SandynJosh
Apr 26, 03:56 PM
I love that argument - who told Apple to only make 1 phone? Nobody it was their decision. This is PC vs Mac all over again - history repeating itself.
I can't wait to see how Steve Jobs spins this somehow at WWDC - my guess is he'll throw iPod Touches and iPads into their numbers so it doesn't look as horrible as the Nielsen chart shows.
At the end of the day, the truth hurts - Android is the new defacto platform for mobile and that means developers, developers, developers.
I suspect you're just trolling because I can't believe that you're as clueless as you pretend.
The Android platform is so highly fractured that to write an app for one Android phone doesn't mean you got the platform covered... far from it. Apple's IOS platform is huge, and has only shrunk in market share by a couple points (PIM is the one taking a beating) since the last survey.
The controlled environment of the IOS, which extends to iPods, and iPads, makes for a more profitable platform for developers. This not wishful dreaming, it's a fact any developer will tell you, or you can jump into the archives and learn for yourself.
I can't wait to see how Steve Jobs spins this somehow at WWDC - my guess is he'll throw iPod Touches and iPads into their numbers so it doesn't look as horrible as the Nielsen chart shows.
At the end of the day, the truth hurts - Android is the new defacto platform for mobile and that means developers, developers, developers.
I suspect you're just trolling because I can't believe that you're as clueless as you pretend.
The Android platform is so highly fractured that to write an app for one Android phone doesn't mean you got the platform covered... far from it. Apple's IOS platform is huge, and has only shrunk in market share by a couple points (PIM is the one taking a beating) since the last survey.
The controlled environment of the IOS, which extends to iPods, and iPads, makes for a more profitable platform for developers. This not wishful dreaming, it's a fact any developer will tell you, or you can jump into the archives and learn for yourself.
marksman
Mar 29, 05:43 PM
God hates us listening to music.
M87
Apr 20, 12:53 AM
I don't think I'll be upgrading if that's all it is.
Snik
Jan 8, 09:56 PM
I have just installed Sophos Anti Virus - what a mistake!
I decided to install it because I have been a long term user of Sophos at work on the corporate PC and having installed the latest OSX I saw virus checkers in the App Store and a recommendation for Sophos there in a reference for another product.
I ran a scan and a couple of PC specific malware files were found and destroyed.
Then I noticed that my Time Machine back up was struggling.
It turns out that there are issues with Sophos and Time Machine.
I moved my Time Machine back ups to a DroboFS in December I have now lost all my back ups since then.
Once I have backed up again I will be deinstalling it - bet I find that I loose the new back up then!
:mad:
I decided to install it because I have been a long term user of Sophos at work on the corporate PC and having installed the latest OSX I saw virus checkers in the App Store and a recommendation for Sophos there in a reference for another product.
I ran a scan and a couple of PC specific malware files were found and destroyed.
Then I noticed that my Time Machine back up was struggling.
It turns out that there are issues with Sophos and Time Machine.
I moved my Time Machine back ups to a DroboFS in December I have now lost all my back ups since then.
Once I have backed up again I will be deinstalling it - bet I find that I loose the new back up then!
:mad:
cactus33
Apr 23, 10:36 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8H7)
As I said a while ago, the next gen of MBP's will have a really good screen as a main selling point.
No one listens!
Maybe good screens, but NOT retinas. :P (Although I wish they would have them)
As I said a while ago, the next gen of MBP's will have a really good screen as a main selling point.
No one listens!
Maybe good screens, but NOT retinas. :P (Although I wish they would have them)
VicMacs
Apr 25, 09:21 AM
Genius, I say.
marksman
Apr 7, 03:25 PM
Yes, the war just started and things are heating up. I would think the next few years will result in a tablet OS distribution that looks like this:
iOS - 35%
Android - 40%
WebOS - 20%
RIM - 5%
Apple - 35%
HP - 20%
RIM - 5%
Samsung - 15%
Moto - 10%
LG - 10%
HTC - 5%
Maybe Microsoft will wedge their way in, maybe the percentages will be shifted around a little. But the growth of the tablet market will stabilize or at least stop growing at the rapid pace that it currently enjoys.
The point I'm making is that the hot market only seems to be lasting 4 to 5 years. 10 years ago, MP3 players was the hot market. 5 years ago, smartphones was the hot market. This year, it's tablets. 5 years from now ... who knows, but it won't be tablets.
Don't apply the phone dynamic to Tablets. Android is not likely to take a lead in tablet market share for a long time if forever.
Every single time a customer goes to buy a tablet they will have the choice to buy an iPad. The only way that changes is if the wireless companies are able to give away cheap android tablets with data plan contracts. Otherwise, it is going to be very difficult for the commodity android market to overtake Apple.
Every store they go to, an iPad will be there next to it, and since Apple took such an aggressive price stance from the beginning, it is going to be hard for anyone to take that position away from them, especially a mish mash of opposing companies relying on a free OS by another party.
iOS - 35%
Android - 40%
WebOS - 20%
RIM - 5%
Apple - 35%
HP - 20%
RIM - 5%
Samsung - 15%
Moto - 10%
LG - 10%
HTC - 5%
Maybe Microsoft will wedge their way in, maybe the percentages will be shifted around a little. But the growth of the tablet market will stabilize or at least stop growing at the rapid pace that it currently enjoys.
The point I'm making is that the hot market only seems to be lasting 4 to 5 years. 10 years ago, MP3 players was the hot market. 5 years ago, smartphones was the hot market. This year, it's tablets. 5 years from now ... who knows, but it won't be tablets.
Don't apply the phone dynamic to Tablets. Android is not likely to take a lead in tablet market share for a long time if forever.
Every single time a customer goes to buy a tablet they will have the choice to buy an iPad. The only way that changes is if the wireless companies are able to give away cheap android tablets with data plan contracts. Otherwise, it is going to be very difficult for the commodity android market to overtake Apple.
Every store they go to, an iPad will be there next to it, and since Apple took such an aggressive price stance from the beginning, it is going to be hard for anyone to take that position away from them, especially a mish mash of opposing companies relying on a free OS by another party.
Detlev
Aug 4, 09:37 AM
Well, it makes sense that Apple would have to be aggresively pursuing these chips now that they are in the true PC market. If they were to sit on their laurels they would honestly find out how fast this market would eat them alive. It does not take much to assume, guess, spread rumors about such a thing and be correct.
Am3822
Sep 11, 05:59 AM
It would be one of them movie/media thingies, so my pessimistic newb bones inform me.
IntelliUser
Nov 16, 01:23 PM
Cool, thanks for the info, i didnt know about this product. Although reading the feature list it sounds more like a internet security and windows virus detector then a mac AV. But maybe i'm wrong.
Anyone who has tested it and is willing to share the experience?
(maybe i take a snapshot of my OSX and give the demo a try, dont want to risk it :) )
Nah, there's no firewall, no anti-spam, no credit card protection - nothing like that. It's just NOD32 for Mac. Both NOD32 and Eset Smart Security Windows licenses should work with it.
Anyone who has tested it and is willing to share the experience?
(maybe i take a snapshot of my OSX and give the demo a try, dont want to risk it :) )
Nah, there's no firewall, no anti-spam, no credit card protection - nothing like that. It's just NOD32 for Mac. Both NOD32 and Eset Smart Security Windows licenses should work with it.
tpavur
Apr 21, 08:31 PM
Yet another sign Apple is going to kill the Mac Pro.
You'll see! With Final Cut Pro on it's deathbed there is no way the Mac Pro is sticking around!
/s
doubtful, this is a key switcher market... it would be crazy to axe the very thing that will continue to switch the PC builders/gamers over the next 5 years... this is a key ingredient to apple taking the industry over with time.
You'll see! With Final Cut Pro on it's deathbed there is no way the Mac Pro is sticking around!
/s
doubtful, this is a key switcher market... it would be crazy to axe the very thing that will continue to switch the PC builders/gamers over the next 5 years... this is a key ingredient to apple taking the industry over with time.
citizenzen
Apr 14, 10:02 AM
You can always donate to the federal reserve. Don't let me stop you!
Pardon me for trying to spread the responsibility across the board.
I realize how grossly unfair that is. :rolleyes:
Pardon me for trying to spread the responsibility across the board.
I realize how grossly unfair that is. :rolleyes:
Mac'nCheese
Apr 10, 08:53 AM
I inputed it exactly like this in my calculator and I got 2. So...
Edit: I voted 2 because I thought of it as 48 over (/) 2(9+3)
But written as 48�2(9+3) I would say 288...
Strange.
You didn't enter it properly then...
Here
280594
The thing about this question is, whats the point of the parentheses..
Try using a calculator that uses the "/" instead of the divided by sign. You'll get 288. I tried it the way you did it on an old calculator and I got 2. But that's not the way it is in the OP. It's 48/2(9+3)
LOL um... ok? It's a calculator...
For the last time, a simple google search will show you guys that unless the calculator is in scientific mode, it will give you the wrong answer. Hard to believe, I guess, that a machine could be wrong, but it's true.
Edit: I voted 2 because I thought of it as 48 over (/) 2(9+3)
But written as 48�2(9+3) I would say 288...
Strange.
You didn't enter it properly then...
Here
280594
The thing about this question is, whats the point of the parentheses..
Try using a calculator that uses the "/" instead of the divided by sign. You'll get 288. I tried it the way you did it on an old calculator and I got 2. But that's not the way it is in the OP. It's 48/2(9+3)
LOL um... ok? It's a calculator...
For the last time, a simple google search will show you guys that unless the calculator is in scientific mode, it will give you the wrong answer. Hard to believe, I guess, that a machine could be wrong, but it's true.
jlasoon
Mar 29, 09:43 AM
The more things that are in the cloud, the closer I get to hitting AT&T's 150GB home DSL (non-uverse) data limit.
I just dropped them for this very reason, went back to Brighthouse networks. 40Mbps no cap. :D
I just dropped them for this very reason, went back to Brighthouse networks. 40Mbps no cap. :D
gavers
Mar 30, 09:48 PM
The main hallmark of a 64-bit filesystem is that you can have files that are larger than (4GiB-1) - or (2GiB-1) if the filesystem treats offsets as signed integers.
Another area where 64-bit filesystems show up is in the total volume size - if the filesystem uses 32-bits for sector addressing you'll have a maximum volume size of (2TiB-512).
If your filesystem has issues with files bigger than 4 GiB (or 2GiB), and has issues with volumes bigger than 2 TiB - you have some 32-bit issues in your filesystem.
This doesn't sound right. I have a single 60GB file on an HFS+ volume. I also have HFS+ volumes larger than 2TB. Wikipedia says HFS+ supports files and volumes up to 8 exabytes in size. NTFS is also 32-bit and supports files of 16TB and volumes of 256TB.
Another area where 64-bit filesystems show up is in the total volume size - if the filesystem uses 32-bits for sector addressing you'll have a maximum volume size of (2TiB-512).
If your filesystem has issues with files bigger than 4 GiB (or 2GiB), and has issues with volumes bigger than 2 TiB - you have some 32-bit issues in your filesystem.
This doesn't sound right. I have a single 60GB file on an HFS+ volume. I also have HFS+ volumes larger than 2TB. Wikipedia says HFS+ supports files and volumes up to 8 exabytes in size. NTFS is also 32-bit and supports files of 16TB and volumes of 256TB.
jonnysods
Apr 20, 06:46 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8H7)
I'll skip this update unless it's an impressive one. Looking forward to a redesign.
I'll skip this update unless it's an impressive one. Looking forward to a redesign.
ravenvii
May 4, 04:23 PM
the worst part is that we don't know if and how many points he had at the beginning, and/or if any monster or trap was pre-placed in the mansion. Nor we know the 'price-list" and stats of monsters and trap (all of which i think we should)
Actually, I can answer a few of those questions.
The villain isn't given any points prior to the start of the game, so as of round 1, he has 2 turns (points). There are no monsters nor traps pre-placed in the mansion.
As for the price-list and stats, that's secret.
As for your re-written rules, I'm taking your suggestion and cleaning it up, then putting it in the OP. With full credit, of course. ;)
Actually, I can answer a few of those questions.
The villain isn't given any points prior to the start of the game, so as of round 1, he has 2 turns (points). There are no monsters nor traps pre-placed in the mansion.
As for the price-list and stats, that's secret.
As for your re-written rules, I'm taking your suggestion and cleaning it up, then putting it in the OP. With full credit, of course. ;)
firestarter
Apr 22, 10:24 AM
Actually, you can get by with a mid/high level iMac now for most graphic design needs (photoshop, illustrator, etc) these days and even average video editing needs
Not if you care about colo[u]r management. While Apple continues its love affair with shiny screens, creatives need an alternative.
Not if you care about colo[u]r management. While Apple continues its love affair with shiny screens, creatives need an alternative.
ptysell
May 6, 12:29 AM
Can always have a system with ARM AND x86 CPUs.
Prom1
Aug 4, 03:55 PM
I got a question ... is the MacBook & MBP batteries Li-Ion or Li-Polymer? If the former then what i want MOST in the MBP is Li-Polymer and really fold the polymers and compress them to get a higher density of energy for longer battery life.
> The next generation of the MBP I'd really like to see the Intel technology for sub display (not unlike that on flip cellphones) to display AudioCD or running app information on the display or AirPort Ex hotspots within range (SSID, Signal Strength, VoIP signals etc). I'd also like to see a higher resolution - that maintains the same or much higher focus and zoom+Auto Focus - iSight thats built in and somewhat rotable (maybe somehow in the sell without external finger control).
> Magnesium or some kind of Metal Polymer combination that is very resistance or displaces heat efficiently but absorbing enough heat for hours of DVD, Video editing on our laps without burning them. Something thats much like ceramic tiles and how they displace heat efficiently.
> Me ... I'll settle for minimum 256MB video memory for ALL MBP and the built to order 512; and built to order 128MB on the Mac Books.
Question why do the old G4 powermacs of 933mhz or lower STILL selling highly used for such a high price - their almost obsolute in their abilities compared to new hardware. as an example on another forum sight someone is trying to sell a Dual 1Ghz QuickSilver for $1000 1.5GB total memory capacity (not that its filled with that much). Isnt this ridiculous?
> The next generation of the MBP I'd really like to see the Intel technology for sub display (not unlike that on flip cellphones) to display AudioCD or running app information on the display or AirPort Ex hotspots within range (SSID, Signal Strength, VoIP signals etc). I'd also like to see a higher resolution - that maintains the same or much higher focus and zoom+Auto Focus - iSight thats built in and somewhat rotable (maybe somehow in the sell without external finger control).
> Magnesium or some kind of Metal Polymer combination that is very resistance or displaces heat efficiently but absorbing enough heat for hours of DVD, Video editing on our laps without burning them. Something thats much like ceramic tiles and how they displace heat efficiently.
> Me ... I'll settle for minimum 256MB video memory for ALL MBP and the built to order 512; and built to order 128MB on the Mac Books.
Question why do the old G4 powermacs of 933mhz or lower STILL selling highly used for such a high price - their almost obsolute in their abilities compared to new hardware. as an example on another forum sight someone is trying to sell a Dual 1Ghz QuickSilver for $1000 1.5GB total memory capacity (not that its filled with that much). Isnt this ridiculous?
Sijmen
Aug 2, 01:45 PM
I'm pretty sure it's time for the Mac Pro. Alongside, something should happen to the Cinema Display.
The current models are
The current models are
shawnce
Aug 4, 05:07 PM
The only thing 64-bit gives you is more addressable memory. Oh, and some operations (like adding two doubles or longs) would only take one cycle on the integer unit, instead of more. Yeah... that's about it.
..and in the case of x86-64 (Intel and AMD) the 64 bit mode of operation allows the CPU to expose more registers for use at compile time (and few other improvements). This can improve optimizations that the compiler can make which can improve the performance of the application it builds.
Also the ability to do integer math using 64 bit wide registers with 64 bit wide functional unit can be a decent performance win for several types of tasks.
..and in the case of x86-64 (Intel and AMD) the 64 bit mode of operation allows the CPU to expose more registers for use at compile time (and few other improvements). This can improve optimizations that the compiler can make which can improve the performance of the application it builds.
Also the ability to do integer math using 64 bit wide registers with 64 bit wide functional unit can be a decent performance win for several types of tasks.
PCClone
Apr 26, 02:19 PM
And next week there will be a new survey that says the opposite. These reports are getting old. Must be a slow news day.
KnightWRX
Apr 24, 09:37 AM
Yes, an iMac needs to have a 7xxx Display to be retina...as it's viewing distance shouldn't be what the iP4 is.
You contradict yourself here. A 27" iMac is probably already retina, considering the viewing distance should be around 30" away.
As the distance grows, the PPI treshold to achieve the "retina" effect of "Eye can't distinguish the individual pixels" becomes lower. Given enough distance, 48 PPI can be enough to be dubbed "retina display" (your standard 50" 1080p TV).
Is 25,600,000 bytes (25.6 MB) x 60 Hz not equal to 1,536,000,000 bytes.
Correct me if I am wrong.
No, you're not wrong. But I'm not either. I'll let you figure out why (think about the lower case b in Mbps vs MB of RAM ;) ). Unless I'm misinterpreting something, I doubt DP 1.2 can push out 21 gigaBYTES of data per second...
As for the 6990 listing that as max resolution, I'm betting that has more to do with current LCD display limitation (that is the max resolutions you'll find on an LCD monitor) than with actual hardware limitation. The hardware is capable of more than that. Some of these cards with a single GPU have 2-4 DP outputs capable of driving 2-4 of these 2560x1600 monitors. The GPU itself doesn't a problem pushing out these pixels and DP 1.2 makes it so they can push it over a single connection.
I look forward to the day that Apple releases retina displays for the MBP. Something else that would set :apple: apart.
Sony was there first with the Vaio Z. 13.3", 1920x1080 baby. If it weren't so expensive it would be mine and I'd be back to running Linux.
You contradict yourself here. A 27" iMac is probably already retina, considering the viewing distance should be around 30" away.
As the distance grows, the PPI treshold to achieve the "retina" effect of "Eye can't distinguish the individual pixels" becomes lower. Given enough distance, 48 PPI can be enough to be dubbed "retina display" (your standard 50" 1080p TV).
Is 25,600,000 bytes (25.6 MB) x 60 Hz not equal to 1,536,000,000 bytes.
Correct me if I am wrong.
No, you're not wrong. But I'm not either. I'll let you figure out why (think about the lower case b in Mbps vs MB of RAM ;) ). Unless I'm misinterpreting something, I doubt DP 1.2 can push out 21 gigaBYTES of data per second...
As for the 6990 listing that as max resolution, I'm betting that has more to do with current LCD display limitation (that is the max resolutions you'll find on an LCD monitor) than with actual hardware limitation. The hardware is capable of more than that. Some of these cards with a single GPU have 2-4 DP outputs capable of driving 2-4 of these 2560x1600 monitors. The GPU itself doesn't a problem pushing out these pixels and DP 1.2 makes it so they can push it over a single connection.
I look forward to the day that Apple releases retina displays for the MBP. Something else that would set :apple: apart.
Sony was there first with the Vaio Z. 13.3", 1920x1080 baby. If it weren't so expensive it would be mine and I'd be back to running Linux.
0 comments:
Post a Comment