ecwyatt
Aug 11, 03:34 PM
I'd wager that what ever they do come out with will be considered a let down, seeing as so much hype is building around it. Its kinda like those supposed summer block-buster movies all hype but doesn't really deliver.
Also I wouldn't be surprised if it only held as many songs as the Rokr or Slvr (if any at all) anything more would threaten to encroach to much on the iPod line, and I don't think apple is dumb enough to do that.
I'd be happier if it replaced my Palm you know a Blackberry killer, since they don't communicate natively only via third party. It would have to have flawless integration with mail and 0 config wi-fi capabilities to make me even consider looking at it.
Also I wouldn't be surprised if it only held as many songs as the Rokr or Slvr (if any at all) anything more would threaten to encroach to much on the iPod line, and I don't think apple is dumb enough to do that.
I'd be happier if it replaced my Palm you know a Blackberry killer, since they don't communicate natively only via third party. It would have to have flawless integration with mail and 0 config wi-fi capabilities to make me even consider looking at it.
wonderspark
Apr 27, 10:25 AM
No sir, trained at DLI Monterey and Goodfellow AFB. Damn, how come the Navy always has the bases at the nicest spots? :)
I picked the Navy because it improved chances of being near a beach! (:
I'm glad that Apple is correcting the mistake they made. Smart move, calling it a bug. Steve is a Jedi for sure.
I picked the Navy because it improved chances of being near a beach! (:
I'm glad that Apple is correcting the mistake they made. Smart move, calling it a bug. Steve is a Jedi for sure.
milo
Aug 18, 03:33 PM
So what apps will saturate all four cores or at least get close to it, on either a quad G5 or quad xeon? Are there any?
Are there any apps that really take advantage of four cores on their own?
Are there any apps that really take advantage of four cores on their own?
MacAddict1978
Mar 26, 02:18 PM
It must be conspiracy right. Right.
It couldn't just be an honest mistake as a result of a stretched development team.
No. It must be the same guys who shot Kennedy messing up all our tech. It's probably something to do with the Chinese.
With all the cash Apple sit's their butts on, there is NO EXCUSE for their development teams, or any team to be stretched thin. Back in the day when Apple was still the little engine that could and trying to avoid that second foot falling in the grave, ok. Yes, they needed to stretch themselves, innovate with little expense, but not today.
Some will argue Apple is slow with development because they want to get it right. Though history in the past 5 years shows us consistency with hardware issues in just about every thing they have released, and software bugs to match on the other end. We've seen delays in OS releases the past few times, and still buggy when they do come out. Leopard was released with an installer that failed and forced tons of people mass headaches, even the tech savvy. The bloody installer was buggy! I expect the darn thing to at least install before glitches tick me off.
Hire some damned people already. The money you spend denying things are buggy or denying the existence of hardware issues (that magically a month or 2 later you fix even though you denied it was a problem in the first place) could easily expand your teams.
And while I don't subscribe to the original posters conspiracy theory, I think he's half right. THey just don't care. iPhone 3G users anyway? They bricked everyone's phones with a bad update, and then acted like everyone was crazy, then admitted it was slow (no, unusable) gave a shoddy fix that made it usable but so bad you had to either hack your phone to put an old version of IOS on it, or you were running to upgrade. Wait, maybe I do buy into his theory. It's one thing to not support old technologies, it's another to leave them crippled and not look back.
It couldn't just be an honest mistake as a result of a stretched development team.
No. It must be the same guys who shot Kennedy messing up all our tech. It's probably something to do with the Chinese.
With all the cash Apple sit's their butts on, there is NO EXCUSE for their development teams, or any team to be stretched thin. Back in the day when Apple was still the little engine that could and trying to avoid that second foot falling in the grave, ok. Yes, they needed to stretch themselves, innovate with little expense, but not today.
Some will argue Apple is slow with development because they want to get it right. Though history in the past 5 years shows us consistency with hardware issues in just about every thing they have released, and software bugs to match on the other end. We've seen delays in OS releases the past few times, and still buggy when they do come out. Leopard was released with an installer that failed and forced tons of people mass headaches, even the tech savvy. The bloody installer was buggy! I expect the darn thing to at least install before glitches tick me off.
Hire some damned people already. The money you spend denying things are buggy or denying the existence of hardware issues (that magically a month or 2 later you fix even though you denied it was a problem in the first place) could easily expand your teams.
And while I don't subscribe to the original posters conspiracy theory, I think he's half right. THey just don't care. iPhone 3G users anyway? They bricked everyone's phones with a bad update, and then acted like everyone was crazy, then admitted it was slow (no, unusable) gave a shoddy fix that made it usable but so bad you had to either hack your phone to put an old version of IOS on it, or you were running to upgrade. Wait, maybe I do buy into his theory. It's one thing to not support old technologies, it's another to leave them crippled and not look back.
SevenInchScrew
Dec 9, 01:09 AM
DoFoT:
It depends on what you want from a game. If you care more about driving and tuning than painting and whatnot go buy GT5. Its all about driving and not much else.
I love it because i'm a bit of a car nerd. If you like cars you will like GT5. If you love cars you will love GT5, its just that simple.
I guess I'll throw in my counterpoint to that then, just to give him another opinion to mull over, because I love cars and don't love GT5....
The game is not real good. Every time I've played it, I can't help but think of how it could have been SOOO much better, if they just trimmed back on the crazy feature list a bit. The game tries to be everything to everyone who likes cars. But the problem with that is, trying to do many things means you'll never excel at any of them. Often the implementation of things in this game is a little weak or unfulfilling because of that. For example...
NASCAR is in, but is pretty plain and boring, and doesn't feel like a real cup race. If you like NASCAR, you'd be better served with a full game based on that.
Same with WRC stuff. Yes, the rally is pretty decent. But, I've played a bunch of REALLY awesome rally games before, and this is nowhere near as good.
Day and Night cycles, and Weather effects look amazing.... on the very few tracks that you can actually have them function on.
The sounds of the cars, just as with every GT game that has come before it, is terrible. Very few cars actually sound like their real-world version, and when you tune them up, they get even less distinctive.
The car list, while huge, is FILLED with cars that I have absolutely no desire to drive in a racing game. I get Kaz's intention, bringing in cars from many eras and different parts of the automotive spectrum to see them, and maybe appreciate them more. But this is a racing game at its core, and I don't ever want to race a VW Kombi.
And lastly, the menus are just pitiful. It really feels like they designed them first, all those years ago, and then never touched them again. So many games have come and gone with great menu systems, and this game took nothing away from them, because they are just awful in this game.
This game really had the potential to be amazing. If they got rid of NASCAR, WRC, Karts, etc, and took out about 4-500 of the boring, crappy cars, we'd be getting somewhere. Use the time and effort that those removed things would have occupied to make some manageable menus, more Premium cars, and get the Day-Night cycle and Weather on all tracks. That would have been great. But that isn't what we got.
Don't get me wrong, it is a good game. But GT games aren't supposed to just be good, they are supposed to be GREAT. But even after a 6 year wait, we only got pretty good.
But hey, as I've said on many occasions, it does make some DAMN GOOD screenshots. Almost unreal at times...
Click to HUGE-size
http://imgur.com/hLJ12.jpg
http://imgur.com/V06hb.jpg
http://imgur.com/Vciun.jpg
http://imgur.com/ZGPiF.jpg
http://imgur.com/IMrhk.jpg
It depends on what you want from a game. If you care more about driving and tuning than painting and whatnot go buy GT5. Its all about driving and not much else.
I love it because i'm a bit of a car nerd. If you like cars you will like GT5. If you love cars you will love GT5, its just that simple.
I guess I'll throw in my counterpoint to that then, just to give him another opinion to mull over, because I love cars and don't love GT5....
The game is not real good. Every time I've played it, I can't help but think of how it could have been SOOO much better, if they just trimmed back on the crazy feature list a bit. The game tries to be everything to everyone who likes cars. But the problem with that is, trying to do many things means you'll never excel at any of them. Often the implementation of things in this game is a little weak or unfulfilling because of that. For example...
NASCAR is in, but is pretty plain and boring, and doesn't feel like a real cup race. If you like NASCAR, you'd be better served with a full game based on that.
Same with WRC stuff. Yes, the rally is pretty decent. But, I've played a bunch of REALLY awesome rally games before, and this is nowhere near as good.
Day and Night cycles, and Weather effects look amazing.... on the very few tracks that you can actually have them function on.
The sounds of the cars, just as with every GT game that has come before it, is terrible. Very few cars actually sound like their real-world version, and when you tune them up, they get even less distinctive.
The car list, while huge, is FILLED with cars that I have absolutely no desire to drive in a racing game. I get Kaz's intention, bringing in cars from many eras and different parts of the automotive spectrum to see them, and maybe appreciate them more. But this is a racing game at its core, and I don't ever want to race a VW Kombi.
And lastly, the menus are just pitiful. It really feels like they designed them first, all those years ago, and then never touched them again. So many games have come and gone with great menu systems, and this game took nothing away from them, because they are just awful in this game.
This game really had the potential to be amazing. If they got rid of NASCAR, WRC, Karts, etc, and took out about 4-500 of the boring, crappy cars, we'd be getting somewhere. Use the time and effort that those removed things would have occupied to make some manageable menus, more Premium cars, and get the Day-Night cycle and Weather on all tracks. That would have been great. But that isn't what we got.
Don't get me wrong, it is a good game. But GT games aren't supposed to just be good, they are supposed to be GREAT. But even after a 6 year wait, we only got pretty good.
But hey, as I've said on many occasions, it does make some DAMN GOOD screenshots. Almost unreal at times...
Click to HUGE-size
http://imgur.com/hLJ12.jpg
http://imgur.com/V06hb.jpg
http://imgur.com/Vciun.jpg
http://imgur.com/ZGPiF.jpg
http://imgur.com/IMrhk.jpg
G5power
Jul 27, 09:48 AM
Assuming August 7 as an announcement date of new systems, the waiting is killer.
CorvusCamenarum
Feb 28, 05:14 PM
According to the school's website (http://www.chc.edu/News/2011/February/statement_regarding_jim_st_george/), he was not fired as the OP's article suggests. Rather, his contract was not renewed. AFAIK, adjunct instructors do not enjoy the same privileges as tenured professors. If his contract ran out and was simply not renewed, then that's that, unless it can be argued that the college has some legal obligation to offer a new contract.
SPUY767
Jul 27, 03:38 PM
Sorry if i missed it, but at what speeds do these run? Don't they know just because they keep bumping and bumping the chip speed don't really mean they have a faster system. Seem just like yesterday when a better design was more important than a super fast chip. Oh well, everyone is buying into the Mhz myth now. Funny that just a year or so ago, Apple was trying to shoot down the Mhz myth, now they have people cheering for it. I guess power consumption is good though.
This is a positively thoughtless remark. No one's cheering the MHz myth on, in fact, Intel itself has abandoned the concept. Until the 3Ghz woodies get dropped in a MacPro, the 2.7 GHZ G5 will still be the fastest chip ever put in a Macintosh. I have a dual core Pentium D in a bastard Mac at the house, it runs at 3.8 GHz. I'm pretty sure that even it is slower in a lot of areas than these Core 2's. So no, you're absolutely wrong, the MHz myth is all but dead.
This is a positively thoughtless remark. No one's cheering the MHz myth on, in fact, Intel itself has abandoned the concept. Until the 3Ghz woodies get dropped in a MacPro, the 2.7 GHZ G5 will still be the fastest chip ever put in a Macintosh. I have a dual core Pentium D in a bastard Mac at the house, it runs at 3.8 GHz. I'm pretty sure that even it is slower in a lot of areas than these Core 2's. So no, you're absolutely wrong, the MHz myth is all but dead.
tribulation
Nov 28, 08:12 PM
what if i have no artists distributed by universal? if this takes effect then the ipod price will just go up and we all will be paying for it. what makes them think that i am even listening to any of their artists on my ipod and why should they get a cut if i dont >> or even if i do. ridiculous and better not happen.
portishead
Apr 12, 12:28 PM
Why are you endorsing lack of improvement?
Nooooo not at all. You missed my next post with my feature requests. I'm just giving people a hard time about complaining that FCP isn't good enough. It has bugs, and it's quirky, but it mostly works.
Nooooo not at all. You missed my next post with my feature requests. I'm just giving people a hard time about complaining that FCP isn't good enough. It has bugs, and it's quirky, but it mostly works.
Grokgod
Jul 28, 03:36 PM
merk850
dont take it back.
I dont think that the difference will be that much, with the new systems.
If your happy with its performance then keep it.
A mild CPU boost isnt all that, and I doubt that the video cards will be upped that much.
I wouldnt take the hit in money lost, cause you can always sell it later down the line and get the lastest and greatest thats really a must buy.
dont take it back.
I dont think that the difference will be that much, with the new systems.
If your happy with its performance then keep it.
A mild CPU boost isnt all that, and I doubt that the video cards will be upped that much.
I wouldnt take the hit in money lost, cause you can always sell it later down the line and get the lastest and greatest thats really a must buy.
mcrain
Mar 23, 02:59 PM
"Lying" implies intent. Are you accusing them of lying, or getting it wrong? They absolutely lied, and they got stuff wrong. I believe there was malevolent intent, and to the extent that can't be proven, there was clear reckless disregard for the truth.
Is it your position that Libya represents a larger danger to American assets/security than Iraq? If not, is it your suggestion that America should be involved in every humanitarian crisis with brutal dictators worldwide, or at least those comparable to Libya? If so, why aren't we in North Korea? Why aren't we in any number of African nations? There are many in the mainstream media and many on the left who are saying today that there are problems. Asking why we didn't go into other African countries, criticizing the coalition and the idea that this is "minimal" US involvement. I'm not claiming the left is perfect, but rather pointing out that your claim (re: hipocricy from 'the left in media') is far too broad and ignores the realities of the media coverage and congressional responses.
But I also think it's important (especially in this forum) to point out hypocrisy stemming from the left so that the Macrumors Echo Chamber doesn't keep you all in denial. I've been in these forums for a long time, and I can tell you that while some denial occurs, liberals are far more likely to be critical of the politicians they support than conservatives are.
princess diana death photos
out about Diana#39;s death
princess diana death
Princess Diana Death Pic
Is it your position that Libya represents a larger danger to American assets/security than Iraq? If not, is it your suggestion that America should be involved in every humanitarian crisis with brutal dictators worldwide, or at least those comparable to Libya? If so, why aren't we in North Korea? Why aren't we in any number of African nations? There are many in the mainstream media and many on the left who are saying today that there are problems. Asking why we didn't go into other African countries, criticizing the coalition and the idea that this is "minimal" US involvement. I'm not claiming the left is perfect, but rather pointing out that your claim (re: hipocricy from 'the left in media') is far too broad and ignores the realities of the media coverage and congressional responses.
But I also think it's important (especially in this forum) to point out hypocrisy stemming from the left so that the Macrumors Echo Chamber doesn't keep you all in denial. I've been in these forums for a long time, and I can tell you that while some denial occurs, liberals are far more likely to be critical of the politicians they support than conservatives are.
netdog
Aug 5, 04:45 PM
I'd be willing to bet that there will be at least two major surprises on Monday, one to do with some fab capability in Leopard that Apple has succeeded in keeping us in the dark about, and one fab piece of consumer hardware. By the second, I don't mean something we all expect like Mac Pros or Meroms in the MBPs. I mean something radical. Something that will make some real headlines.
They can't do things according to their old schedules now that they are on with Intel. Get used to new patterns. Apple is coming out of the shadows now, with sales and mindshare building at a strong pace. Waiting until January to annouce big new consumer pushes because WWDC is for developers won't do anymore. Welcome to the new Apple.
Think big. It's okay. Apple won't disappoint.
They can't do things according to their old schedules now that they are on with Intel. Get used to new patterns. Apple is coming out of the shadows now, with sales and mindshare building at a strong pace. Waiting until January to annouce big new consumer pushes because WWDC is for developers won't do anymore. Welcome to the new Apple.
Think big. It's okay. Apple won't disappoint.
Tom359
Apr 25, 04:14 PM
This is why we need a "loser pays" system.
This would get rid if the "I'm going to sue you so you pay money to go away becuase it's cheaper than paying the legal bills." Our system has been corrupted by these nuisance law suits.
This would get rid if the "I'm going to sue you so you pay money to go away becuase it's cheaper than paying the legal bills." Our system has been corrupted by these nuisance law suits.
Lollypop
Jul 20, 12:47 PM
As fast as possible! Don't worry I do agree that e mail and browsing has very little to do with the processor speed, still you did ask the question! Now if only I could get a fibre link to my house without it costing a few hundred thousand Pounds a year hmm :rolleyes:
Sort of proves the point i was trying to make, at some point mose users wil rather get a beter IO subsystem than more processing power. When last i checked most operating systems dont scale very well beyond 32 processors, I asume that they have gotten the OS scale beyond that, but wont it at some point become impossible to improve to OS to scale better on more processors?
Multitasking has be mentioned as a situation where multiple processors will be an advantage, but at the same time be real, to what level do you multitast with processor intense apps?
Most of the time I have itunes running in the background, web browser open, word, entourage, few finder windows... basics really, but even with so few things open I cant concentrate on the report im writing or the thread im reading because of everything else happening and drawing my attention. Wont the same be true if not more so for a photoshop user? Or a FCP user? So asuming that you reduce the clutter wont the level of multitasking be reduced then?
Sort of proves the point i was trying to make, at some point mose users wil rather get a beter IO subsystem than more processing power. When last i checked most operating systems dont scale very well beyond 32 processors, I asume that they have gotten the OS scale beyond that, but wont it at some point become impossible to improve to OS to scale better on more processors?
Multitasking has be mentioned as a situation where multiple processors will be an advantage, but at the same time be real, to what level do you multitast with processor intense apps?
Most of the time I have itunes running in the background, web browser open, word, entourage, few finder windows... basics really, but even with so few things open I cant concentrate on the report im writing or the thread im reading because of everything else happening and drawing my attention. Wont the same be true if not more so for a photoshop user? Or a FCP user? So asuming that you reduce the clutter wont the level of multitasking be reduced then?
NoSmokingBandit
Aug 18, 12:55 PM
http://www.andriasang.com/e/blog/2010/08/18/gt5_date_and_blue_ps3/
New pics and stuff.
An official feature list is nice too:
How did the death of Princess
princess diana death photos
Newspapers Diana Death
New pics and stuff.
An official feature list is nice too:
kntgsp
Mar 22, 07:29 PM
If Samsung had left it as vanilla Android they would've had a day one sale from me. Touchwiz is an abortion of programming. It's horrendous.
I'll wait to see how easily vanilla ROMs can be ported over or if it winds up being the epic clusterf**k that the Galaxy S was. Couldn't get rid of Touchwiz even if you tried. Using a different launcher and it still ran in the background eating resources. Remove it entirely? The thing kernel panicked and rebooted in an endless loop.
Samsung still doesn't get it. VANILLA Android. You want to offer your own launcher and apps as an alternative? Great. Offer them in the marketplace or from your website. Otherwise take your Touchwiz, and your ridiculous RFS file format and cram it up your mother's box. That whole software department at Samsung just needs to be exterminated.
Christ I am so sick of them taking fantastic hardware and absolutely ruining it by using proprietary file formats and frankenstein versions of Android. I do get a kick out of their 10.1" model being both thinner and lighter than the 9.7" Ipad2 though. That will undoubtedly have the apple apologists out en masse.
I'll wait to see how easily vanilla ROMs can be ported over or if it winds up being the epic clusterf**k that the Galaxy S was. Couldn't get rid of Touchwiz even if you tried. Using a different launcher and it still ran in the background eating resources. Remove it entirely? The thing kernel panicked and rebooted in an endless loop.
Samsung still doesn't get it. VANILLA Android. You want to offer your own launcher and apps as an alternative? Great. Offer them in the marketplace or from your website. Otherwise take your Touchwiz, and your ridiculous RFS file format and cram it up your mother's box. That whole software department at Samsung just needs to be exterminated.
Christ I am so sick of them taking fantastic hardware and absolutely ruining it by using proprietary file formats and frankenstein versions of Android. I do get a kick out of their 10.1" model being both thinner and lighter than the 9.7" Ipad2 though. That will undoubtedly have the apple apologists out en masse.
TheKrillr
Aug 27, 08:19 PM
Not true.
Recent years, updates came right before the end of the promotion.
I didn't know that, thats very good to know. I'm in need of a macbook by the 25th and was afraid i'd have to end up ordering right before the release of Merom.
Recent years, updates came right before the end of the promotion.
I didn't know that, thats very good to know. I'm in need of a macbook by the 25th and was afraid i'd have to end up ordering right before the release of Merom.
Full of Win
Mar 31, 09:34 PM
What is this, "let's go on an Apple fansite and act surpised that it's full of Apple fans" day?
No, it's "make up a fake day" day.
No, it's "make up a fake day" day.
wpotere
Apr 28, 08:11 AM
Sad, pathetic, misguided
Speaking of which...
Speaking of which...
QCassidy352
Jul 20, 03:53 PM
I hate to burst everyone's bubble, but Kentsfield will not be appearing in any of the Pro machines for some time.
Apple will be using them exclusively in the Xserves, at for the most part of 2007. This will finally give Apple another way to distinguish their server line from their pro line.
What? Apple*differentiates the XServes by having them 1U thick and rackmountable. One buys a rackmount server not because it's faster but because it's smaller and fits in a rack.
yeah, what he said. Apple does not have to distinguish powermacs from servers with processor speeds. People (businesses) who need servers are not going to buy powermacs to do the job even if they are a little bit faster or cheaper; they are going to buy real rack-mounted servers.
Apple will be using them exclusively in the Xserves, at for the most part of 2007. This will finally give Apple another way to distinguish their server line from their pro line.
What? Apple*differentiates the XServes by having them 1U thick and rackmountable. One buys a rackmount server not because it's faster but because it's smaller and fits in a rack.
yeah, what he said. Apple does not have to distinguish powermacs from servers with processor speeds. People (businesses) who need servers are not going to buy powermacs to do the job even if they are a little bit faster or cheaper; they are going to buy real rack-mounted servers.
voyagerd
Jul 27, 03:52 PM
Woot! I'm going to buy and ATI Radeon X850XT!
~Shard~
Aug 11, 02:45 PM
I would add
Bill McEnaney
Mar 3, 03:55 AM
Lmfao!!!! That is the DUMBEST thing I've ever heard in my entire life. Yeah, gay people can live together but no sex! Hmm, doesn't that kind of go against the whole point of being gay? I'm sorry that's the only response I can come up with, it's just that the ignorance in your post is too overwhelming for the average person to comprehend.
Many here know that I'm a heterosexual who took and keeps a vow to be a lifelong virgin. So I don't have sex. Does that mean that being heterosexual is pointless? I don't know. But I do know that some good things are better than sexual pleasure.
Say two same-sex-attracted people are roommates. Does that imply that they should have sex with each other? No, they may be roommates who live together only to share living expenses. Some may think likemyorbs is assuming something that's plainly false. They may think LMO assumes that every same-sex-attracted feels same-sex-attracted to anybody else of the same sex.
Same-sex-attracted people can live celibately together. My two "gay" friends did that for about 30 years before they "married" each other in Las Vegas. Although I believe that "gay" sex is always gravely immoral, I admire my two buddies for their self-control. I'll bet they didn't ask each other, "We're not having sex with each other? What's the point of being gay? Since we're not having it, let's live separately."
Many here know that I'm a heterosexual who took and keeps a vow to be a lifelong virgin. So I don't have sex. Does that mean that being heterosexual is pointless? I don't know. But I do know that some good things are better than sexual pleasure.
Say two same-sex-attracted people are roommates. Does that imply that they should have sex with each other? No, they may be roommates who live together only to share living expenses. Some may think likemyorbs is assuming something that's plainly false. They may think LMO assumes that every same-sex-attracted feels same-sex-attracted to anybody else of the same sex.
Same-sex-attracted people can live celibately together. My two "gay" friends did that for about 30 years before they "married" each other in Las Vegas. Although I believe that "gay" sex is always gravely immoral, I admire my two buddies for their self-control. I'll bet they didn't ask each other, "We're not having sex with each other? What's the point of being gay? Since we're not having it, let's live separately."
Подписаться на:
Комментарии к сообщению (Atom)
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий