 64 bit (http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/64bit.html) application support extended throughought the User Interface layer of the OS, allowing "full" 64-bit application development and deployment.
- Time Machine (http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/timemachine.html), automatic backup and restoring of files corrupted or accidentally deleted or overwritten by the user.
- Spaces (http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/spaces.html), Apple's implementation of virtual desktops.
- Core Animation (http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/coreanimation.html)
- Enhancements to Dashboard (http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/dashboard.html), Spotlight (http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/spotlight.html), Mail (http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/mail.html), iCal (http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/ical.html) and Universal Access (http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/accessibility.html)
- Boot Camp, and "next generation" Front Row, and Photo Booth bundled
Apple plan to release Leopard in "Spring 2007."
More information can be found at Apple's Leopard Sneak Peek (http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/) pages.
moogs
Sep 13, 10:57 AM
Would it be smart to wait for these 8 core mac pros or are they still a long ways away?
iliketyla
Mar 31, 02:33 PM
Let the Apple fanboys begin patting each other on the back, and taking something and running wild with it.
By the end of this thread, it'll be impossible to decipher what the original story was about.
By the end of this thread, it'll be impossible to decipher what the original story was about.
skunk
Feb 28, 07:12 PM
2) okay, they can pretend to get marriedNo, you are absolutely wrong., They can get married like any other couple where the laws allow. Marriage is not a special preserve of any religion. You cannot just commandeer it.
No, I'm not kidding. To the Catholic Church sex outside of a valid sacramental marriage is fornicationWho cares what Catholic dogma claims? It's an irrelevance.
Last time I checked when the vast majority of people did such behavior it was with the opposite gender not the same.So what is the problem? Are you against variation?
Do you have proof that Plato was a repressed homosexual?No, not proof
"Homosexuality," Plato wrote, "is regarded as shameful by barbarians and by those who live under despotic governments just as philosophy is regarded as shameful by them, because it is apparently not in the interest of such rulers to have great ideas engendered in their subjects, or powerful friendships or passionate love-all of which homosexuality is particularly apt to produce." This attitude of Plato's was characteristic of the ancient world, and I want to begin my discussion of the attitudes of the Church and of Western Christianity toward homosexuality by commenting on comparable attitudes among the ancients.
To a very large extent, Western attitudes toward law, religion, literature and government are dependent upon Roman attitudes. This makes it particularly striking that our attitudes toward homosexuality in particular and sexual tolerance in general are so remarkably different from those of the Romans. It is very difficult to convey to modern audiences the indifference of the Romans to questions of gender and gender orientation. The difficulty is due both to the fact that the evidence has been largely consciously obliterated by historians prior to very recent decades, and to the diffusion of the relevant material.
Romans did not consider sexuality or sexual preference a matter of much interest, nor did they treat either in an analytical way. An historian has to gather together thousands of little bits and pieces to demonstrate the general acceptance of homosexuality among the Romans.
One of the few imperial writers who does appear to make some sort of comment on the subject in a general way wrote, "Zeus came as an eagle to god like Ganymede and as a swan to the fair haired mother of Helen. One person prefers one gender, another the other, I like both." Plutarch wrote at about the same time, "No sensible person can imagine that the sexes differ in matters of love as they do in matters of clothing. The intelligent lover of beauty will be attracted to beauty in whichever gender he finds it." Roman law and social strictures made absolutely no restrictions on the basis of gender. It has sometimes been claimed that there were laws against homosexual relations in Rome, but it is easy to prove that this was not the case. On the other hand, it is a mistake to imagine that anarchic hedonism ruled at Rome. In fact, Romans did have a complex set of moral strictures designed to protect children from abuse or any citizen from force or duress in sexual relations. Romans were, like other people, sensitive to issues of love and caring, but individual sexual (i.e. gender) choice was completely unlimited. Male prostitution (directed toward other males), for instance, was so common that the taxes on it constituted a major source of revenue for the imperial treasury. It was so profitable that even in later periods when a certain intolerance crept in, the emperors could not bring themselves to end the practice and its attendant revenue.
Gay marriages were also legal and frequent in Rome for both males and females. Even emperors often married other males. There was total acceptance on the part of the populace, as far as it can be determined, of this sort of homosexual attitude and behavior. This total acceptance was not limited to the ruling elite; there is also much popular Roman literature containing gay love stories. The real point I want to make is that there is absolutely no conscious effort on anyone's part in the Roman world, the world in which Christianity was born, to claim that homosexuality was abnormal or undesirable. There is in fact no word for "homosexual" in Latin. "Homosexual" sounds like Latin, but was coined by a German psychologist in the late 1 9th century. No one in the early Roman world seemed to feel that the fact that someone preferred his or her own gender was any more significant than the fact that someone preferred blue eyes or short people. Neither gay nor straight people seemed to associate certain characteristics with sexual preference. Gay men were not thought to be less masculine than straight men and lesbian women were not thought of as less feminine than straight women. Gay people were not thought to be any better or worse than straight people-an attitude which differed both from that of the society that preceded it, since many Greeks thought gay people were inherently better than straight people, and from that of the society which followed it, in which gay people were often thought to be inferior to others.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/1979boswell.html
The most celebrated account of homosexual love comes in Plato's Symposium, in which homosexual love is discussed as a more ideal, more perfect kind of relationship than the more prosaic heterosexual variety. This is a highly biased account, because Plato himself was homosexual and wrote very beautiful epigrams to boys expressing his devotion. Platonic homosexuality had very little to do with sex; Plato believed ideally that love and reason should be fused together, while concern over the body and the material world of particulars should be annihilated. Even today, "Platonic love" refers to non-sexual love between two adults.
Behind Plato's contempt for heterosexual desire lay an aesthetic, highly intellectual aversion to the female body. Plato would have agreed with Schopenhauer's opinion that "only a male intellect clouded by the sexual drive could call the stunted, narrow-shouldered, broad-hipped and short-legged sex the fair sex".
http://www.newstatesman.com/199908230009
No, I'm not kidding. To the Catholic Church sex outside of a valid sacramental marriage is fornicationWho cares what Catholic dogma claims? It's an irrelevance.
Last time I checked when the vast majority of people did such behavior it was with the opposite gender not the same.So what is the problem? Are you against variation?
Do you have proof that Plato was a repressed homosexual?No, not proof
"Homosexuality," Plato wrote, "is regarded as shameful by barbarians and by those who live under despotic governments just as philosophy is regarded as shameful by them, because it is apparently not in the interest of such rulers to have great ideas engendered in their subjects, or powerful friendships or passionate love-all of which homosexuality is particularly apt to produce." This attitude of Plato's was characteristic of the ancient world, and I want to begin my discussion of the attitudes of the Church and of Western Christianity toward homosexuality by commenting on comparable attitudes among the ancients.
To a very large extent, Western attitudes toward law, religion, literature and government are dependent upon Roman attitudes. This makes it particularly striking that our attitudes toward homosexuality in particular and sexual tolerance in general are so remarkably different from those of the Romans. It is very difficult to convey to modern audiences the indifference of the Romans to questions of gender and gender orientation. The difficulty is due both to the fact that the evidence has been largely consciously obliterated by historians prior to very recent decades, and to the diffusion of the relevant material.
Romans did not consider sexuality or sexual preference a matter of much interest, nor did they treat either in an analytical way. An historian has to gather together thousands of little bits and pieces to demonstrate the general acceptance of homosexuality among the Romans.
One of the few imperial writers who does appear to make some sort of comment on the subject in a general way wrote, "Zeus came as an eagle to god like Ganymede and as a swan to the fair haired mother of Helen. One person prefers one gender, another the other, I like both." Plutarch wrote at about the same time, "No sensible person can imagine that the sexes differ in matters of love as they do in matters of clothing. The intelligent lover of beauty will be attracted to beauty in whichever gender he finds it." Roman law and social strictures made absolutely no restrictions on the basis of gender. It has sometimes been claimed that there were laws against homosexual relations in Rome, but it is easy to prove that this was not the case. On the other hand, it is a mistake to imagine that anarchic hedonism ruled at Rome. In fact, Romans did have a complex set of moral strictures designed to protect children from abuse or any citizen from force or duress in sexual relations. Romans were, like other people, sensitive to issues of love and caring, but individual sexual (i.e. gender) choice was completely unlimited. Male prostitution (directed toward other males), for instance, was so common that the taxes on it constituted a major source of revenue for the imperial treasury. It was so profitable that even in later periods when a certain intolerance crept in, the emperors could not bring themselves to end the practice and its attendant revenue.
Gay marriages were also legal and frequent in Rome for both males and females. Even emperors often married other males. There was total acceptance on the part of the populace, as far as it can be determined, of this sort of homosexual attitude and behavior. This total acceptance was not limited to the ruling elite; there is also much popular Roman literature containing gay love stories. The real point I want to make is that there is absolutely no conscious effort on anyone's part in the Roman world, the world in which Christianity was born, to claim that homosexuality was abnormal or undesirable. There is in fact no word for "homosexual" in Latin. "Homosexual" sounds like Latin, but was coined by a German psychologist in the late 1 9th century. No one in the early Roman world seemed to feel that the fact that someone preferred his or her own gender was any more significant than the fact that someone preferred blue eyes or short people. Neither gay nor straight people seemed to associate certain characteristics with sexual preference. Gay men were not thought to be less masculine than straight men and lesbian women were not thought of as less feminine than straight women. Gay people were not thought to be any better or worse than straight people-an attitude which differed both from that of the society that preceded it, since many Greeks thought gay people were inherently better than straight people, and from that of the society which followed it, in which gay people were often thought to be inferior to others.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/1979boswell.html
The most celebrated account of homosexual love comes in Plato's Symposium, in which homosexual love is discussed as a more ideal, more perfect kind of relationship than the more prosaic heterosexual variety. This is a highly biased account, because Plato himself was homosexual and wrote very beautiful epigrams to boys expressing his devotion. Platonic homosexuality had very little to do with sex; Plato believed ideally that love and reason should be fused together, while concern over the body and the material world of particulars should be annihilated. Even today, "Platonic love" refers to non-sexual love between two adults.
Behind Plato's contempt for heterosexual desire lay an aesthetic, highly intellectual aversion to the female body. Plato would have agreed with Schopenhauer's opinion that "only a male intellect clouded by the sexual drive could call the stunted, narrow-shouldered, broad-hipped and short-legged sex the fair sex".
http://www.newstatesman.com/199908230009
craig jones
Sep 13, 12:58 PM
Arrays of cheap RAM on a PCIe card?
The RAM companies don't seem interested in making wodges of slow cheap hi-cap ram, only in bumping up the speed and upping the capacity. For the last 10 years, a stick of decent RAM has always been about �100/ $100 no matter what the capacity / flavour of the moment is.
Even slow RAM is still orders of magnitude faster than a HD, hence my point. There's various historical and technical factors as to why we have the current situation.
I've also looked at RAID implementations (I run a RAID5) but each RAID level has its own problems.
I've recently seen that single-user RAID3 might be one way forward for the desktop, but don't really know enough about it yet.
Slow RAM may be faster than hard disk but it's too slow for main memory. It could be useful for disk cache but products like that came and went. If such hardware could actually result in performance improvements to justify their costs then you'd see products that used them.
As for RAID 3, it has been used before but really has no place considering modern disk drives and workloads. RAID 3 and 4, in order to work properly, require spindle sync. Workstations have no business implementing any parity-based RAID scheme. Servers used RAID 5 when they have high capacity needs and aren't sensitive to write performance.
The RAM companies don't seem interested in making wodges of slow cheap hi-cap ram, only in bumping up the speed and upping the capacity. For the last 10 years, a stick of decent RAM has always been about �100/ $100 no matter what the capacity / flavour of the moment is.
Even slow RAM is still orders of magnitude faster than a HD, hence my point. There's various historical and technical factors as to why we have the current situation.
I've also looked at RAID implementations (I run a RAID5) but each RAID level has its own problems.
I've recently seen that single-user RAID3 might be one way forward for the desktop, but don't really know enough about it yet.
Slow RAM may be faster than hard disk but it's too slow for main memory. It could be useful for disk cache but products like that came and went. If such hardware could actually result in performance improvements to justify their costs then you'd see products that used them.
As for RAID 3, it has been used before but really has no place considering modern disk drives and workloads. RAID 3 and 4, in order to work properly, require spindle sync. Workstations have no business implementing any parity-based RAID scheme. Servers used RAID 5 when they have high capacity needs and aren't sensitive to write performance.
BornAgainMac
Jul 21, 07:19 AM
Now you just need to decide what color your want your new computer... (again)
-aggie-
Jun 22, 08:08 AM
I'm tired of wading through all these posts. I didn't see it mentioned, but does anyone know if the Shack is carrying the 32GB iPhone 4?
mamouneyya
Mar 31, 03:08 PM
Hahahahahaha! Go to the hell!
:apple: iOS for ever :apple:
:D:D
:apple: iOS for ever :apple:
:D:D
netdog
Aug 11, 02:42 PM
MS Windows has about 95% of the world market...doesn't mean the technology is better.:)
A phone that works in most of the world is better for many of us. Who wants a phone that won't work in Europe for instance? Last I checked, my Mac works here just fine.
A phone that works in most of the world is better for many of us. Who wants a phone that won't work in Europe for instance? Last I checked, my Mac works here just fine.