nighthawk
Jul 20, 09:58 AM
My quadra still runs, I guess I'm the forth party to get it.
This feels almost like an onion article:
Home Computer Gives Birth to Octuple-Cores
<enter photoshopped picture of a Mac Pro craddling its new born octuplets>
My first job as a graphic designer I used an enhanced SE/30 (with 20" external monitor). About a year later we upgraded to the Quadras, so I guess that makes me #5?
This feels almost like an onion article:
Home Computer Gives Birth to Octuple-Cores
<enter photoshopped picture of a Mac Pro craddling its new born octuplets>
My first job as a graphic designer I used an enhanced SE/30 (with 20" external monitor). About a year later we upgraded to the Quadras, so I guess that makes me #5?
Silentwave
Jul 14, 05:34 PM
It's worth noting that Intel has shipped P4-series chips at 3.4GHz. But the new chips (Woodcrest and Conroe) aren't being sold at speeds above 3GHz.
Pay attention. The answer is "sooner than you think".
Quarter 4 this year will see the X6900 conroe extreme at 3.2GHz.
So when will we start seeing 8 chips in a computer? Perhaps this will become the new measurement...not processor speeds, but the number of processors (or cores).
There have already been technology briefings from Intel that talk about 4-core chips in early and 32-core chips by 2010. Similar offerings are expected from AMD.
And the Xeon-MP series processors (which will, of course, eventually get all this tech) are designed with 8-way SMP in mind. A theoretical Xeon-MP based on this 32-core tech would produce a system with 256 cores. Of course, it is doubtful that anything other than a large server would be able to take proper advantage of this, so I wouldn't ever expect to find one on a desktop.
8 core should be out sometime between end of 2006 and beginning of 2007 with the quad core Clovertown processors (based on woodcrest) available in dual chip configurations. And it'll only get better from there.
Which reminds me, though slightly OT... this is a good reason why iMac may well get Conroe now or perhaps get Merom now but transition to a desktop chip by the time Santa Rosa comes out. The new chipset/socket means new logic board, and by the time that comes out the Kenstfield quad core chips on the consumer desktop end will start arriving. I don't yet know how far kentsfield will be scaling either up or down as far as clock speed/heat, but if quad core starts moving into the consumer dekstop market, they will need a very powerful processor: either Conroe or Kentsfield.
Pay attention. The answer is "sooner than you think".
Quarter 4 this year will see the X6900 conroe extreme at 3.2GHz.
So when will we start seeing 8 chips in a computer? Perhaps this will become the new measurement...not processor speeds, but the number of processors (or cores).
There have already been technology briefings from Intel that talk about 4-core chips in early and 32-core chips by 2010. Similar offerings are expected from AMD.
And the Xeon-MP series processors (which will, of course, eventually get all this tech) are designed with 8-way SMP in mind. A theoretical Xeon-MP based on this 32-core tech would produce a system with 256 cores. Of course, it is doubtful that anything other than a large server would be able to take proper advantage of this, so I wouldn't ever expect to find one on a desktop.
8 core should be out sometime between end of 2006 and beginning of 2007 with the quad core Clovertown processors (based on woodcrest) available in dual chip configurations. And it'll only get better from there.
Which reminds me, though slightly OT... this is a good reason why iMac may well get Conroe now or perhaps get Merom now but transition to a desktop chip by the time Santa Rosa comes out. The new chipset/socket means new logic board, and by the time that comes out the Kenstfield quad core chips on the consumer desktop end will start arriving. I don't yet know how far kentsfield will be scaling either up or down as far as clock speed/heat, but if quad core starts moving into the consumer dekstop market, they will need a very powerful processor: either Conroe or Kentsfield.
aswitcher
Aug 11, 09:11 PM
Apple can really lead the way with GPS if they start putting it in iPods and iPhones, as well as the next generation of portable Macs.
Even a Mac wrist watch with GPS and BT like the Suunto range would rock - and I am sure sell well.
Even a Mac wrist watch with GPS and BT like the Suunto range would rock - and I am sure sell well.
Mattie Num Nums
Mar 31, 02:27 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.
Thats not at all what this article is saying. The Android project is still going to be "open source".
Thats not at all what this article is saying. The Android project is still going to be "open source".
.jpg "spider dogs Redback+ite")
Billy Boo Bob
Nov 28, 11:02 PM
1 Random artist finds inspiration and writes a song
2 Artist decides his song is so good that he/she records it in a professional studio (which he can rent) so the sound quality is superb
3 Artists logs into the iTMS and publishes his song
4 Artists gets $ from every song sold and the iTMS charges the artist for the distribution
See, that's the catch-22 for new artists. The labels are the ones that get tunes played on the radio. In the 50's and 60's they would strong-arm their stuff in, but I'm sure even nowadays they provide incentives (read: bribes) to get new stuff on the air. Especially if they think the band is really good and will make it in the long run. And don't fool yourself into thinking a new band can get huge without radio.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
2 Artist decides his song is so good that he/she records it in a professional studio (which he can rent) so the sound quality is superb
3 Artists logs into the iTMS and publishes his song
4 Artists gets $ from every song sold and the iTMS charges the artist for the distribution
See, that's the catch-22 for new artists. The labels are the ones that get tunes played on the radio. In the 50's and 60's they would strong-arm their stuff in, but I'm sure even nowadays they provide incentives (read: bribes) to get new stuff on the air. Especially if they think the band is really good and will make it in the long run. And don't fool yourself into thinking a new band can get huge without radio.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
nep61
Apr 5, 04:49 PM
And I was sooooo close to buying AVID MC 5.5... thank goodness for an extended wait for my Tax refund... Now I'll sit tight to see if this RUMOR is actually true..... :apple:
Cougarcat
Mar 26, 07:09 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
How does Rosetta hold back forward progress exactly? It's just small extension for the OS. It's not like it's Classic.
How does Rosetta hold back forward progress exactly? It's just small extension for the OS. It's not like it's Classic.
DVK916
Jul 27, 11:02 AM
Only the Mac Mini and the iMac's processor can be replaced. the MacBook and MacBook Pro have the processor soldered into the motherboard.
No, this isn't true. All of them have a socket cpu that can be replaced.
No, this isn't true. All of them have a socket cpu that can be replaced.
patseguin
Aug 7, 08:21 AM
Will Leopard be available for download by ADC members as soon as it is given out at WWDC?
NJRonbo
Jun 14, 11:38 AM
Yeah it's strange. I called them back. They
don't have anything in their system one way
or another but told me to stop in tomorrow and
they will check the system.
Store is on my way to work so I don't mind.
don't have anything in their system one way
or another but told me to stop in tomorrow and
they will check the system.
Store is on my way to work so I don't mind.
ART5000
Jul 20, 11:57 PM
ANy gurus on hand here..
is it possible that Apple will come out with dual woocrest then when kentfield hits the street, we could just buy the processor and snap out woody and snap in Kentfield.
IS THIS FEASIBLE:rolleyes:
is it possible that Apple will come out with dual woocrest then when kentfield hits the street, we could just buy the processor and snap out woody and snap in Kentfield.
IS THIS FEASIBLE:rolleyes:
logandzwon
Apr 6, 02:08 PM
Nice...I'm glad to have a more rare piece of hardware. I love mine and have no issues, it'll only get better over time.Reminds me of the days of the RAZR, that's what the iPhone and iPad have become.
Honda sells a TON more cars than BMW by a huge factor...I'd rather drive a BMW, I guess you're all happy with the Hondas :)
I'd argue it's more like a the difference between a Corvette and Skyline GT-R circa 1996. For 97 Corvette gets an awesome overhaul, building on all the best features and designs from the competition. People start getting excited again, then the details of the R34 GT-R are announced. By 1999 it's back to drawing board for Corvette.
Honda sells a TON more cars than BMW by a huge factor...I'd rather drive a BMW, I guess you're all happy with the Hondas :)
I'd argue it's more like a the difference between a Corvette and Skyline GT-R circa 1996. For 97 Corvette gets an awesome overhaul, building on all the best features and designs from the competition. People start getting excited again, then the details of the R34 GT-R are announced. By 1999 it's back to drawing board for Corvette.
CFreymarc
Apr 12, 01:23 AM
I hope not. I want the 5 now :)
Correction, the iPhone 4G starts production in September.
Correction, the iPhone 4G starts production in September.
jaxstate
Jul 15, 07:59 AM
A real mess? That's one fine looking machine. IMO
well, that looks a real mess.. but I suppose it's a good idea since heated air tends to rise.. :-)
well, that looks a real mess.. but I suppose it's a good idea since heated air tends to rise.. :-)
deconai
Aug 11, 03:42 PM
i just want a cell phone that works.
all these phones today(by all these phones i mean the motorolas i have had, so mayby motorola's jsut suck) have this ridiculous amount of latency when you are navigating the menus. cause they have to have all this fancy crap flyin around. its like phones are using the same technology from 5 years ago but they are just piling these features into them so they dog down. overall phones today seem to suck just a bit. my nokia 8260 was the best phone i ever had and it was monochrome with no camera or video or stupid crap like that...
I used to have a Motorola loaded with everything but the kitchen sink (that is, until my wife decided to wash it in the washing machine :P ). I got a cheap Samsung SGH-E317 to replace it and I swear it works 100% faster than my Moto. It seems to receive the signal stronger as well.
all these phones today(by all these phones i mean the motorolas i have had, so mayby motorola's jsut suck) have this ridiculous amount of latency when you are navigating the menus. cause they have to have all this fancy crap flyin around. its like phones are using the same technology from 5 years ago but they are just piling these features into them so they dog down. overall phones today seem to suck just a bit. my nokia 8260 was the best phone i ever had and it was monochrome with no camera or video or stupid crap like that...
I used to have a Motorola loaded with everything but the kitchen sink (that is, until my wife decided to wash it in the washing machine :P ). I got a cheap Samsung SGH-E317 to replace it and I swear it works 100% faster than my Moto. It seems to receive the signal stronger as well.
Macsavvytech
Apr 6, 02:01 AM
Ugh. Final Cut is fine the way it is for now... We need iWeb overhaul!! Make it more search engine friendly, none of the text as an image crap. grrr...
No Real web designer uses iWeb...
Tried it for 5 minutes until i realised how closed up it is, ie no code view.
Not that i really need any graphic program anyway. TextWrangler and Notepad++ FTW!
No Real web designer uses iWeb...
Tried it for 5 minutes until i realised how closed up it is, ie no code view.
Not that i really need any graphic program anyway. TextWrangler and Notepad++ FTW!
kenypowa
Apr 27, 08:19 AM
Wow. That's surprising. This whole time people downplayed it because there was no evidence that apple was actually transmitting this data. It wasn't a big deal because the db file was local only. Now when Apple addresses it they had to not only admit that the file exists but that they actually were transmitting data.
Ah well, still not a big deal. :p
It was never a big deal. Either you are holding it wrong or there is a misunderstanding. Apple never makes mistakes, didn't you get the memo? ;)
Ah well, still not a big deal. :p
It was never a big deal. Either you are holding it wrong or there is a misunderstanding. Apple never makes mistakes, didn't you get the memo? ;)
cgc
Jul 21, 03:20 PM
All I will say is that you are not a typical user. You are not even close to typical.
OK. So maybe you need ten thousand cores and three million gigabytes of RAM. Don't think for an instant that the majority of the world shares your requirements.
It must take a lot of cores to RIP DVDs and seed them...:confused:
OK. So maybe you need ten thousand cores and three million gigabytes of RAM. Don't think for an instant that the majority of the world shares your requirements.
It must take a lot of cores to RIP DVDs and seed them...:confused:
mcrain
Mar 22, 08:26 AM
Are you suggesting that Obama has gotten comparable treatment from the media as compared to Bush? The double standard is hilariously transparent... Obama justified, Bush not. Obama builds strong coalition, Bush doesn't. Obama trying to save people, Bush going after the oil. Obama savior, Bush satan.
The hypocrisy coming from the left in the media on this issue is palpable... all the talk about Obama's great coalition and how its a justifiable war.
Wait a second. Wait a second. You are trying to compare the media's portrayal of GWB over about SEVEN years, TWO wars, and HOW MANY lies to Libya and less then ONE WEEK. The Lybia thing has been going on for about a day or so. In the FIRST days of the Afghanistan war, did you hear ANY mainstream media criticizing GWB? In the FIRST days of the Iraq war, did you hear ANY mainstream media criticizing GWB? Democrats were falling all over themselves to support the President and the need to get those WMDs, which is why after almost 6 years, it was a defining issue of the presidential campaign. The candidates 5 years later were all explaining why they supported one war then, but not now after all the lies were exposed, or how they were against it all along. Not to mention Afghanistan after 7 years. There were a few, unlike now, where there are a lot.
This is THE FIRST WEEK of this thing, and NBC nightly news had their entire story about: criticism from congress; inability of white house to deal with that problem, partly because in Brazil; late involvement; involvement here but not in Somalia, Congo, etc..., risk that Ghaddafi would survive this and remain in power; lack of real Arab support and weak coalition; and fact that opposition is disorganized, poorly armed and leaderless, and probably won't be able to win without military support on the ground.
That's pretty hard reporting, and I'm very happy Congress is being critical. Almost everything Fivepoint, the GOP and the Democrats who are speaking out have said is a valid concern. They should have done this during week ONE of Afghanistan, and Iraq. I know I don't want another one of those.
(edit) Yesterday, NPR was talking about Candidate Obama vs. President Obama, and pointed out Candidate Obama's statements about ONLY CONGRESS CAN DECLARE WAR. They discussed, at length, prior presidents assumption of power, Obama's use of it and how guest couldn't imagine a new president opposed to a power like this giving it up. So, maybe you should watch some NBC, ABC, CBS and listen to some NPR. Mind you, in FPs defense, I spent 16 hours in the car since this all started, so I've probably heard every story...
If you actually want change, vote for Ron Paul, vote for fiscal responsibility, vote for small government and non intervention. Vote for the destruction bailouts, stimulus, subsidies, and all other forms of crony-capitalism. I can't imagine him being nominated to run for president by the GOP. Did you see that "ghostwritten" pamphlet put out by his campaign? I'm sure he never approved of it, but against the 1st black president? With a son who tripped all over the Civil Rights Act? I hope he mounts a third party campaign. With Palin as VP, or better yet, Palin as a fourth party candidate.
Oh yeah... and here's a fun little nugget for those who like to tout Obama's coalition: I know, I don't get it either. But, again this is the first week. The only ones "touting" are the white house, and it's already falling on deaf ears and criticism. Already!
The hypocrisy coming from the left in the media on this issue is palpable... all the talk about Obama's great coalition and how its a justifiable war.
Wait a second. Wait a second. You are trying to compare the media's portrayal of GWB over about SEVEN years, TWO wars, and HOW MANY lies to Libya and less then ONE WEEK. The Lybia thing has been going on for about a day or so. In the FIRST days of the Afghanistan war, did you hear ANY mainstream media criticizing GWB? In the FIRST days of the Iraq war, did you hear ANY mainstream media criticizing GWB? Democrats were falling all over themselves to support the President and the need to get those WMDs, which is why after almost 6 years, it was a defining issue of the presidential campaign. The candidates 5 years later were all explaining why they supported one war then, but not now after all the lies were exposed, or how they were against it all along. Not to mention Afghanistan after 7 years. There were a few, unlike now, where there are a lot.
This is THE FIRST WEEK of this thing, and NBC nightly news had their entire story about: criticism from congress; inability of white house to deal with that problem, partly because in Brazil; late involvement; involvement here but not in Somalia, Congo, etc..., risk that Ghaddafi would survive this and remain in power; lack of real Arab support and weak coalition; and fact that opposition is disorganized, poorly armed and leaderless, and probably won't be able to win without military support on the ground.
That's pretty hard reporting, and I'm very happy Congress is being critical. Almost everything Fivepoint, the GOP and the Democrats who are speaking out have said is a valid concern. They should have done this during week ONE of Afghanistan, and Iraq. I know I don't want another one of those.
(edit) Yesterday, NPR was talking about Candidate Obama vs. President Obama, and pointed out Candidate Obama's statements about ONLY CONGRESS CAN DECLARE WAR. They discussed, at length, prior presidents assumption of power, Obama's use of it and how guest couldn't imagine a new president opposed to a power like this giving it up. So, maybe you should watch some NBC, ABC, CBS and listen to some NPR. Mind you, in FPs defense, I spent 16 hours in the car since this all started, so I've probably heard every story...
If you actually want change, vote for Ron Paul, vote for fiscal responsibility, vote for small government and non intervention. Vote for the destruction bailouts, stimulus, subsidies, and all other forms of crony-capitalism. I can't imagine him being nominated to run for president by the GOP. Did you see that "ghostwritten" pamphlet put out by his campaign? I'm sure he never approved of it, but against the 1st black president? With a son who tripped all over the Civil Rights Act? I hope he mounts a third party campaign. With Palin as VP, or better yet, Palin as a fourth party candidate.
Oh yeah... and here's a fun little nugget for those who like to tout Obama's coalition: I know, I don't get it either. But, again this is the first week. The only ones "touting" are the white house, and it's already falling on deaf ears and criticism. Already!
ugp
Jun 22, 11:50 AM
My district here received their phones today...
Out of 68 PINs generated, only 11 phones were sent. Only to 4 stores and one of the stores that received the most phones did not even generate P any PINs. System was screwed up like I thought it would be with Radio Shack.
Out of the 11 phones 10 are 16GB and 1 32GB. The store that generated the most PINs did not receive any phones at all.
Anyone shocked... I know I am not being I worked for Radio Shack for 7 years.
Out of 68 PINs generated, only 11 phones were sent. Only to 4 stores and one of the stores that received the most phones did not even generate P any PINs. System was screwed up like I thought it would be with Radio Shack.
Out of the 11 phones 10 are 16GB and 1 32GB. The store that generated the most PINs did not receive any phones at all.
Anyone shocked... I know I am not being I worked for Radio Shack for 7 years.
GFLPraxis
Aug 11, 10:39 AM
These iPhone rumours continue to persist. I admit to being a sceptic, but maybe I'm wrong! I just hope that if they do do it, they do it well.
The Intel Mac rumors persisted too.
The Intel Mac rumors persisted too.
Benjamins
Mar 31, 03:34 PM
I was just pointing out that the code is still open, even if some have to wait longer than has been the case. I'm not saying everything is golden and Google are a paragon of virtue, this is certainly a bit of a sly move on their part.
I cannot help shake the feeling that some of the vitriol from certain people is the fear that a more coherent and unified Android ecosystem is an even bigger threat to the iOS platform.
not really. It's just reaction to extreme hypocrisy.
Maybe Google needs to back off from using the word "open" like they own it.
I cannot help shake the feeling that some of the vitriol from certain people is the fear that a more coherent and unified Android ecosystem is an even bigger threat to the iOS platform.
not really. It's just reaction to extreme hypocrisy.
Maybe Google needs to back off from using the word "open" like they own it.
CaptMurdock
Mar 23, 12:08 AM
Which fact do you deny?
Considering the shellacking dished out by the others in this thread, I'm fairly sure you haven't presented any facts for me to deny.
Considering the shellacking dished out by the others in this thread, I'm fairly sure you haven't presented any facts for me to deny.
NAG
Apr 25, 02:33 PM
Can we officially call this an over reaction? I'm all for Apple explaining what is going on here but a lawsuit is overkill. Where is the proof that this is actually harming people?
0 comments:
Post a Comment