Cassie
Jan 23, 11:09 PM
Well, my last post in this thread was just about two weeks ago I suppose. And that truck already died, ha. But, new truck: :)
http://i55.tinypic.com/2lvbd07.jpg
http://i51.tinypic.com/w86qfd.jpg
http://i56.tinypic.com/wbe2qe.jpg
1988 Ford Ranger XLT Supercab. 2.0 l4, 5 spd manual. Few small issues with it, but it runs pretty well for its age and high mileage, plus only paid $1700 for it. :D Love it to death. :apple: (I admit it, I have some redneck in me :p)
http://i55.tinypic.com/2lvbd07.jpg
http://i51.tinypic.com/w86qfd.jpg
http://i56.tinypic.com/wbe2qe.jpg
1988 Ford Ranger XLT Supercab. 2.0 l4, 5 spd manual. Few small issues with it, but it runs pretty well for its age and high mileage, plus only paid $1700 for it. :D Love it to death. :apple: (I admit it, I have some redneck in me :p)
1984
Aug 29, 12:30 PM
World Class CLIO Material? It's just another iPod/iTunes ad.
cleanup
Nov 27, 05:09 PM
Gift for my mom. She rides her bike 10 miles to and from work a few times a week:
http://img227.imageshack.us/img227/8065/appleipodnano6thgenerat.jpg
I cycle to work and school daily (except in the coming winter months) and I gotta tell you, cyclists who listen to music while they ride are clearly not very concerned for their own or anyone else's safety! No offense, but for your mother's sake, I hope she keeps the volume REALLY low, or doesn't use the iPod at all. It's rather dangerous, IMHO.
Haven't started Christmas shopping yet (unlike Surely) so I haven't got any good karma, but nevertheless picked up a new pair of jeans for myself. D'oh. :(
http://images.asos.com/inv/s/15/95/525822/dripdry/image1xl.jpg
http://img227.imageshack.us/img227/8065/appleipodnano6thgenerat.jpg
I cycle to work and school daily (except in the coming winter months) and I gotta tell you, cyclists who listen to music while they ride are clearly not very concerned for their own or anyone else's safety! No offense, but for your mother's sake, I hope she keeps the volume REALLY low, or doesn't use the iPod at all. It's rather dangerous, IMHO.
Haven't started Christmas shopping yet (unlike Surely) so I haven't got any good karma, but nevertheless picked up a new pair of jeans for myself. D'oh. :(
http://images.asos.com/inv/s/15/95/525822/dripdry/image1xl.jpg
iStudentUK
Mar 19, 06:21 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)
I'm very pleased about this- many countries working together following a proper UN resolution. Using air support and missiles but not troops.
This also seems like a good example of cooporation, even though any country with a decent airforce could go it alone against Libyia right now! All sorts of countries involved, with France, UK and US doing most at the moment.
I'm very pleased about this- many countries working together following a proper UN resolution. Using air support and missiles but not troops.
This also seems like a good example of cooporation, even though any country with a decent airforce could go it alone against Libyia right now! All sorts of countries involved, with France, UK and US doing most at the moment.
steviem
Apr 10, 10:10 AM
LOL, that's the thing, Automatic licenses are just Drivers licenses out there. Yes we have Automatic and Manual tests in the UK, but they can learn and take a test in an Automatic and then drive whatever transmission car they like, regardless of whether they know how to work a clutch or not.
Jealous much?
Jealous much?
BJonson
Apr 26, 01:02 PM
trademarking app store. How pompous. What's next, trademarking computer store, book store, pet store? LOL.
griz
Jun 22, 03:23 PM
My goodness...
I'm just hoping Apple continues to make a few machines that can do actual design and coding work.
As long as Apple needs people to build Apps for their touch screen devices, you will have a machine that can do design and coding. They will be the workhorses that support the consumer product line of handhelds like the ipod, iphone and ipad. Don't worry, the Mac is not going away. It might get a whole lot cooler with added features, but it's going to be capable of running Xcode for a long long time.
I'm just hoping Apple continues to make a few machines that can do actual design and coding work.
As long as Apple needs people to build Apps for their touch screen devices, you will have a machine that can do design and coding. They will be the workhorses that support the consumer product line of handhelds like the ipod, iphone and ipad. Don't worry, the Mac is not going away. It might get a whole lot cooler with added features, but it's going to be capable of running Xcode for a long long time.
Machead III
Sep 7, 12:33 PM
Funny, that's what I thought reading your original post.
Cearly "education" didn't serve you as you started the communism argument.
Please, enlghten me, off forum, so I may better understand.
Considering your locations (UK and France) I'm not surprised.
I'm not interested in talking to bigots.
Cearly "education" didn't serve you as you started the communism argument.
Please, enlghten me, off forum, so I may better understand.
Considering your locations (UK and France) I'm not surprised.
I'm not interested in talking to bigots.
Macky-Mac
Mar 28, 01:12 PM
....Next you'll be saying that the US won WW1 and WW2.
so now you're going to say the US lost WW1 and WW2? :p
so now you're going to say the US lost WW1 and WW2? :p
xliver
Aug 16, 07:37 AM
I wish whoever posted this would get it straight - Microsoft is coming out with zune to compete with iPod. They are the one with the new product that will inevitably suck.
I don't understand why this post says that Apple is coming out with wireless capabilities to compete with zune - if nobody has wireless out yet, then there is not much a competition. And it certainly isn't Apple hoping to be the ones to catch up.
I don't understand why this post says that Apple is coming out with wireless capabilities to compete with zune - if nobody has wireless out yet, then there is not much a competition. And it certainly isn't Apple hoping to be the ones to catch up.
Blakeasd
Mar 31, 12:37 PM
THe graphite color in appearance is now available and when you press the mute button the speaker window has a line over it like IOS.
Lyle
Mar 21, 09:23 AM
As seen on Twitter:
Obama has now fired more Tomahawk cruise missiles than all other Nobel Peace Prize winners combined.
Obama has now fired more Tomahawk cruise missiles than all other Nobel Peace Prize winners combined.
qualleyiv
Nov 15, 10:30 AM
That really depends on the program, on how "parallelizable" the application is.
The simplest way to think of it is like this: Let's say you have a program that first has to calculate A. Then, when it's done that, it uses the result of A to calculate B. Then, when it's done that, uses the result of B to calculate C, then C to D, and so on. That's a *serial* problem there. The calculation of B can't begin until A is done, so it doesn't matter how many processors you have running, all computation is held up on one spot.
On the other hand, let's say you have an application that needs to calculate A, B, C and D, but those four values are not dependent on each other at all. In that case, you can use four processors at the same time, to calculate all four values at the same time.
Think of it like baking a cake. You can't start putting on the icing until the cake is done baking. And you can't start baking the cake until the ingredients are all mixed together. But you can have people simultaneously getting out and measuring the ingredients.
So that problem is partially parallelizable, but the majority of its workload is a serial process.
Some software applications, just by their very nature, will never be able to do anything useful with multiple processors.
OK, I'm hardly a programmer (PHP doesn't really count) but that's the exact same description that I've heard applied to the description of what it takes to vectorize a program (i.e. make it Alti-Vec optimized) [that and the process of making loops that can be unrolled]. So I've got to ask, is there some difference between those two concepts? If not, it sure seems like we would have a lot more multi-core enabled apps out there already...
The simplest way to think of it is like this: Let's say you have a program that first has to calculate A. Then, when it's done that, it uses the result of A to calculate B. Then, when it's done that, uses the result of B to calculate C, then C to D, and so on. That's a *serial* problem there. The calculation of B can't begin until A is done, so it doesn't matter how many processors you have running, all computation is held up on one spot.
On the other hand, let's say you have an application that needs to calculate A, B, C and D, but those four values are not dependent on each other at all. In that case, you can use four processors at the same time, to calculate all four values at the same time.
Think of it like baking a cake. You can't start putting on the icing until the cake is done baking. And you can't start baking the cake until the ingredients are all mixed together. But you can have people simultaneously getting out and measuring the ingredients.
So that problem is partially parallelizable, but the majority of its workload is a serial process.
Some software applications, just by their very nature, will never be able to do anything useful with multiple processors.
OK, I'm hardly a programmer (PHP doesn't really count) but that's the exact same description that I've heard applied to the description of what it takes to vectorize a program (i.e. make it Alti-Vec optimized) [that and the process of making loops that can be unrolled]. So I've got to ask, is there some difference between those two concepts? If not, it sure seems like we would have a lot more multi-core enabled apps out there already...
valanchan
Apr 12, 10:12 PM
Just read something today to the effect that Peter Jackson is following James Cameron's lead and shooting 48fps on the "Hobbit"; gambling that enough digital theaters will upgrade to 48fps by the time the "film" arrives in a couple of years time. Guess that is the beginning of the end of the "film" look for at least action movies.
This is so that each eye receives 24fps for 3d. So finally 3d will now look like a 3d "movie" rather than a 3d flip book.
This is so that each eye receives 24fps for 3d. So finally 3d will now look like a 3d "movie" rather than a 3d flip book.
zin
Mar 24, 02:38 PM
Please don't put an AMD 5XXX series into the new iMacs! :(
DavidLeblond
Aug 16, 07:34 AM
Compete with Zune? Seriously? Zune is even on Apple's radar?
Let me get this straight, maybe I'm mistaken. Is this the same Zune that was announced that it will "play music! videos! games! ... wait... no, we changed our minds... no games. And videos? Yeah we can't quite get that to work, it won't do that either. But it plays music! And looks like an iPod... except its a tad on the fugly side...."
Please. Apple already has something to compete with this, its called the iPod. Who needs wireless??
Let me get this straight, maybe I'm mistaken. Is this the same Zune that was announced that it will "play music! videos! games! ... wait... no, we changed our minds... no games. And videos? Yeah we can't quite get that to work, it won't do that either. But it plays music! And looks like an iPod... except its a tad on the fugly side...."
Please. Apple already has something to compete with this, its called the iPod. Who needs wireless??
Chaos123x
Apr 12, 10:06 PM
$299... but this isn't studio
True $299 for each app will get expensive.
True $299 for each app will get expensive.
.png "John 3:16")
AidenShaw
Aug 26, 09:26 AM
What do you think about the rumours that a single socket Conroe thanks to it�s superior memory handling effiency (~70%?) compared to Xeons DB-Dimm�s lousy (~25?) might crush a dual socket Xeon in memory intesive tasks, like photoshop.
Have you heard seen any data on that one,exept the specuatlion on Anandtech?
It's nonsense, frankly.
It is speculation (or FUD) based on a single facet of the system design, without considering all of the factors that affect real application performance. (Remember when Apple was whining about the horrible "pipeline bubble" problem with the Pentium - meanwhile Pentiums and Xeons were benchmarking just fine against the Apples?)
Dell has submitted SPEC results for Woodcrest and Conroe systems, and they're virtually the same - with a very slight advantage to Conroe.
quot;John 3:16quot; Globe Craft Kits
Have you heard seen any data on that one,exept the specuatlion on Anandtech?
It's nonsense, frankly.
It is speculation (or FUD) based on a single facet of the system design, without considering all of the factors that affect real application performance. (Remember when Apple was whining about the horrible "pipeline bubble" problem with the Pentium - meanwhile Pentiums and Xeons were benchmarking just fine against the Apples?)
Dell has submitted SPEC results for Woodcrest and Conroe systems, and they're virtually the same - with a very slight advantage to Conroe.
jgould
Feb 22, 07:32 PM
I hardly have any cable management. I just have a few twist ties used from trash bags!
I've done that too :D Simple beats complicated...
I've done that too :D Simple beats complicated...
BRLawyer
Aug 26, 05:14 AM
...also known as The New Form-Factor Conroe Mini-Tower/Pizza-Box!
The problem with the all-in-one form factor of the iMacIntel is that when the LCD dies - you have a good computer that you can't use. And if the computer dies - you have a good screen that you can't use.
Or, more likely, when the computer is obsolete you have a good screen that you can't use.
Apple needs something between the horribly constrained MiniMac, and the preposterously huge ProMac.
A Conroe (64-bit, single-socket, dual-core) system would fit the bill.... When will The Steve see the light?
A better question is: when does the LCD OR the computer die, especially in the case of Macs? I would say never...
The problem with the all-in-one form factor of the iMacIntel is that when the LCD dies - you have a good computer that you can't use. And if the computer dies - you have a good screen that you can't use.
Or, more likely, when the computer is obsolete you have a good screen that you can't use.
Apple needs something between the horribly constrained MiniMac, and the preposterously huge ProMac.
A Conroe (64-bit, single-socket, dual-core) system would fit the bill.... When will The Steve see the light?
A better question is: when does the LCD OR the computer die, especially in the case of Macs? I would say never...
Hisdem
Mar 19, 03:52 PM
I am a bit suprised the Mods let you start such an Anti-American thread title ..."U.S. will use Lybia as aerial target practice"
This is not about the USA ... this is about the UN Security Council deciding to stop a Dictator like Gaddafi from forcing his will on the people of Lybia.
The USA is only one of 10 countries that approved this decision.
Those with knowledge of this situation will agree that sometimes people need protection from thugs like Gaddafi who tell his people "there will be no mercy" and fire weapons upon them for the sole reason of staying in power.
where many others in this thread just want to chirp more "Ridiculous" Anti-American crap.
Agreed. Only one thing though, I think reason the mods let him put that title is because it's not really hard to see americans saying the whole world sucks compared to them on here. And insulting people who live in "third world" countries. Just look at it as a polite payback. ;)
And to make myself clear, I support the US and all the other countries involved with this intervention, it just needed to be done.
This is not about the USA ... this is about the UN Security Council deciding to stop a Dictator like Gaddafi from forcing his will on the people of Lybia.
The USA is only one of 10 countries that approved this decision.
Those with knowledge of this situation will agree that sometimes people need protection from thugs like Gaddafi who tell his people "there will be no mercy" and fire weapons upon them for the sole reason of staying in power.
where many others in this thread just want to chirp more "Ridiculous" Anti-American crap.
Agreed. Only one thing though, I think reason the mods let him put that title is because it's not really hard to see americans saying the whole world sucks compared to them on here. And insulting people who live in "third world" countries. Just look at it as a polite payback. ;)
And to make myself clear, I support the US and all the other countries involved with this intervention, it just needed to be done.
NAG
Jan 11, 10:41 PM
Seeing as how we don't know the specs of the machine let alone the price point, no, no one will be able to tell you the benefits of this product.
AvSRoCkCO1067
Aug 16, 09:11 AM
Compete with Zune? Seriously? Zune is even on Apple's radar?
Let me get this straight, maybe I'm mistaken. Is this the same Zune that was announced that it will "play music! videos! games! ... wait... no, we changed our minds... no games. And videos? Yeah we can't quite get that to work, it won't do that either. But it plays music! And looks like an iPod... except its a tad on the fugly side...."
Please. Apple already has something to compete with this, its called the iPod. Who needs wireless??
Actually...it's called the iPod 4G :p .
Apple's already a generation ahead of the 'Zune' - wireless, unless providing a way to purchase songs on the go, is completely and utterly...useless :) .
Let me get this straight, maybe I'm mistaken. Is this the same Zune that was announced that it will "play music! videos! games! ... wait... no, we changed our minds... no games. And videos? Yeah we can't quite get that to work, it won't do that either. But it plays music! And looks like an iPod... except its a tad on the fugly side...."
Please. Apple already has something to compete with this, its called the iPod. Who needs wireless??
Actually...it's called the iPod 4G :p .
Apple's already a generation ahead of the 'Zune' - wireless, unless providing a way to purchase songs on the go, is completely and utterly...useless :) .
wheezy
Nov 15, 06:37 PM
That really depends on the program, on how "parallelizable" the application is.
The simplest way to think of it is like this: Let's say you have a program that first has to calculate A. Then, when it's done that, it uses the result of A to calculate B. Then, when it's done that, uses the result of B to calculate C, then C to D, and so on. That's a *serial* problem there. The calculation of B can't begin until A is done, so it doesn't matter how many processors you have running, all computation is held up on one spot.
On the other hand, let's say you have an application that needs to calculate A, B, C and D, but those four values are not dependent on each other at all. In that case, you can use four processors at the same time, to calculate all four values at the same time.
Think of it like baking a cake. You can't start putting on the icing until the cake is done baking. And you can't start baking the cake until the ingredients are all mixed together. But you can have people simultaneously getting out and measuring the ingredients.
So that problem is partially parallelizable, but the majority of its workload is a serial process.
Some software applications, just by their very nature, will never be able to do anything useful with multiple processors.
What a very lovely analogy. Thank you.
For me... 8 cores for the bragging rights only... so I guess I won't get one anytime soon. I'm sure 4 would suit me fine though, I need to upgrade my 1Ghz G4!!!
The simplest way to think of it is like this: Let's say you have a program that first has to calculate A. Then, when it's done that, it uses the result of A to calculate B. Then, when it's done that, uses the result of B to calculate C, then C to D, and so on. That's a *serial* problem there. The calculation of B can't begin until A is done, so it doesn't matter how many processors you have running, all computation is held up on one spot.
On the other hand, let's say you have an application that needs to calculate A, B, C and D, but those four values are not dependent on each other at all. In that case, you can use four processors at the same time, to calculate all four values at the same time.
Think of it like baking a cake. You can't start putting on the icing until the cake is done baking. And you can't start baking the cake until the ingredients are all mixed together. But you can have people simultaneously getting out and measuring the ingredients.
So that problem is partially parallelizable, but the majority of its workload is a serial process.
Some software applications, just by their very nature, will never be able to do anything useful with multiple processors.
What a very lovely analogy. Thank you.
For me... 8 cores for the bragging rights only... so I guess I won't get one anytime soon. I'm sure 4 would suit me fine though, I need to upgrade my 1Ghz G4!!!
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق