daze
Aug 27, 12:29 PM
Speaking of wish expectations Multimedia;
I know you're hangin' out for Santa Rosa. The article mentions that it's expected in early 2007. Do you think that would be the date for official announcement of production-standard architecture, or actual availability announcement?
Seems very early to be shipping...
I could go out in September and get a Merom notebook, but I don't mind waiting 6 months for Santa Rosa to hit the street.
Why not wait for the one after Santa Rosa? Then the one after... ;)
I know you're hangin' out for Santa Rosa. The article mentions that it's expected in early 2007. Do you think that would be the date for official announcement of production-standard architecture, or actual availability announcement?
Seems very early to be shipping...
I could go out in September and get a Merom notebook, but I don't mind waiting 6 months for Santa Rosa to hit the street.
Why not wait for the one after Santa Rosa? Then the one after... ;)
Gakusei
Apr 6, 03:42 PM
Personally I'm waiting for either the HTC 10.1" tablet or the rumored official Google version being made by LG. Or...if Apple makes some much needed improvements in iOS 5, like not needing to connect the iPad to a computer to update the OS.
bobthedino
Apr 27, 09:14 AM
I know of no cell tower or wifi device that works up to 100 miles away.
No-one has said this. Apple said the database contains the location of cell towers and Wi-Fi hotspots around your current location.
A bit of research reveals that iOS not only downloads location data for the cell tower or Wi-Fi hotspot nearest you, but also for hundreds of others in the area around you. This is so that when you move location it doesn't have to re-query Apple's location database over the internet. This is what the cache is for - to enable the device to look up locations stored locally instead of having to waste battery and talk to Apple again over the internet. In addition it enables Wi-Fi only devices to still be able to locate themselves even when they have no internet connection.
No-one has said this. Apple said the database contains the location of cell towers and Wi-Fi hotspots around your current location.
A bit of research reveals that iOS not only downloads location data for the cell tower or Wi-Fi hotspot nearest you, but also for hundreds of others in the area around you. This is so that when you move location it doesn't have to re-query Apple's location database over the internet. This is what the cache is for - to enable the device to look up locations stored locally instead of having to waste battery and talk to Apple again over the internet. In addition it enables Wi-Fi only devices to still be able to locate themselves even when they have no internet connection.
JAT
Apr 6, 03:53 PM
What you and every other non-informed are missing is the Xoom lack of apps is a not really a con for 2 reason.
1. Unlike iOS, ALL APPS, in the android market scale to fit the 1280x800 screen. No x1 or x2 crap. So I can still ENJOY my facebooke app on a larger screen. Nothing is lost. "optimized for tablets" gives me the same information just with a different interface. So long has my twitter app or facebooke or squeezebox app scale so i can see all. I am a happy camper.
2. Unlike iOS i would argue that the xoom needs LESS apps to do functions that take iOS 3 or 4 apps to do. I dont need goodreader or the like because I have a native file system. I dont need skyfire because i have flash. I dont need to open in here, open in there. Every app can have access to each other...
Scale?? Access to each other??
I'm beginning to wonder if you have ever used EITHER iOS or Android.
1. Unlike iOS, ALL APPS, in the android market scale to fit the 1280x800 screen. No x1 or x2 crap. So I can still ENJOY my facebooke app on a larger screen. Nothing is lost. "optimized for tablets" gives me the same information just with a different interface. So long has my twitter app or facebooke or squeezebox app scale so i can see all. I am a happy camper.
2. Unlike iOS i would argue that the xoom needs LESS apps to do functions that take iOS 3 or 4 apps to do. I dont need goodreader or the like because I have a native file system. I dont need skyfire because i have flash. I dont need to open in here, open in there. Every app can have access to each other...
Scale?? Access to each other??
I'm beginning to wonder if you have ever used EITHER iOS or Android.
composer11
Jul 23, 05:00 AM
Apple's business model is based on high margins. I don't think this is going to change.
My guess is that they will release upgraded systems more often, and discontinue the slower systems more often, and leave the prices approximately unchanged.
Don't expect dirt-cheap Macs (aside from closeout sales to dump old stock, of course), but do expect more powerful systems to come out much more rapidly.
You can get tons of great audio gear. But you're going to have to start shopping in music stores and not in computer stores. And be prepared to pay for the quality you get.
Yeah, I know, that's probably what they will do forcing you to pay top dollar.
Hope the Mac Books get dedicated GPU, intel is rumored to be working on something that should be on par with ATI/Nvida to be ready for Vista, meanwhile AMD is scooping up ATI.
Regarding music gear, I have a Mackie 400F which sounds nice, a tube pre amp and Rhodes NT2A, I was speaking of wireless. Everything wireless. LOL!
My guess is that they will release upgraded systems more often, and discontinue the slower systems more often, and leave the prices approximately unchanged.
Don't expect dirt-cheap Macs (aside from closeout sales to dump old stock, of course), but do expect more powerful systems to come out much more rapidly.
You can get tons of great audio gear. But you're going to have to start shopping in music stores and not in computer stores. And be prepared to pay for the quality you get.
Yeah, I know, that's probably what they will do forcing you to pay top dollar.
Hope the Mac Books get dedicated GPU, intel is rumored to be working on something that should be on par with ATI/Nvida to be ready for Vista, meanwhile AMD is scooping up ATI.
Regarding music gear, I have a Mackie 400F which sounds nice, a tube pre amp and Rhodes NT2A, I was speaking of wireless. Everything wireless. LOL!
shamino
Jul 20, 09:58 AM
No I think you are confused. :) I meant "Is having more cores, lets say 8, more efficient than one big core equal in processing power to the 8 cores?"
First of all, you assume that it is possible to make "one big core equal in processing power to the 8 cores". I don't think it is possible to do this (at least not with the x86 architecture using today's technology.)
But assuming such a chip exists, the answer depends on what kind of efficiency you're thinking of.
If you mean computational efficiency (meaning the most useful processing per clock-tick), then a single big core will do better. This is because single-threaded apps will be able to use the full power (whereas multiple threads are needed to take advantagte of multiple cores.) Also, the operating system can get rid of the overhead that is needed to keep software running on the multiple cores from stepping on each other.
If you mean energy efficiency (amount of processing per watt of electricity consumed), then it could go either way, depending on how the chips are made. But given today's manufacturing processes and the non-linear power curve that we see as clock speeds are increased, the multiple-core solution will almost definitely use less power.
First of all, you assume that it is possible to make "one big core equal in processing power to the 8 cores". I don't think it is possible to do this (at least not with the x86 architecture using today's technology.)
But assuming such a chip exists, the answer depends on what kind of efficiency you're thinking of.
If you mean computational efficiency (meaning the most useful processing per clock-tick), then a single big core will do better. This is because single-threaded apps will be able to use the full power (whereas multiple threads are needed to take advantagte of multiple cores.) Also, the operating system can get rid of the overhead that is needed to keep software running on the multiple cores from stepping on each other.
If you mean energy efficiency (amount of processing per watt of electricity consumed), then it could go either way, depending on how the chips are made. But given today's manufacturing processes and the non-linear power curve that we see as clock speeds are increased, the multiple-core solution will almost definitely use less power.
BC2009
Apr 7, 11:42 PM
When I worked retail in high school I can remember we had a daily sales goal and that goal was based on how we had done last month and the previous year at that time. The managers were rated on their ability to achieve their sales goals and by how much they sold overall (i.e.: the best managers were the ones with the highest goals and still made their goals). However, the managers got dinged for missing for their goals.
I am betting that this is a game that Best Buy managers have played for quite some time to ensure they can consistently make their sales goals and avoid their their goals from being artificially inflated to a level where they could not consistently achieve their goals. I doubt this was a company-wide Best Buy policy, but rather a consequence of the way they do performance ratings on their store managers.
Either way it is DEFINITELY poor customer service. If somebody takes the time to drive down to your store and you have stock that has already been received into the inventory system and could be sold and you turn that customer away because the manager is looking out for his performance rating then you just told your customer that the manager's performance goals and ratings are more important than the people who help you achieve those goals with their hard-earned money.
I am betting that this is a game that Best Buy managers have played for quite some time to ensure they can consistently make their sales goals and avoid their their goals from being artificially inflated to a level where they could not consistently achieve their goals. I doubt this was a company-wide Best Buy policy, but rather a consequence of the way they do performance ratings on their store managers.
Either way it is DEFINITELY poor customer service. If somebody takes the time to drive down to your store and you have stock that has already been received into the inventory system and could be sold and you turn that customer away because the manager is looking out for his performance rating then you just told your customer that the manager's performance goals and ratings are more important than the people who help you achieve those goals with their hard-earned money.
mccldwll
Apr 19, 08:38 PM
Apple better not win this case and anyone who thinks that they should are a fool.
And anyone who writes "are a fool" is a dolt.
And anyone who writes "are a fool" is a dolt.
JimEJr
Apr 27, 10:30 AM
Its not about being a criminal or paranoid. This data is for the sole purpose of marketers to sell us crap.
Well, I'm tired of seeing ads everywhere I turn. You can't go to the bathroom now without seeing a ad shoved in your face and its becoming tiresome.
Well, Fry could have added our iPads and our phones too. Its disgusting already how much advertising has infiltrated our lives. You can't even read a news story on the internet without an ad being being intrusively shoved in your face.
Well then shut your eyes and plug your ears...or kiss your content (aka what you DO want) good bye as those ads are what is paying for you to enjoy that news story you refer to and most anything else that is free or a lower cost than it would be without ads. You can't have it both ways. Want all bloggers, media, etc. to do everything without ads AND without a charge? You try running a biz that way...see how long you'll be able to pay your bills.
In reality, the more data advertisers have about you, the better they will be able to put forth ads that are much more relevant to you. If we're going to have ads, might as well have them be for something of genuine interest to each one of us.
Well, I'm tired of seeing ads everywhere I turn. You can't go to the bathroom now without seeing a ad shoved in your face and its becoming tiresome.
Well, Fry could have added our iPads and our phones too. Its disgusting already how much advertising has infiltrated our lives. You can't even read a news story on the internet without an ad being being intrusively shoved in your face.
Well then shut your eyes and plug your ears...or kiss your content (aka what you DO want) good bye as those ads are what is paying for you to enjoy that news story you refer to and most anything else that is free or a lower cost than it would be without ads. You can't have it both ways. Want all bloggers, media, etc. to do everything without ads AND without a charge? You try running a biz that way...see how long you'll be able to pay your bills.
In reality, the more data advertisers have about you, the better they will be able to put forth ads that are much more relevant to you. If we're going to have ads, might as well have them be for something of genuine interest to each one of us.
rezenclowd3
Aug 20, 01:16 PM
The Colin McRae series WAS great. With Dirt, its no longer a wold tour, more random than the last McRae game that was made.
I don't care for the hoppers because when I race, I don't want to sprint. I want 10+ laps. 20-30 is good. Also, when in the friggen hell will qualifying be added back into racing games???? That is half the racing experience. NOT fighting from dead last EVERY FING race! Luckily I get my fix there with the F1: Championship Edition for PS3, which really is a pretty damn good racing AND F1 game.
Oh and with Forza 3, oval is fun, which I refuse to watch in reality. BUT these guys running in the hoppers have MODIFIED their stock cars....ugh...
When I race my electric RC cars, our club has started to go to 7minute races. Still not cooking motors. Laps happens to be about 25 right now in stock timing class. I really think its the number of laps that one can do consistently makes racing more fun, not time overall IMO. Those 7minutes seem to last a VERY long time.
I don't care for the hoppers because when I race, I don't want to sprint. I want 10+ laps. 20-30 is good. Also, when in the friggen hell will qualifying be added back into racing games???? That is half the racing experience. NOT fighting from dead last EVERY FING race! Luckily I get my fix there with the F1: Championship Edition for PS3, which really is a pretty damn good racing AND F1 game.
Oh and with Forza 3, oval is fun, which I refuse to watch in reality. BUT these guys running in the hoppers have MODIFIED their stock cars....ugh...
When I race my electric RC cars, our club has started to go to 7minute races. Still not cooking motors. Laps happens to be about 25 right now in stock timing class. I really think its the number of laps that one can do consistently makes racing more fun, not time overall IMO. Those 7minutes seem to last a VERY long time.
Small White Car
Apr 10, 12:20 AM
Oh, we are totally getting an iPad app to go along with this program. I can feel it.
I would oh-so love the ability to down-rez a Final Cut project and send it to an iPad...do all my rough cutting there...and then bring it back to the Mac and re-link it to the real footage to do the detail work.
I've had a lot of fun playing with iMovie on the iPad. I am drooling for something similar that works as part of a Final Cut Pro workflow.
Interesting news, but the bit about booting competitors is downright disgusting.
I'm a little confused...why was Avid presenting at a Final Cut Pro User Group's meeting anyway? Do they just come in and are like "Hey, you've all made a mistake!" or something?
I would oh-so love the ability to down-rez a Final Cut project and send it to an iPad...do all my rough cutting there...and then bring it back to the Mac and re-link it to the real footage to do the detail work.
I've had a lot of fun playing with iMovie on the iPad. I am drooling for something similar that works as part of a Final Cut Pro workflow.
Interesting news, but the bit about booting competitors is downright disgusting.
I'm a little confused...why was Avid presenting at a Final Cut Pro User Group's meeting anyway? Do they just come in and are like "Hey, you've all made a mistake!" or something?
Bosunsfate
Aug 8, 12:39 AM
:p
As I had said many times before, we were not going to see just upgraded features. Rather the show stoppers are something no one had thought of before.
You guys and Apple are really doing a sweet job....and yea take the rest of the year off.....but then again, I need Leopard shipped, so get that out first. ;)
As I had said many times before, we were not going to see just upgraded features. Rather the show stoppers are something no one had thought of before.
You guys and Apple are really doing a sweet job....and yea take the rest of the year off.....but then again, I need Leopard shipped, so get that out first. ;)
Sydde
Mar 19, 05:46 PM
It's a known fact the Obama Administration monitors MacRumors forums for a populist read on issues... ;) Yes I agree business is in charge colored by perceived economic end-results.
Until we have publicly funded campaigns, there will be no change. As long as it costs millions to get elected, business will continue to set policy, maintain the farce of two different parties and basically run the country, a situation I think the OP of this thread is in favour of.
Until we have publicly funded campaigns, there will be no change. As long as it costs millions to get elected, business will continue to set policy, maintain the farce of two different parties and basically run the country, a situation I think the OP of this thread is in favour of.
MacQuest
Jul 21, 05:42 AM
It's the future, you know, soon the clock speed will be irrelevant and we'll be expressing processor speed in number of cores octocore, hexacore, tricontradicore, hexacontetracore, hecticosoctocore, and such and such
Word.
Word.
Tomaz
Aug 7, 06:07 PM
Innovation isn't creating new ideas, but improving them.
For instance, Spotlight searching wasn't new. BeOS had something similar. But Apple improved it and integrated it into their OS.
See, I have Virtue desktops. I've tried Desktop Manager, You Control: Desktops. But they're all just hacks. Spaces looks mcuh cleaner, simpler and elegant than any of those. That's what I expect from Apple, and they did not let me down.
As for Time Machine, no the idea is not new, even for Microsoft. But Apple is making it simple. Easy enough for mom and dad to use. Personally I think having a wormhole-space interface is kickass.
Ok my last post on this topic before I'm getting on peoples nerves: Copying, improving and whatever you wanna call it is ok, I don't care where an idea came from as long as the outcome is good. But Apple always presents their innovations as their inventions and claims that everyone else copies. In todays keynote they even made a big deal out of how MS copies Apple (banner, on stage), and afterwards they introduced only stuff that they copied (and maybe improved) from MS, Linux... that's just not very sympathetic!
For instance, Spotlight searching wasn't new. BeOS had something similar. But Apple improved it and integrated it into their OS.
See, I have Virtue desktops. I've tried Desktop Manager, You Control: Desktops. But they're all just hacks. Spaces looks mcuh cleaner, simpler and elegant than any of those. That's what I expect from Apple, and they did not let me down.
As for Time Machine, no the idea is not new, even for Microsoft. But Apple is making it simple. Easy enough for mom and dad to use. Personally I think having a wormhole-space interface is kickass.
Ok my last post on this topic before I'm getting on peoples nerves: Copying, improving and whatever you wanna call it is ok, I don't care where an idea came from as long as the outcome is good. But Apple always presents their innovations as their inventions and claims that everyone else copies. In todays keynote they even made a big deal out of how MS copies Apple (banner, on stage), and afterwards they introduced only stuff that they copied (and maybe improved) from MS, Linux... that's just not very sympathetic!
matticus008
Nov 29, 08:32 AM
I question any law/contract of this type on several grounds:
1 - How are the eligable rightsholders identified/compensated?
It depends on the system in place. In Canada, I believe the proceeds are turned over to the CRIA which is then responsible for distribution to its members through a process of their own selection (and not legally specified).
2 - How are they compensated equitably? Do you compensate Jay-Z and a classical artist the same? Which ever you prefer, Jay-Z sells more.
Again, it's up to the labels to decide. Once they get their cut from the CRIA, the label controls distribution within its internal channels. More popular artists on that label probably get a bigger cut than niche artists, but more importantly, individual artists likely never see much in the way of proceeds from this.
3 - If I've paid the royalty, don't I own rights to the music? Sure, I may need to find a copy of it, but I'm told that they're all over a thing called the "internet".
No. Most importantly, the royalty does not create a stipulation, or even a fiduciary relationship between you, the customer, and the CRIA. The exchange is between the company (Apple, RCA, Samsung, Microsoft, etc.) and the industry consortium.
Even setting that aside, you have no record of a transaction taking place at all. You can't claim to have paid royalties and have received nothing in return granting you any rights (one way to fight this is to demand that a given label supply you with a written document). Absent consideration, all you've essentially done is paid money for nothing--you didn't send the label a contract with your dollar (and you can't, since you're not paying them the dollar anyway, you'd be paying Apple). Your contribution isn't so much because you're pirating music, but because you could be. It's like putting down a deposit, having to pay insurance, or having a membership in a book club. You pay money, but that's not the end of the transaction. The only thing this royalty grants you is a tacit guarantee that Universal will continue to provide digital content.
1 - How are the eligable rightsholders identified/compensated?
It depends on the system in place. In Canada, I believe the proceeds are turned over to the CRIA which is then responsible for distribution to its members through a process of their own selection (and not legally specified).
2 - How are they compensated equitably? Do you compensate Jay-Z and a classical artist the same? Which ever you prefer, Jay-Z sells more.
Again, it's up to the labels to decide. Once they get their cut from the CRIA, the label controls distribution within its internal channels. More popular artists on that label probably get a bigger cut than niche artists, but more importantly, individual artists likely never see much in the way of proceeds from this.
3 - If I've paid the royalty, don't I own rights to the music? Sure, I may need to find a copy of it, but I'm told that they're all over a thing called the "internet".
No. Most importantly, the royalty does not create a stipulation, or even a fiduciary relationship between you, the customer, and the CRIA. The exchange is between the company (Apple, RCA, Samsung, Microsoft, etc.) and the industry consortium.
Even setting that aside, you have no record of a transaction taking place at all. You can't claim to have paid royalties and have received nothing in return granting you any rights (one way to fight this is to demand that a given label supply you with a written document). Absent consideration, all you've essentially done is paid money for nothing--you didn't send the label a contract with your dollar (and you can't, since you're not paying them the dollar anyway, you'd be paying Apple). Your contribution isn't so much because you're pirating music, but because you could be. It's like putting down a deposit, having to pay insurance, or having a membership in a book club. You pay money, but that's not the end of the transaction. The only thing this royalty grants you is a tacit guarantee that Universal will continue to provide digital content.
BRLawyer
Jul 15, 01:28 PM
That would be a good lineup: two Minis, two iMacs, two Macs, two MacPros. Perhaps then the spread from $1499 for a base model conroe Mac to a $3299 or even $3599 for a premo dual-woodcrest 3GHz MacPro would seem plausible? I really like having a Mac desktop option before stepping up to the MacPro (with a smaller format). Right now the iMac is your only option in a certain range.
I agree with another poster too, having both models silent would be most excellent!
This sounds to me like a redux of the Performa/Quadra/LC disaster of the late 90s...I am glad Apple has learned from its mistakes, so it does NOT stretch its production line to a plethora of unnecessary models anymore...
A cheapo MacPro model is more than enough to fill any gaps between the iMac and the Pro line...nothing else.
I agree with another poster too, having both models silent would be most excellent!
This sounds to me like a redux of the Performa/Quadra/LC disaster of the late 90s...I am glad Apple has learned from its mistakes, so it does NOT stretch its production line to a plethora of unnecessary models anymore...
A cheapo MacPro model is more than enough to fill any gaps between the iMac and the Pro line...nothing else.
aswitcher
Aug 11, 02:40 PM
What I gather would really make the iPhone something special:
alison lohman
Object-X
Sep 19, 12:31 AM
1. It's Merom. Not Memrom, Menron, Memron or even L. Ron.
You forgot Mormon.
You forgot Mormon.
jalman11
Apr 25, 01:41 PM
there is fine print somewhere about this...
I'm presuming that this data is not transmitted back to apple, therefore, should we also be upset that our own apple iphones and our own itunes backups "secretly" log our text messages and call logs... the horror.
I'm presuming that this data is not transmitted back to apple, therefore, should we also be upset that our own apple iphones and our own itunes backups "secretly" log our text messages and call logs... the horror.
Hellhammer
Apr 8, 09:01 AM
The trouble is .. I find the TDP numbers for Sandy Bridge very misleading. For example the previous i7 2.66Ghz dual core had a TDP of 35W and the current i7 2.2Ghz quad core has a TDP of 45W. Theoretically, it should only use 10W more when doing CPU intensive task, but according to anandtech who measured the task, the i7 Sandy Bridge Quad core was using almost 40W more when running cinebench.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4205/the-macbook-pro-review-13-and-15-inch-2011-brings-sandy-bridge/14
It just doesn't make any sense. Going by those figures, if the i7 dual core was 35W, the i7 Sandy Bridge quad core would be around 70W.
Not sure how this relates to potential MacBook Air Sandy Bridge processors, but keep in mind.. there must be a reason why Samsung went for the ULV processor in their 13" laptop instead of the LV one.
CPU isn't the only thing that changed. AMD 6750M (~30W) has higher TDP than NVidia GT 330M (~23W). I had to put ~ because their TDPs are not officially stated by AMD or NVidia so it's just based on previous GPUs and their TDPs. The point is that AMD 6750M has higher TDP.
There is also another thing. TDP is not the maximum power draw. Maximum power dissipation is usually 20-30% more than the actual TDP. While MPD is rarely achieved as it requires maximum voltage and temperature, it can (nearly) be achieved with heavy benchmarking applications.
For example, the combined TDP from quad core SB and AMD 6750M is 75W. If we use 20% extra as the MPD, that is 90W, just from the CPU and GPU! Of course those parts are not using 90W in that test because things like screen, HD, RAM etc need power too. As the MPD is usually in percents, it can explain why the difference is so big in watts.
40W sounds a bit too much to explain with MPD though. IIRC the GT 330M is underclocked but I'm not 100% sure. You have a valid point that the SBs may be using more power than their predecessors. To make this more accurate, we should compare them with C2Ds though ;)
I guess we will have to wait and see, but an ULV in 13" would be more than a disappointment.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4205/the-macbook-pro-review-13-and-15-inch-2011-brings-sandy-bridge/14
It just doesn't make any sense. Going by those figures, if the i7 dual core was 35W, the i7 Sandy Bridge quad core would be around 70W.
Not sure how this relates to potential MacBook Air Sandy Bridge processors, but keep in mind.. there must be a reason why Samsung went for the ULV processor in their 13" laptop instead of the LV one.
CPU isn't the only thing that changed. AMD 6750M (~30W) has higher TDP than NVidia GT 330M (~23W). I had to put ~ because their TDPs are not officially stated by AMD or NVidia so it's just based on previous GPUs and their TDPs. The point is that AMD 6750M has higher TDP.
There is also another thing. TDP is not the maximum power draw. Maximum power dissipation is usually 20-30% more than the actual TDP. While MPD is rarely achieved as it requires maximum voltage and temperature, it can (nearly) be achieved with heavy benchmarking applications.
For example, the combined TDP from quad core SB and AMD 6750M is 75W. If we use 20% extra as the MPD, that is 90W, just from the CPU and GPU! Of course those parts are not using 90W in that test because things like screen, HD, RAM etc need power too. As the MPD is usually in percents, it can explain why the difference is so big in watts.
40W sounds a bit too much to explain with MPD though. IIRC the GT 330M is underclocked but I'm not 100% sure. You have a valid point that the SBs may be using more power than their predecessors. To make this more accurate, we should compare them with C2Ds though ;)
I guess we will have to wait and see, but an ULV in 13" would be more than a disappointment.
sjo
Aug 11, 04:09 PM
I have three subscriptions. Two in europe, one in US. How does that count?
Yeah, I've got several as well, if I spend more than two weeks in another country or visit there frequently I tend to get local subscription. Much more convenient to stay connected with the locals. This way I help more and more countries to get over the 100% treshold as well :rolleyes:
Yeah, I've got several as well, if I spend more than two weeks in another country or visit there frequently I tend to get local subscription. Much more convenient to stay connected with the locals. This way I help more and more countries to get over the 100% treshold as well :rolleyes:
scott523
Sep 19, 12:02 PM
I hope that the MacBook with Core 2 Duo is better than the Core Duo version :)
I think it's neither worse or better. Tests showed only a slight bump in speed and reduction in energy consumption. At least it's the best 64-bit Intel mobile processor we got until the next one comes in April/May. :cool:
I think it's neither worse or better. Tests showed only a slight bump in speed and reduction in energy consumption. At least it's the best 64-bit Intel mobile processor we got until the next one comes in April/May. :cool:
elmimmo
Aug 17, 04:09 AM
It's frustrating to see all the work that anandtech (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2816&p=10) went through to make the benchmarks, for such a ****** comparison they decided to do in the first place.
They are comparing a 2 generations old G5 (Dual 2,5) versus a new Intel (Quad 2,6) which is not even the fastest out there. What kind of comparison is that? If the new Intels you are comparing against are all Quad based, the only reasonable G5 to compare against is the fastest one out there, the Quad G5 @2,5, because it is the fastest, and because it is even at core count. And they do not even mention it exists. And since you take the trouble to do so, compare fastest G5 against fastes Intel, gosh.
They could as well have compared any Mac Pro against an iMac DV�
They are comparing a 2 generations old G5 (Dual 2,5) versus a new Intel (Quad 2,6) which is not even the fastest out there. What kind of comparison is that? If the new Intels you are comparing against are all Quad based, the only reasonable G5 to compare against is the fastest one out there, the Quad G5 @2,5, because it is the fastest, and because it is even at core count. And they do not even mention it exists. And since you take the trouble to do so, compare fastest G5 against fastes Intel, gosh.
They could as well have compared any Mac Pro against an iMac DV�
