avkills
Jul 14, 02:35 PM
Man if they put the power supply on the top that would just be insanely stupid. 2 Optical drives is fine by me, although I am good with just one. But the post above about a Blu-Ray drive would make having 2 logical, one is Blue-ray, other is DVD/CD +/- RW.
-mark
-mark
LanPhantom
Mar 31, 02:41 PM
How is it biting them in the ass? Android is the fastest growing OS with a larger share than IOS. I think it's been a very succesfull strategy.
It's because of the Buy One Get One option. Nothing more. People choose that option because it makes financial sense and if they don't really care about the OS or the phone, they will choose the one that fits their check books. If Apple was to OK ATT and VZ to do a Buy One Get One on the iPhone, there would be no comparison. It would be game over for Android.
-LanPhantom
It's because of the Buy One Get One option. Nothing more. People choose that option because it makes financial sense and if they don't really care about the OS or the phone, they will choose the one that fits their check books. If Apple was to OK ATT and VZ to do a Buy One Get One on the iPhone, there would be no comparison. It would be game over for Android.
-LanPhantom
milo
Jul 14, 03:21 PM
Except Conroes don't support dual processor configuration. Woodcrest does, hence the reason it will be in the Pro line machines while Conroe is put into new iMacs.
So why use woodcrest WITHOUT dual processor configuration? Makes no sense, any single proc models should be conroe.
- copying DVDs - you can't legally copy 99% of DVDs anyway, if there was no need for twin CD drives, why would there suddenly be for DVDs?
- burning two at once - few people need this, and it's a great sales opportunity for a Firewire external burner anyway. Hell, why stop at TWO?
- Blu-ray - not unless they're really screwed up BR and drives with BR will be incompatible with existing media or something.
Against this, you have the confusion generated by a Mac with two optical drives. I have a Mac with two optical drives (an in-built combo drive, and a FW DVD burner), and it's not terribly elegant. It's fine when reading disks (obviously), but writing them generates some confusion. How sure am I that I'm burning to the right drive? I'm not saying you can't do it, I'm just saying this would be unbelievably un-Mac like. It'd be like the next version of iTunes coming with a menu at the top of its window.
Macs have ALREADY had two optical bays (including twin CD drives). And none of these configs include two drives, you'd only have a second one if you wanted it.
Copying DVD's, nowadays people are backing up their own materials. Most dvd copying would be making backups of your own discs. Burning multiple discs would be a great option as well. And bluray drives will be INCREDIBLY expensive when these machines ship, not to mention who knows how well they will burn cd's and dvd's (assuming that all bluray drives will be burners, none of them readers only). Many people will want to wait and add a bluray or hd-dvd later, especially since nobody knows which will be the winning format.
So why use woodcrest WITHOUT dual processor configuration? Makes no sense, any single proc models should be conroe.
- copying DVDs - you can't legally copy 99% of DVDs anyway, if there was no need for twin CD drives, why would there suddenly be for DVDs?
- burning two at once - few people need this, and it's a great sales opportunity for a Firewire external burner anyway. Hell, why stop at TWO?
- Blu-ray - not unless they're really screwed up BR and drives with BR will be incompatible with existing media or something.
Against this, you have the confusion generated by a Mac with two optical drives. I have a Mac with two optical drives (an in-built combo drive, and a FW DVD burner), and it's not terribly elegant. It's fine when reading disks (obviously), but writing them generates some confusion. How sure am I that I'm burning to the right drive? I'm not saying you can't do it, I'm just saying this would be unbelievably un-Mac like. It'd be like the next version of iTunes coming with a menu at the top of its window.
Macs have ALREADY had two optical bays (including twin CD drives). And none of these configs include two drives, you'd only have a second one if you wanted it.
Copying DVD's, nowadays people are backing up their own materials. Most dvd copying would be making backups of your own discs. Burning multiple discs would be a great option as well. And bluray drives will be INCREDIBLY expensive when these machines ship, not to mention who knows how well they will burn cd's and dvd's (assuming that all bluray drives will be burners, none of them readers only). Many people will want to wait and add a bluray or hd-dvd later, especially since nobody knows which will be the winning format.
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.
iMikeT
Aug 25, 03:48 PM
I tell you, I've had nothing but trouble with Apple. I'm young, I'm a medical student (so relatively affluent), and I'm a "switcher." That switching part, that was a mistake. Mac OS X is beautiful software, I love it. Unfortunately I've had a lot of problems with the hardware. These days it's enough I wish I still had my IBM/Lenovo laptop--that never gave me problems.
The gun was photographed on
Learn more about Angelina
angelina jolie tomb raider
in #39;Wanted#39; (including the
Jolie desire from all of
3) Wanted – Angelina Jolie
Angelina Jolie. Wanted
angelina jolie hair wanted.
Angelina Jolie Wanted
of Angelina+jolie+wanted+
Naked Angelina Jolie Wanted
wanted angelina jolie List
Angelina Jolie - WANTED
angelina jolie wanted makeup.
ergle2
Sep 15, 12:50 PM
More pedantic details for those who are interested... :)
NT actually started as OS/2 3.0. Its lead architect was OS guru Dave Cutler, who is famous for architecting VMS for DEC, and naturally its design influenced NT. And the N-10 (Where "NT" comes from, "N" "T"en) Intel RISC processor was never intended to be a mainstream product; Dave Cutler insisted on the development team NOT using an X86 processor to make sure they would have no excuse to fall back on legacy code or thought. In fact, the N-10 build that was the default work environment for the team was never intended to leave the Microsoft campus. NT over its life has run on X86, DEC Alpha, MIPS, PowerPC, Itanium, and x64.
IBM and Microsoft worked together on OS/2 1.0 from 1985-1989. Much maligned, it did suck because it was targeted for the 286 not the 386, but it did break new ground -- preemptive multitasking and an advanced GUI (Presentation Manager). By 1989 they wanted to move on to something that would take advantage of the 386's 32-bit architecture, flat memory model, and virtual machine support. Simultaneously they started OS/2 2.0 (extend the current 16-bit code to a 16-32-bit hybrid) and OS/2 3.0 (a ground up, platform independent version). When Windows 3.0 took off in 1990, Microsoft had second thoughts and eventually broke with IBM. OS/2 3.0 became Windows NT -- in the first days of the split, NT still had OS/2 Presentation Manager APIs for it's GUI. They ripped it out and created Win32 APIs. That's also why to this day NT/2K/XP supported OS/2 command line applications, and there was also a little known GUI pack that would support OS/2 1.x GUI applications.
All very true, but beyond that -- if you've ever looked closely VMS and at NT, you'll notice, it's a lot more than just "influenced". The core design was pretty much identical -- the way I/O worked, its interrupt handling, the scheduler, and so on -- they're all practically carbon copies. Some of the names changed, but how things work under the hood hadn't. Since then it's evolved, of course, but you'd expect that.
Quite amusing, really... how a heavyweight enterprise-class OS of the 80's became the desktop of the 00's :)
Those that were around in the dim and distant will recall that VMS and Unix were two of the main competitors in many marketplaces in the 80's and early 90's... and today we have OS X, Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris, etc. vs XP, W2K3 Server and (soon) Vista -- kind of ironic, dontcha think? :)
Of course, there's a lot still running VMS to this very day. I don't think HP wants them to tho' -- they just sent all the support to India, apparently, to a team with relatively little experience...
NT actually started as OS/2 3.0. Its lead architect was OS guru Dave Cutler, who is famous for architecting VMS for DEC, and naturally its design influenced NT. And the N-10 (Where "NT" comes from, "N" "T"en) Intel RISC processor was never intended to be a mainstream product; Dave Cutler insisted on the development team NOT using an X86 processor to make sure they would have no excuse to fall back on legacy code or thought. In fact, the N-10 build that was the default work environment for the team was never intended to leave the Microsoft campus. NT over its life has run on X86, DEC Alpha, MIPS, PowerPC, Itanium, and x64.
IBM and Microsoft worked together on OS/2 1.0 from 1985-1989. Much maligned, it did suck because it was targeted for the 286 not the 386, but it did break new ground -- preemptive multitasking and an advanced GUI (Presentation Manager). By 1989 they wanted to move on to something that would take advantage of the 386's 32-bit architecture, flat memory model, and virtual machine support. Simultaneously they started OS/2 2.0 (extend the current 16-bit code to a 16-32-bit hybrid) and OS/2 3.0 (a ground up, platform independent version). When Windows 3.0 took off in 1990, Microsoft had second thoughts and eventually broke with IBM. OS/2 3.0 became Windows NT -- in the first days of the split, NT still had OS/2 Presentation Manager APIs for it's GUI. They ripped it out and created Win32 APIs. That's also why to this day NT/2K/XP supported OS/2 command line applications, and there was also a little known GUI pack that would support OS/2 1.x GUI applications.
All very true, but beyond that -- if you've ever looked closely VMS and at NT, you'll notice, it's a lot more than just "influenced". The core design was pretty much identical -- the way I/O worked, its interrupt handling, the scheduler, and so on -- they're all practically carbon copies. Some of the names changed, but how things work under the hood hadn't. Since then it's evolved, of course, but you'd expect that.
Quite amusing, really... how a heavyweight enterprise-class OS of the 80's became the desktop of the 00's :)
Those that were around in the dim and distant will recall that VMS and Unix were two of the main competitors in many marketplaces in the 80's and early 90's... and today we have OS X, Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris, etc. vs XP, W2K3 Server and (soon) Vista -- kind of ironic, dontcha think? :)
Of course, there's a lot still running VMS to this very day. I don't think HP wants them to tho' -- they just sent all the support to India, apparently, to a team with relatively little experience...
SiliconAddict
Aug 6, 03:06 AM
I'm hoping for a major bombshell of an announcement when it comes to Leopard. I've said it before and I will say it again - the gap between Windows and OS X will narrow with Vista. Yes we are all aware that Vista in all likelihood is going to be just as buggy as 10.0 when it was released. But keep in mind that this will probably be the last version of OS X to be released for the next 18+ months. (When its all said and done its prob going to be close to 2 years with 10.4->10.5) That time frame is more then enough time for MS to release SP1 and SP2 which WILL happen once its released, the general public (a.k.a Beta testers.) get their hands on it, and MS starts getting those crash reports.
Leopard needs to go up against MS's next generation and to be honest while 10.4 vs. XP is a non contest the same can't be said between 10.4 and Vista. That gap is narrowed. Apple needs to do something more then Expose, Spotlight, Dashboard, icon changes, and migrating more and more of their graphic subsystem onto the video card. All of those changes are good and worthy additions to OS X but it's incremental. It's Apple doing cleanup from the days of 10.0. It's Apple resting on their laurels. This simply can't happen anymore. The gap between Windows and OS X NEEDS to widen again. If it doesn't the "its good enough" mentality that many PC users have will only increase because like it or not Vista IS a major revamp of Windows under the hood. Yes a revamp with many key missing technologies but a revamp of the core OS nonetheless.
We need something that was as revolutionary as 9.x ->10.0. While I'm under no illusions that Apple isn't ready to revamp the entire GUI they HAVE to have been working on new stuff over the last 6 years. There has to be something that almost done baking in the bowels of Cupertino that can make it into 10.5.
PS- Please Apple; FTFF.
Leopard needs to go up against MS's next generation and to be honest while 10.4 vs. XP is a non contest the same can't be said between 10.4 and Vista. That gap is narrowed. Apple needs to do something more then Expose, Spotlight, Dashboard, icon changes, and migrating more and more of their graphic subsystem onto the video card. All of those changes are good and worthy additions to OS X but it's incremental. It's Apple doing cleanup from the days of 10.0. It's Apple resting on their laurels. This simply can't happen anymore. The gap between Windows and OS X NEEDS to widen again. If it doesn't the "its good enough" mentality that many PC users have will only increase because like it or not Vista IS a major revamp of Windows under the hood. Yes a revamp with many key missing technologies but a revamp of the core OS nonetheless.
We need something that was as revolutionary as 9.x ->10.0. While I'm under no illusions that Apple isn't ready to revamp the entire GUI they HAVE to have been working on new stuff over the last 6 years. There has to be something that almost done baking in the bowels of Cupertino that can make it into 10.5.
PS- Please Apple; FTFF.
Nuck81
Dec 9, 10:02 AM
Anyone else have trouble leveling up your B-Spec driver? Mine really sucks and can't even finish the FF race in whatever car he drives.
Mine is a level 21.
It's worth doing as it gives you some amazing cars, like a Pagani Zonda R, and a Toyota 7 race car.
You have to keep your guy level headed, especially at the beginning. After he levels up a bit, you can generally let him be and he'll pull out the victory...
Mine is a level 21.
It's worth doing as it gives you some amazing cars, like a Pagani Zonda R, and a Toyota 7 race car.
You have to keep your guy level headed, especially at the beginning. After he levels up a bit, you can generally let him be and he'll pull out the victory...
fivepoint
Apr 27, 01:54 PM
First off, before the ignorant attacks begin, no I'm not a birther. I'm personally of the opinion that he was born in America and generally share the president's feelings that this is a giant waste of time.
Now... to the issue at hand: I'm not an expert in layout/graphic-design, but can someone please tell me why the PDF Certificate of Live Birth has Illustrator layers? If it's a scan, shouldn't it just be a single image, jpg, pdf, png, etc. consisting of a bunch of pixels and not layers? I downloaded the file from whitehouse.gov, opened it in Adobe Illustrator, and after releasing the layers slide the black text around seperate from the green/white background. I'm not sure what's going on here, can someone shed some light on the issue?
I'm assuming there's a logical explanation, any graphic artists here want to update the rest of us?
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5026/5662168856_0e95c82cc7_b.jpg
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5066/5661600471_9ebebdaf36_b.jpg
Now... to the issue at hand: I'm not an expert in layout/graphic-design, but can someone please tell me why the PDF Certificate of Live Birth has Illustrator layers? If it's a scan, shouldn't it just be a single image, jpg, pdf, png, etc. consisting of a bunch of pixels and not layers? I downloaded the file from whitehouse.gov, opened it in Adobe Illustrator, and after releasing the layers slide the black text around seperate from the green/white background. I'm not sure what's going on here, can someone shed some light on the issue?
I'm assuming there's a logical explanation, any graphic artists here want to update the rest of us?
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5026/5662168856_0e95c82cc7_b.jpg
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5066/5661600471_9ebebdaf36_b.jpg
shamino
Jul 22, 12:06 PM
I'm just curious about your post. Why would anyone in their right mind maintain a website for a product/company that no longer exists? Seems like a big waste of time and resources. I can see doing something similar for archival purposes, but that link leads to a complete website that has the appearance that it is still active.
I can think of several reasons. To sell service and support to users that have no other source, and has a hobby are the biggest two that come to mind.
You might be surprised to learn that there are still a lot of Amiga (http://www.amiga.com/)-enthusiast web sites, and even one where the owners are making new hardware (http://www.a2retrosystems.com/index.htm) for Apple-II series computers. (And there appears to be a surprisingly strong demand for Apple II Ethernet cards!)
I can think of several reasons. To sell service and support to users that have no other source, and has a hobby are the biggest two that come to mind.
You might be surprised to learn that there are still a lot of Amiga (http://www.amiga.com/)-enthusiast web sites, and even one where the owners are making new hardware (http://www.a2retrosystems.com/index.htm) for Apple-II series computers. (And there appears to be a surprisingly strong demand for Apple II Ethernet cards!)
Hellhammer
Apr 6, 11:26 AM
Hellhammer, can I ask you something about this? There are SB LV and now SB ULV. Both are for laptops and the Macbook Pro 13 has SB LV, right? Or does the Pro has something else? What is the performance difference between an equally clocked ULV and LV?
Thanks!
13" MBP uses SV chips, i.e. standard voltage (35W). Before it used MV (medium voltage, 25W) chips but Sandy Bridge does not offer CPUs like that. LV (25W) and ULV (17W) chips have not been released yet but will be released shortly like the article says.
If the clock speed and other specs are the same, then the performance is the same. ULV and LV chips are only separated by the TDP which causes the ULV to have lower clock speed. Otherwise they are the same chips.
Thanks!
13" MBP uses SV chips, i.e. standard voltage (35W). Before it used MV (medium voltage, 25W) chips but Sandy Bridge does not offer CPUs like that. LV (25W) and ULV (17W) chips have not been released yet but will be released shortly like the article says.
If the clock speed and other specs are the same, then the performance is the same. ULV and LV chips are only separated by the TDP which causes the ULV to have lower clock speed. Otherwise they are the same chips.
BRLawyer
Aug 5, 05:59 PM
According to my last chat with Steve Jobs, we're gonna have the following:
- MacPro with Woodcrest, 3 configs;
- updated XServes with Woodcrest, 2 configs;
- updated MBPs with Merom;
- NO DISPLAYS
- NO iPods
- NO iPhone
- Leopard Preview
That's all, folks...
- MacPro with Woodcrest, 3 configs;
- updated XServes with Woodcrest, 2 configs;
- updated MBPs with Merom;
- NO DISPLAYS
- NO iPods
- NO iPhone
- Leopard Preview
That's all, folks...
mattsh
Sep 19, 06:24 AM
to be honest - i've been looking at the lenovo offerings and i'm attracted. i have been a diehard apple fan my entire life, but if all it means is i have to use tiger clone (aka vista) but at least have hardware that is current with technology i'll buy.
so yes, apple has a monopoly, but they can't be to jack ass about it because people will start to go other places no matter how good ilife is.
there is no excuse that one of the top 5 notebook venders in the united states on intel architecture is behind this much its competitors.
You know I've been thinking about this. Does Apple really NEED to update now? I mean what's the purpose of the update? Yes there is 64bit, but other then that? Not much. A LITTLE more speed, but OSX already runs pretty fast... faster then Windows would with comparible hardware. OSX already does more then Windows does and does it better. Maybe Apple doesn't NEED To stay up with the latest processor fad because they are already better then the competition.. maybe the competition NEEDS faster hardward because they OS is so bloated it runs slowly unless they have it. Ever think of that? Honestly, I'm 100% happy with my current MB which does not have the new processor in it. I launch most programs in under a second.:D
so yes, apple has a monopoly, but they can't be to jack ass about it because people will start to go other places no matter how good ilife is.
there is no excuse that one of the top 5 notebook venders in the united states on intel architecture is behind this much its competitors.
You know I've been thinking about this. Does Apple really NEED to update now? I mean what's the purpose of the update? Yes there is 64bit, but other then that? Not much. A LITTLE more speed, but OSX already runs pretty fast... faster then Windows would with comparible hardware. OSX already does more then Windows does and does it better. Maybe Apple doesn't NEED To stay up with the latest processor fad because they are already better then the competition.. maybe the competition NEEDS faster hardward because they OS is so bloated it runs slowly unless they have it. Ever think of that? Honestly, I'm 100% happy with my current MB which does not have the new processor in it. I launch most programs in under a second.:D
R94N
Aug 18, 05:23 AM
A blue PS3 is a nice idea.
swingerofbirch
Aug 7, 07:07 PM
I have two questions.
Do you think that one of the top secret features they didn't show was a unified interface? Because the UIs they showed looked just as hodge-podged as Tiger, ie iCal and Finder still brushed metal and Mail is still plastic. They talk about Microsoft copying Aqua, but I can't think of one app that is aqua anymore! What does Aqua look like?
Second, did the developers get a beta of Leopard? If so, won't we be hearing about whatever top secret features they didn't show? Surely one of the 4200 is a snitch!
Do you think that one of the top secret features they didn't show was a unified interface? Because the UIs they showed looked just as hodge-podged as Tiger, ie iCal and Finder still brushed metal and Mail is still plastic. They talk about Microsoft copying Aqua, but I can't think of one app that is aqua anymore! What does Aqua look like?
Second, did the developers get a beta of Leopard? If so, won't we be hearing about whatever top secret features they didn't show? Surely one of the 4200 is a snitch!
vivithemage
Apr 27, 08:40 AM
They have some good wordsmiths :D
alec
Sep 19, 10:54 AM
lol lol power book g5 rofl rofl OMG hahahahhahahahahahahahha
...
......
for the love of god kill me
...
......
for the love of god kill me
SevenInchScrew
Dec 9, 06:38 PM
GT5 is a game for people who love cars. Not people who only love fast cars. People who love all cars.
But, I DO love all types of cars. I just don't think they all have a place in a RACING game.
I'm sure you'd be happy if everyone started with a Zonda in their garage, but for people who like to drive something fresh and fun the exhaustive list in GT5 is perfect.
The game doesn't have to be only 700hp exotics, that isn't what I'm saying. There have been PLENTY of wildly varied cars throughout history that would be fun to drive, on a track, in a racing game. The VW K�belwagen and Citro�n DS, for example, aren't some of them.
But, I DO love all types of cars. I just don't think they all have a place in a RACING game.
I'm sure you'd be happy if everyone started with a Zonda in their garage, but for people who like to drive something fresh and fun the exhaustive list in GT5 is perfect.
The game doesn't have to be only 700hp exotics, that isn't what I'm saying. There have been PLENTY of wildly varied cars throughout history that would be fun to drive, on a track, in a racing game. The VW K�belwagen and Citro�n DS, for example, aren't some of them.
Vegasman
Apr 27, 08:50 AM
How long would have been reasonable, do you think? A week is not too bad, especially considering we've just had the Easter holidays.
Also it's surely better to spend time to get something right. Clearly Apple has had to investigate the iOS source code to find out what was actually going on, as it obviously wasn't behaving as expected. Finding the right engineers and actually doing the work isn't a matter of hours.
2 days. When it was first reported. Almost a year ago.
Also it's surely better to spend time to get something right. Clearly Apple has had to investigate the iOS source code to find out what was actually going on, as it obviously wasn't behaving as expected. Finding the right engineers and actually doing the work isn't a matter of hours.
2 days. When it was first reported. Almost a year ago.
simontarr
Sep 15, 07:46 AM
I think all this quad and oct core stuff is fantastic (it would be even more fantastic if I have the money to get such gear...)
But at the moment it's the HDD that slows everything down. Your RAM may be able to send 4GB/s of data to the processor to deal with, but the HD can't write the said executed data at even a 10th of the speed.
I remember reading a BBC news article the other month about mRAM (or magnetic RAM) which has the same write speeds as RAM, but without its volatility. It doesn't loose it's data when the power is off. Ideal for fast HDDs they say.
On an unrelated note, wouldnt it been cool to effectivly install a whole OS on RAM. That would be noticably quicker....
But at the moment it's the HDD that slows everything down. Your RAM may be able to send 4GB/s of data to the processor to deal with, but the HD can't write the said executed data at even a 10th of the speed.
I remember reading a BBC news article the other month about mRAM (or magnetic RAM) which has the same write speeds as RAM, but without its volatility. It doesn't loose it's data when the power is off. Ideal for fast HDDs they say.
On an unrelated note, wouldnt it been cool to effectivly install a whole OS on RAM. That would be noticably quicker....
Apple Corps
Sep 19, 09:10 AM
Im still on for today, 4 hours and counting.
0710 PDT - no updates yet - keep counting :-(
0710 PDT - no updates yet - keep counting :-(
bassfingers
Apr 6, 03:15 PM
What bothers me is people think because an iPad sells more it is superior, unless you made the iPad or work at Apple I don't see how that makes sense. Also most people on here have never even played with a XOOM.
I own both an iPad2 (my wife's technically) and my XOOM. I had an iPad1 since launch until I sold it for a XOOM. For me, Apps are lacking on XOOM but it's made up for with the true tablet OS and excellent first party apps.
Find me a better GMail/Email, Maps, Browser on the iPad and other stuff you will actually use most often and I'll sell my XOOM. Since I've had my XOOM, I haven't touched the iPad2. Everytime I pick it up I miss using the XOOM.
did you feel dorky typing XOOM so many times. I would, because its dorky. It's the same reasons that everything in "Xenon: Girl of the 21st Century" was dorky
I own both an iPad2 (my wife's technically) and my XOOM. I had an iPad1 since launch until I sold it for a XOOM. For me, Apps are lacking on XOOM but it's made up for with the true tablet OS and excellent first party apps.
Find me a better GMail/Email, Maps, Browser on the iPad and other stuff you will actually use most often and I'll sell my XOOM. Since I've had my XOOM, I haven't touched the iPad2. Everytime I pick it up I miss using the XOOM.
did you feel dorky typing XOOM so many times. I would, because its dorky. It's the same reasons that everything in "Xenon: Girl of the 21st Century" was dorky
ergle2
Sep 13, 07:19 PM
Obviously, since Intel is no longer creating new processors with HT.
By the way, previous poster, HT does not double the number of cores. Just the number of virtual cores. A Pentium 4 system with HT will run slower than a dual Pentium 4 system (with HT disabled) at the same clock speed.
Actually, many tasks were faster.
HyperThreading was thrown in to mask other deficiencies in the NetBurst arch by exploiting resources that were otherwise wasted.
There were a few cases where HT ran slower when HT first debuted, but with OS scheduler tweaks and BIOS updates (microcode changes, likely), HT was a net win in most cases.
Core 2 doesn't have the same design issues - mostly down to that excessively long pipeline - that Prescott had, and hence HT makes no sense.
The problem, however, lay with Netburst as a whole, rather than HT -- which offered a minor improvement in performance - a band-aid if you will.
By the way, previous poster, HT does not double the number of cores. Just the number of virtual cores. A Pentium 4 system with HT will run slower than a dual Pentium 4 system (with HT disabled) at the same clock speed.
Actually, many tasks were faster.
HyperThreading was thrown in to mask other deficiencies in the NetBurst arch by exploiting resources that were otherwise wasted.
There were a few cases where HT ran slower when HT first debuted, but with OS scheduler tweaks and BIOS updates (microcode changes, likely), HT was a net win in most cases.
Core 2 doesn't have the same design issues - mostly down to that excessively long pipeline - that Prescott had, and hence HT makes no sense.
The problem, however, lay with Netburst as a whole, rather than HT -- which offered a minor improvement in performance - a band-aid if you will.
gugy
Aug 17, 12:17 PM
"Sixteen Core Tigerton Setup about $6,000" :eek:
I want one!
I want one!