Setmose
Mar 27, 12:59 PM
All Intel machines going forward with the new Sandy Bridge CPU architecture will be EFI boot like Mac has been for some time. That probably explains why Apple will support off-the-shelf PC GPUs now. :apple:
QuarterSwede
Apr 10, 06:57 PM
And two-seaters?? :eek: Well, let's not go there.
Miata's are actually very good driving cars.
Miata's are actually very good driving cars.
dr Dunkel
Apr 20, 06:53 AM
Agreed. With the big up in GPU they gave the MBPs I am hopeful that they just might. The 27" saw the first desktop CPU in an iMac, right? I wonder if they can't now manage the same with the GPU. If it is decent, I think I'll be pretty tempted; and I've been running on only laptops for ages, so that's saying something!
I'm with you on this one. If the new iMacs have decent GPU:s, I'm on the boat for an ultimate. If not, no iMac this time.
Decent GPU would mean something like the 6950 or, even better, an Apple special version :D Well, it will have to pack enough power to feed that high resolution screen.
6950 in the 21.5 (who makes screens this small these days?) would be super, if they make the "21.5" into 23.5 instead.
I'm with you on this one. If the new iMacs have decent GPU:s, I'm on the boat for an ultimate. If not, no iMac this time.
Decent GPU would mean something like the 6950 or, even better, an Apple special version :D Well, it will have to pack enough power to feed that high resolution screen.
6950 in the 21.5 (who makes screens this small these days?) would be super, if they make the "21.5" into 23.5 instead.
h'biki
Apr 16, 03:21 AM
when marketshare is almost 0 % you are close to dying, look a 1 % of all new machines built is not giving me any confidence in the platform. sure we have 10 % in a installed platform but are loosing everywhere( thank you motorola for holding up the ass end. Fact is Pcs are running away from Mac and when a 500 dollar machine kicks a new $2000 Imac its time to say so long to Jobs and his croonies. Supported you guys way to long at my expense.
Layman's version:
When you CEASE TO MAKE A PROFIT then you are dying*. Until then, it doesn't matter what your market share is.
If 1% of the world's population gave me a dollar, I'd be very rich. If 50% of the world's population gave you 1 cent, you'd also be rich, but not as rich as me... even though you have a greater market share. Its all about margins!
For those who are actually interested in understanding the world of business:
*Well, possibly dying... You have to continue to lose money and do it over a period of time before you are dying. Even then, that may be a result of mismanagement, rather than the company itself being dead -- there may still be the potential for money to be made. Really, the only time a company is dead is when its bankrupt and/or when its taken over and its assets stripped (because its been mis-valued).
To give two recent examples. Gateway has been losing money for some time. It has gone from a all time high in 1997 of $61 per share to its current price of around $6 (which it has been at for over the last year). In other words, its been devalued by a magnitude of 10. (They may have refinanced during that time and devalued the price per share, while increasing their overall market value... but I can't remember them doing that. Gateway may have greater marker share, but Apple is valued at around $28 per share. Just to make the comparison properly fair, Gateway has a market value of $1,999 Million, while Apple's market value is around $10,000 million. In other words, Apple is worth ten times as much as Gateway, despite their smaller market share. (Admittely, Apple's share price flucates like crazy, but thats arguably a result of the FUD of uninformed gits, like those at C|Net). Nonetheless, Gateway is likely to be around for some time. Until it continues to burn through money and its share price drops even lower, and it becomes the target of a hostile takeover... which will result in (1) a merger/total buyout/absortion; (2) a massive corporate governance change because the hostile company thinks there's money to be made; and (3) its bought out, its assets stripped and resold.
Example 2 is Media 100. They were also burning through money. Unlike Gateway, however, they weren't generating much gross revenue. Their technology was good, but not that good, and their management was baaad. They weren't generating much gross revenue, which is why no one was really interested in buying them or giving them a loan. They just didn't seem capable of even making a profit (and thats what matters). They were a dying company (unlike Gateway, which is just troubled). So they were forced to file for bankruptcy. Now their assets are being bought by Optibase -- when that deal is complete, they will be dead.
Point is, corporate finance is a very convuluted world. They're like stars. The bigger they are, the longer it usually takes them to die. Sometimes there are corporate "supernovas" (like Enron or HIH or OneTel) in which the whole corporate structure implodes, but thats because of criminal negligence, lack of transparency, and dodgy account practices. (All of which render the mechanisms of the market for corporate control to be rather useless. Noone wants to touch a company when you don't want to know what you're buying).
The most important thing to the world of corporate finance -- the one in which a company lives or dies -- is profit per share, then revenue. Both of which Apple has. Thus it is healthy. Oh, and its debt free. This is a good thing, because it signals to potentially future creditors that it pays off it loans... thus they're likely to bail it out, if it finds itself in trouble again. (Of course, there are mitigating factors there, but thats true of anything).
The only reason that Apple's market share is an issue is because uninformed gits in the IT press (tautology that) scream about it being an issue. This creates information asynchronicity (imnsho) and distorts the market (both the share market and the IT market). Personally I reckon that if people didn't think market share was an issue, Apple would actually be increasing its marketshare. Of course, thats exactly the reason companies like C|NET do scream about it, so it becomes a quasi self-fulfililng prophercy.
Here endeth the lesson on "Introduction to Corporate Financing 101"
Layman's version:
When you CEASE TO MAKE A PROFIT then you are dying*. Until then, it doesn't matter what your market share is.
If 1% of the world's population gave me a dollar, I'd be very rich. If 50% of the world's population gave you 1 cent, you'd also be rich, but not as rich as me... even though you have a greater market share. Its all about margins!
For those who are actually interested in understanding the world of business:
*Well, possibly dying... You have to continue to lose money and do it over a period of time before you are dying. Even then, that may be a result of mismanagement, rather than the company itself being dead -- there may still be the potential for money to be made. Really, the only time a company is dead is when its bankrupt and/or when its taken over and its assets stripped (because its been mis-valued).
To give two recent examples. Gateway has been losing money for some time. It has gone from a all time high in 1997 of $61 per share to its current price of around $6 (which it has been at for over the last year). In other words, its been devalued by a magnitude of 10. (They may have refinanced during that time and devalued the price per share, while increasing their overall market value... but I can't remember them doing that. Gateway may have greater marker share, but Apple is valued at around $28 per share. Just to make the comparison properly fair, Gateway has a market value of $1,999 Million, while Apple's market value is around $10,000 million. In other words, Apple is worth ten times as much as Gateway, despite their smaller market share. (Admittely, Apple's share price flucates like crazy, but thats arguably a result of the FUD of uninformed gits, like those at C|Net). Nonetheless, Gateway is likely to be around for some time. Until it continues to burn through money and its share price drops even lower, and it becomes the target of a hostile takeover... which will result in (1) a merger/total buyout/absortion; (2) a massive corporate governance change because the hostile company thinks there's money to be made; and (3) its bought out, its assets stripped and resold.
Example 2 is Media 100. They were also burning through money. Unlike Gateway, however, they weren't generating much gross revenue. Their technology was good, but not that good, and their management was baaad. They weren't generating much gross revenue, which is why no one was really interested in buying them or giving them a loan. They just didn't seem capable of even making a profit (and thats what matters). They were a dying company (unlike Gateway, which is just troubled). So they were forced to file for bankruptcy. Now their assets are being bought by Optibase -- when that deal is complete, they will be dead.
Point is, corporate finance is a very convuluted world. They're like stars. The bigger they are, the longer it usually takes them to die. Sometimes there are corporate "supernovas" (like Enron or HIH or OneTel) in which the whole corporate structure implodes, but thats because of criminal negligence, lack of transparency, and dodgy account practices. (All of which render the mechanisms of the market for corporate control to be rather useless. Noone wants to touch a company when you don't want to know what you're buying).
The most important thing to the world of corporate finance -- the one in which a company lives or dies -- is profit per share, then revenue. Both of which Apple has. Thus it is healthy. Oh, and its debt free. This is a good thing, because it signals to potentially future creditors that it pays off it loans... thus they're likely to bail it out, if it finds itself in trouble again. (Of course, there are mitigating factors there, but thats true of anything).
The only reason that Apple's market share is an issue is because uninformed gits in the IT press (tautology that) scream about it being an issue. This creates information asynchronicity (imnsho) and distorts the market (both the share market and the IT market). Personally I reckon that if people didn't think market share was an issue, Apple would actually be increasing its marketshare. Of course, thats exactly the reason companies like C|NET do scream about it, so it becomes a quasi self-fulfililng prophercy.
Here endeth the lesson on "Introduction to Corporate Financing 101"
Stella
Jun 22, 01:13 PM
Sounds OK - run the apps on your apple mobile as your desktop.
As long as iOS didn't replace OSX.... many people would be pissed if desktop apps were controlled by Apple.
As long as iOS didn't replace OSX.... many people would be pissed if desktop apps were controlled by Apple.
Mr-Stabby
Apr 12, 09:36 PM
BETA! We no GET
Yeah BETA sounds like we won't be getting it for a while :(
Yeah BETA sounds like we won't be getting it for a while :(
jettredmont
Aug 16, 01:31 PM
The post says apple is going to compete with Zune because everyone knows almost everything about zune, with the exception of having a physical zune apple can at least stay on top by brining in inovative features before zune has them.
Back in the day, the fact that we already know everything about an unreleased product was called marketing vaporware, and it was considered a bad thing ...
Until Zune is out, Apple is already "caught up" with it, and is in fact ahead (no technology available is always technologically inferior to any technology available, to paraphrase McNealy). Don't buy into Microsoft's hype machine. They always use it to buy themselves a year in the marketplace, at the cost of us consumers.
Back in the day, the fact that we already know everything about an unreleased product was called marketing vaporware, and it was considered a bad thing ...
Until Zune is out, Apple is already "caught up" with it, and is in fact ahead (no technology available is always technologically inferior to any technology available, to paraphrase McNealy). Don't buy into Microsoft's hype machine. They always use it to buy themselves a year in the marketplace, at the cost of us consumers.
Chef Medeski
Jul 14, 11:44 AM
From Wiki:
Holographic disks: standards with 200 and 300 GB storage are under development and prototypes expected in 2008
I've heard about Mac users waiting, but 5 years for most likely the first consumer device if lucky, 6 for probably first computer device. 2012.... yes exactly when I wanted to buy my next laptop after the next four I plan to purchase.
Holographic disks: standards with 200 and 300 GB storage are under development and prototypes expected in 2008
I've heard about Mac users waiting, but 5 years for most likely the first consumer device if lucky, 6 for probably first computer device. 2012.... yes exactly when I wanted to buy my next laptop after the next four I plan to purchase.
ibook30
Jul 14, 12:51 AM
What i'm worried about is if this whole format war between HD-DVD and Blu-ray turns out to be really worthless and end up with neither format winning and instead having both supplanted by further formats. it would be like trying to put betamax up against laserdisc then having DVDs come to market :rolleyes: .
There are great things coming though- future discs, future mass storage too. HDs may be on their way out soon enough for speed reasons. one thing i'm keeping an eye on is ferroelectric memory, which might also make HD-DVD/Bluray etc. partly obsolete as a storage format- useful primarily for video media only.
Excellent points, and concerns. I think the format wars will be mitigated by tech companies desire to make a dollar and the markets inability to handle too many choices and price points vs. value.
It's not impossible that the bluray/ HD DVD conflict will be supplanted by new technology - but it will become a regional issue (Asia vs Europe or N America) and/or price against value issue .. ultimately leaving the consumer with two or three choices.... no matter how fast the technology advances. "The market" is unlikely to handle more than 2 or 3 choices. (I am speaking of the consumer market - a seperate market for the technocracy will allow more choices for niche markets.... I hope)
Let's see what happens- it'll be an interesting ride.
On the 802.11n front- to deviate from the thread again - if Apple and other traditional tech companies do not get behind this - it will leave an opening for telecom/cable companies like Comcast, AT&T, and Verizon - all of whom are delivering faster and faster connection speeds to the (residential)consumer's front door .... Verizon's fiber optic system gives faster download and upload times than previous options, so they are creating a need for faster home networks.
Apple is beginning to compete with telcoms for the communication dollar (iChat AV and ventures into cell phones) - so telcoms might strike back by offering machines or networking cards that work with these advancing high speed internets. I dunno.
p.s. (Silentwave) I am reading about ferroelectric tech - and it is fascinating. Glad you mentioned it!
There are great things coming though- future discs, future mass storage too. HDs may be on their way out soon enough for speed reasons. one thing i'm keeping an eye on is ferroelectric memory, which might also make HD-DVD/Bluray etc. partly obsolete as a storage format- useful primarily for video media only.
Excellent points, and concerns. I think the format wars will be mitigated by tech companies desire to make a dollar and the markets inability to handle too many choices and price points vs. value.
It's not impossible that the bluray/ HD DVD conflict will be supplanted by new technology - but it will become a regional issue (Asia vs Europe or N America) and/or price against value issue .. ultimately leaving the consumer with two or three choices.... no matter how fast the technology advances. "The market" is unlikely to handle more than 2 or 3 choices. (I am speaking of the consumer market - a seperate market for the technocracy will allow more choices for niche markets.... I hope)
Let's see what happens- it'll be an interesting ride.
On the 802.11n front- to deviate from the thread again - if Apple and other traditional tech companies do not get behind this - it will leave an opening for telecom/cable companies like Comcast, AT&T, and Verizon - all of whom are delivering faster and faster connection speeds to the (residential)consumer's front door .... Verizon's fiber optic system gives faster download and upload times than previous options, so they are creating a need for faster home networks.
Apple is beginning to compete with telcoms for the communication dollar (iChat AV and ventures into cell phones) - so telcoms might strike back by offering machines or networking cards that work with these advancing high speed internets. I dunno.
p.s. (Silentwave) I am reading about ferroelectric tech - and it is fascinating. Glad you mentioned it!
bobbleheadbob
Apr 2, 09:17 PM
Keep up that attitude and continue wondering why no one talks with you as you type on your laptop in the middle of the coffee shop across from De Anza college. Sure, you may have helped get DB2 started and you still work in a DOS window but don't blame your wife for leaving you as you worked late at night too long. How much of the money from the IPO went to family attorney and court fees?
De Anza college? Is that anywhere near Faber College, Flounder? :cool:
De Anza college? Is that anywhere near Faber College, Flounder? :cool:
eldo33
Nov 28, 04:31 PM
standard 13" MBA
http://www.flickr.com/photos/56429926@N03/5216005590/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/56429926@N03/5216005590/
FearNo1
Apr 23, 01:39 AM
Using your example, couldn't they do that with the GPS tech in most fones today simply by saving your location info in a server side database? I wouldn't put anything pass these companies and govt today.
If LTD wants an example other wise you can see companies start using these feature on the phones to track employees at all time and what they do. Or in court cases them being pulled it to use against one spouse in a mess divorce.
Spying on ones spouse is another example.
If LTD wants an example other wise you can see companies start using these feature on the phones to track employees at all time and what they do. Or in court cases them being pulled it to use against one spouse in a mess divorce.
Spying on ones spouse is another example.
redAPPLE
Aug 7, 01:34 AM
It would be cool if Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R-Cal.) made a surprise appearance and said - "Hasta la vista, Vista!"
unfortunately, i think, he is a pc guy.
unfortunately, i think, he is a pc guy.
iJohnHenry
Apr 20, 04:58 PM
Yes, I love driving manual transmission cars. It's fun.
Yeah, but the others should know that you rely on public transportation, day to day.
Manual is fun, until you spend a couple of hours, or more, commuting every day.
Yeah, but the others should know that you rely on public transportation, day to day.
Manual is fun, until you spend a couple of hours, or more, commuting every day.
lordonuthin
Mar 23, 04:50 PM
yes, congrats to designed for 1 million points!
and congrats to you, whiterabbit for 11 million points!
but why is it not showing you hit 11 million points for the team?
Thanks.
I don't know? :confused:
and congrats to you, whiterabbit for 11 million points!
but why is it not showing you hit 11 million points for the team?
Thanks.
I don't know? :confused:
camelsnot
Apr 2, 08:20 PM
have one but that commercial makes me want to puke. Once you use one and realize it's limitations, it's not so magical. It's a fun consumption device which you can get some work done on, but without real multitasking, it's lack of real technology actually hinders and isn't so magical.
With apple it was never about the hardware technology. They have at least that right in the commercial (the only thing right).
Job$, instead of waxing philosophical with your over-inflated ego in embarrassingly inaccurate commercials, how about trying to innovate. iOS should've had REAL multitasking years ago. Quit pandering cheap to make speed bumps at the same prices, as something magical. DO something magical. You built iOS off a phone, morphed into an ipod touch and now an ipad (yes.. a larger version of the touch, but in a better form factor). That was just smart business. ALWAYS repurpose what you can. BUS101. Now do something magical with the OS.
With apple it was never about the hardware technology. They have at least that right in the commercial (the only thing right).
Job$, instead of waxing philosophical with your over-inflated ego in embarrassingly inaccurate commercials, how about trying to innovate. iOS should've had REAL multitasking years ago. Quit pandering cheap to make speed bumps at the same prices, as something magical. DO something magical. You built iOS off a phone, morphed into an ipod touch and now an ipad (yes.. a larger version of the touch, but in a better form factor). That was just smart business. ALWAYS repurpose what you can. BUS101. Now do something magical with the OS.
kingtj
Mar 24, 01:50 PM
They'll need to do something about the power connectors, though.
The last couple times I decided to go with a re-flashed PC version of a graphics card for my Mac Pro, I had to buy special 6-pin power connectors to go between the card and the motherboard since the PC version assumed you had a different type of power connector to use.
When you consider you often need 2 of these cables, typically priced at upwards of $20 each, that can start to make a re-flashed PC version of a given card look a lot less attractive compared to the official Apple version.
i would love to buy an off the shelf gpu for half the price of a mac branded amd card. please let this be true then i will not sell my 2008 macpro
The last couple times I decided to go with a re-flashed PC version of a graphics card for my Mac Pro, I had to buy special 6-pin power connectors to go between the card and the motherboard since the PC version assumed you had a different type of power connector to use.
When you consider you often need 2 of these cables, typically priced at upwards of $20 each, that can start to make a re-flashed PC version of a given card look a lot less attractive compared to the official Apple version.
i would love to buy an off the shelf gpu for half the price of a mac branded amd card. please let this be true then i will not sell my 2008 macpro
Nermal
Nov 23, 08:07 PM
A slice of cake. I've already eaten it so I don't have a pic... but it was very good :p
jxyama
Mar 19, 05:17 PM
jxyama, I think you have something there... last nite my wife (who is computer ignorant) asks whether I have a MAC or a PC. Turns out her best friend (newbie PC user for about 1 year) has convinced her that MACs aren't as good. My wife or her friend have never even used one but they 'KNOW' they are inferior to MACs. Now if either of them were to have to make a buying decision it's not hard to imagine what they'll walk out the store with.
How could any new user have a different opinion unless they happen to know a MAC user. Only 2% use MACs so they're unlikely to be exposed to one, PC users (98%) will bad mouth a MAC, and Apples advertising, while award winning does very little to enlighten people about the product.
i agree with you.
the problem with the current computer market is that it's dominated by two kind of uses, neither of which apple excels at: enterprise and gaming.
for enterprise users, innovation and usability (beyond certain degree) are secondary. what they need is computers to get the job done for as cheap as possible - because computer is purely a commodity tool. as far as corporations are concerned, there is no reason to step away from windows because it has been getting the job done and it is the cheapest options available. now, this is changing slightly recently because of the onslaught of malicious windows virus. some corporations are starting to realize that the cost of hiring windows admin and lost productivity due to these virus are starting to make windows more expensive. because they have absolutely no brand attachment, corporations that deem Macs to be more cost effective overall than windows PCs will have absolutely no problem switching. (however, they will have no problem pursuing other options if something better than Macs come out too.)
because many people work for corporations, them and their families will be most familiar with windows PCs. Macs are seen as some abnormality, and expensive. ("there's only so much a computer can do and windows does it fine, so why bother paying more for Macs?")
what they fail to see (IMO) is that Macs can do a lot more, far more easily. but it will take time for those people to be convinced that computers can really do more than what they've seen windows PCs do and it really is worth more $$$.
gaming - this is tough for apple. in this segment, user base is everything. because it's so technologically driven, R&D money is much better spent on improving the technology rather than adapting them to work on Macs...
How could any new user have a different opinion unless they happen to know a MAC user. Only 2% use MACs so they're unlikely to be exposed to one, PC users (98%) will bad mouth a MAC, and Apples advertising, while award winning does very little to enlighten people about the product.
i agree with you.
the problem with the current computer market is that it's dominated by two kind of uses, neither of which apple excels at: enterprise and gaming.
for enterprise users, innovation and usability (beyond certain degree) are secondary. what they need is computers to get the job done for as cheap as possible - because computer is purely a commodity tool. as far as corporations are concerned, there is no reason to step away from windows because it has been getting the job done and it is the cheapest options available. now, this is changing slightly recently because of the onslaught of malicious windows virus. some corporations are starting to realize that the cost of hiring windows admin and lost productivity due to these virus are starting to make windows more expensive. because they have absolutely no brand attachment, corporations that deem Macs to be more cost effective overall than windows PCs will have absolutely no problem switching. (however, they will have no problem pursuing other options if something better than Macs come out too.)
because many people work for corporations, them and their families will be most familiar with windows PCs. Macs are seen as some abnormality, and expensive. ("there's only so much a computer can do and windows does it fine, so why bother paying more for Macs?")
what they fail to see (IMO) is that Macs can do a lot more, far more easily. but it will take time for those people to be convinced that computers can really do more than what they've seen windows PCs do and it really is worth more $$$.
gaming - this is tough for apple. in this segment, user base is everything. because it's so technologically driven, R&D money is much better spent on improving the technology rather than adapting them to work on Macs...
Digital Dude
Mar 24, 02:07 PM
This is HUGE, ginormous news. If Lion, or even later released of Snow Leopard, has this kind of support, ti would revitalize the Mac gaming scene. Even 3D artists would have more options, especially when you consider how well the high end consumer cards stack up against their FireGL competition.
Now all they need is complete 6900 series support-- yeah, I'm lookin' at you, 6990. ;-)
Not likely since Steve Jobs isn't smart enough to do that. Heck, he still believes that glossy displays are a cool idea.
I almost gave up on the MacPro until Steve forced me into a 'NON-GLARE' NEC PA271, and all I can say is wow! Even with the pithy GT120 card-less piece of crap offering by Apple, the screen looks fantastic.
Now all they need is complete 6900 series support-- yeah, I'm lookin' at you, 6990. ;-)
Not likely since Steve Jobs isn't smart enough to do that. Heck, he still believes that glossy displays are a cool idea.
I almost gave up on the MacPro until Steve forced me into a 'NON-GLARE' NEC PA271, and all I can say is wow! Even with the pithy GT120 card-less piece of crap offering by Apple, the screen looks fantastic.
Lukeit
Mar 31, 10:58 AM
I won't get a chance to get this installed for a few days but one of the things I noticed about the new version of Safari was that if you dragged a picture from Safari onto your desktop or a folder that it would create a link rather than downloading the picture to that folder. Can anyone with DP2 confirm this is still the case?
Nope... that has been fixed !!!1 Now it works properly and you get to drag a picture!
Nope... that has been fixed !!!1 Now it works properly and you get to drag a picture!
zedsdead
Jan 13, 04:03 PM
Apple will NOT do that, however, remember the collapsing port patent filed by Apple?
Apple is supposed to be building an Ultra-Portable. Ethernet takes up space. I seriously doubt it will be in the Macbook Air or whatever apple decides to call it. Wifi will be enough. This laptop is not ment to be a main computer.
Apple is supposed to be building an Ultra-Portable. Ethernet takes up space. I seriously doubt it will be in the Macbook Air or whatever apple decides to call it. Wifi will be enough. This laptop is not ment to be a main computer.
AFPoster
Mar 22, 12:50 PM
Nope. Not everyone. I am quite happy where I am… thanks.
Quite frankly after a few visits I am happy never to return to the Land of the super-sized, home of the intolerant.
HAHA, if I lived in Europe I wouldn't want to leave that place, not to say that's where you are, but Europe is great. Not everyone is true, but a big understatement thus the millions of illegal immigrants and people constantly being killed trying to get here. Ahem, Mexico for one.
Quite frankly after a few visits I am happy never to return to the Land of the super-sized, home of the intolerant.
HAHA, if I lived in Europe I wouldn't want to leave that place, not to say that's where you are, but Europe is great. Not everyone is true, but a big understatement thus the millions of illegal immigrants and people constantly being killed trying to get here. Ahem, Mexico for one.
smugDrew
Apr 1, 05:39 AM
I retract my previous statement; the current build seems just as bad as the last and that's on the aforementioned 8GB toting i7 MBP. Even with Flash disabled and harmful scripts blocked, it's a hog capable of eating a combined 3GB or more on its own; the split processes in Activity Monitor just make it look nicer.
Unrelated: does anyone else have a problem keeping their Google Calendars synced in iCal? I hop in and it shows me the local calendars, but I end up having to go into settings and manually recheck my Delegates to get the server-side calendars to trickle back down.
OK but I don't care how much memory Safari 5.1 uses, that's why I load up my MBP with RAM.
So does Safari feel fast? Is it stable? :eek:
Unrelated: does anyone else have a problem keeping their Google Calendars synced in iCal? I hop in and it shows me the local calendars, but I end up having to go into settings and manually recheck my Delegates to get the server-side calendars to trickle back down.
OK but I don't care how much memory Safari 5.1 uses, that's why I load up my MBP with RAM.
So does Safari feel fast? Is it stable? :eek:
No comments:
Post a Comment