Seryph
Mar 31, 09:44 AM
Talking about new "features": have you noticed the Fuji wallpaper is different?
The new one has clouds at the base...
I'd like to see this too! The old one was pretty bland at the bottom so if this is true I'm glad they changed it.
The new one has clouds at the base...
I'd like to see this too! The old one was pretty bland at the bottom so if this is true I'm glad they changed it.
spillproof
Apr 12, 08:20 PM
Is there going to be a keynote video like WWDC or the September iPod events? I want to go spoiler free if possible!
koruki
Apr 12, 09:54 PM
I want to know what the Jaw dropping feature is mentioned months ago..
ezekielrage_99
Aug 31, 01:02 AM
I can see that dropping the Core Solo happening because for a little extra you can get a Core Duo.
Plymouthbreezer
Mar 23, 04:38 PM
lots, Bluetooth, WIFI (for internet radio), design..
Here's my classic mockup
http://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=277273&stc=1&thumb=1&d=1300734199
Really nice work. Bravo.
As I have said in past threads, I'm happy to hear that Apple plans on keeping the Classic around for a bit longer, as it truly is the best music player on the market for serious audiophiles.
Here's my classic mockup
http://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=277273&stc=1&thumb=1&d=1300734199
Really nice work. Bravo.
As I have said in past threads, I'm happy to hear that Apple plans on keeping the Classic around for a bit longer, as it truly is the best music player on the market for serious audiophiles.
amols
Aug 16, 07:26 AM
I think they'll use 802.11 for wireless. That way, I can stream my music from iPod to Airport Express directly. Although Firewire/USB will still be the primary I/O.
KnightWRX
May 2, 06:04 PM
LOL! Yeah... and I remember crashing faster than you click your mouse on those systems. Windows 3.0 and 3.1 were a mess. But of course... most things were back then. how far we've come.
Uh ? You say the crashing is somehow related to pre-emptive multi-tasking and yet you talk about Windows 3.0 and 3.1 which had... cooperative multi-tasking ? :confused:
I was talking about Unix systems on 386s (think BSD, think SCO UnixWare, think early Linux). Those had true pre-emptive multi-tasking and they didn't "crash faster than you click your mouse". (heck, my first DOS computer had no mouse and I don't think it ever crashed).
Crashing has nothing to do with the type of multi-tasking.
I think what he is saying is that programs that are actually doing work in the background can continue running, while those that aren't can suspend iOS style. That is how Lion works. It brings the benefits of both iOS & Mac OS.
What's working ? Is a program that's sitting in its idle loop waiting on a listen() operation not working ? Is a program that's firing a heartbeat every X seconds not working ?
Are we that ressource limited that we need to suspend these programs and have system level services to do these tasks, which the programs will register with on launch ? What's the benefit of a system level service vs the program doing it itself ?
Let's face it, it's not like a program sitting in the background is digging into the CPU much with a idle loop...
Uh ? You say the crashing is somehow related to pre-emptive multi-tasking and yet you talk about Windows 3.0 and 3.1 which had... cooperative multi-tasking ? :confused:
I was talking about Unix systems on 386s (think BSD, think SCO UnixWare, think early Linux). Those had true pre-emptive multi-tasking and they didn't "crash faster than you click your mouse". (heck, my first DOS computer had no mouse and I don't think it ever crashed).
Crashing has nothing to do with the type of multi-tasking.
I think what he is saying is that programs that are actually doing work in the background can continue running, while those that aren't can suspend iOS style. That is how Lion works. It brings the benefits of both iOS & Mac OS.
What's working ? Is a program that's sitting in its idle loop waiting on a listen() operation not working ? Is a program that's firing a heartbeat every X seconds not working ?
Are we that ressource limited that we need to suspend these programs and have system level services to do these tasks, which the programs will register with on launch ? What's the benefit of a system level service vs the program doing it itself ?
Let's face it, it's not like a program sitting in the background is digging into the CPU much with a idle loop...
ssn637
Mar 31, 02:41 AM
Can we perform a clean installation with DP2 or do we have to first install DP1? I just deleted the original Lion installation image from my backup drive, thinking I could restore the DP2 image to an external drive and boot from there. But it looks more like this requires Lion DP1. How do I download DP1 again from the AppStore if I need it? :(
dongmin
Sep 6, 09:49 AM
Fair enough, but what about those of us who want to buy a general purpose computer? (Probably most people)Well I actually think there's a good chance now that Apple will drop the Mini altogether and replace it with a Conroe-based smallish desktop. Apple didn't add any new features to the Mini other than the CPU bump. To me, this signals Apple's reluctance to advance the line beyond the current incarnation. Logic dictates that a new product will replace it.
Silent upgrades anyone? :)
Makes the MBP upgrades more likely. Can only say to nay sayers, that MBP will be C2D before (12th) or *just* after the student offer ends (US) - Sept 16th. I'd bet someone an icecream over it...I'd bet on the 19th or 20th. There's just too much stuff next week with the video store, ipods, and airport AV. Apple will want at least a full week of these new toys on the Apple.com front page before adding the C2D MBPs. Next week:
[............movie store..............]
[ipods] [airport] [24" imac] [mini]
The week after:
[.............movie store..............]
[MBPs] [ipods] [airport] [imacs]
It looks like Apple's been holding off making any Merom-related announcements until they have enough on hand to ship today. And indeed, they're shipping Merom iMacs today, which beats all other major vendors, if I'm not mistaken. I'll bet that Apple will wait til they have enough stock of 2.0 and 2.16 ghz parts before announcing the Macbook Pros. That's why I say they're two weeks off, at least.
.
.
Silent upgrades anyone? :)
Makes the MBP upgrades more likely. Can only say to nay sayers, that MBP will be C2D before (12th) or *just* after the student offer ends (US) - Sept 16th. I'd bet someone an icecream over it...I'd bet on the 19th or 20th. There's just too much stuff next week with the video store, ipods, and airport AV. Apple will want at least a full week of these new toys on the Apple.com front page before adding the C2D MBPs. Next week:
[............movie store..............]
[ipods] [airport] [24" imac] [mini]
The week after:
[.............movie store..............]
[MBPs] [ipods] [airport] [imacs]
It looks like Apple's been holding off making any Merom-related announcements until they have enough on hand to ship today. And indeed, they're shipping Merom iMacs today, which beats all other major vendors, if I'm not mistaken. I'll bet that Apple will wait til they have enough stock of 2.0 and 2.16 ghz parts before announcing the Macbook Pros. That's why I say they're two weeks off, at least.
.
.
kalun
Oct 23, 11:00 PM
Meanwhile, product checks (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2163) indicate that several European hardware distributers "ran dry" of MacBook and MacBook Pro inventory several weeks ago.
Well, in Japan, there are enough Macbook Pro so that it is shipped within 24 hours. so...ya....
Well, in Japan, there are enough Macbook Pro so that it is shipped within 24 hours. so...ya....
techweenie
Apr 3, 01:30 PM
The trolls are out in force today. They seem to be taking cues from the political world where Google is apparently broken. 40% of the population cannot -- or will not -- independently verify claims, and a whole ecosystem has grown up to help insulate them from reality.
Yes, Mr. Al Coholic, iPads do have multiple applications. Your apparent belief that all applications must be promoted in every ad is at best impractical.
If you were able to understand the subtle message of this new ad I wouldn't have to explain to you that this positions the iPad against other tablets with *some* applications and *some* technical spec advantages by saying it's all about the user experience.
The very first brochure we did for the Apple II did the same thing with the headline "Simplicity is the Ultimate Sophistication." How many companies are still operating with the same philosophy 30+ years later?
Yes, Mr. Al Coholic, iPads do have multiple applications. Your apparent belief that all applications must be promoted in every ad is at best impractical.
If you were able to understand the subtle message of this new ad I wouldn't have to explain to you that this positions the iPad against other tablets with *some* applications and *some* technical spec advantages by saying it's all about the user experience.
The very first brochure we did for the Apple II did the same thing with the headline "Simplicity is the Ultimate Sophistication." How many companies are still operating with the same philosophy 30+ years later?
cube
Mar 24, 03:26 PM
Cool story bro, would read again. If you want the fusion so badly then buy a PC. No one's forcing you to buy from Apple.
I am forced to buy Apple because of the lack of commercial Linux applications for consumers.
I am forced to buy Apple because of the lack of commercial Linux applications for consumers.
chutch15
Sep 12, 09:58 PM
MicroByte - Sorry. I edited my post since you replied. I added a pic just for the heck of it.
8CoreWhore
May 2, 04:58 PM
Apple sees the benefit of unifying how things work across OS X and iOS.
There are tons of people that don't know how to install or uninstall apps on their PC, but they do on their iPhone or iPad. By unifying, those people feel comfortable buying a Mac.
There are tons of people that don't know how to install or uninstall apps on their PC, but they do on their iPhone or iPad. By unifying, those people feel comfortable buying a Mac.
macman2790
Nov 27, 01:19 PM
this would be cool. It would even be better if someone other than the digitimes discovered it.
Link2999
Sep 20, 11:34 AM
I caved and bought a Belkin Grip Vue. It's a pretty nice little case, but it's expensive for what you're getting. $25 for a small piece of rubber. It's hard on the outside and soft on the inside. Green color looks nice though.
bushido
Apr 6, 05:21 AM
safari is still being a biatch to me. it freezes and won't load anything if i go to pages like www.redmondpie.com and sometimes i can't type anywhere on safari unless i quit safari and reopen it, anyone have the same issues?
oh and adblocker isn't properly blocking ads anymore, i even get pop ups sometimes ... i thought those were extinct
oh and adblocker isn't properly blocking ads anymore, i even get pop ups sometimes ... i thought those were extinct
Small White Car
Apr 12, 10:17 PM
I thought I heard him say that it was 'shipping' in June, in addition to the App Store. Can anyone else verify this?
Final Cut is.
We were talking about Aperture, the photo program.
Final Cut is.
We were talking about Aperture, the photo program.
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
tokevino
Aug 7, 12:24 AM
I am buying an iMac very soon, and I just want a 64-bit intel core in it. Cmon merom!
IMHO, only Mac Pro and MacBook Pro will get the chance for Core 2s. Intel simply doesn't have the production, yet.
Do you have a particular need for 64 bit computing?
IMHO, only Mac Pro and MacBook Pro will get the chance for Core 2s. Intel simply doesn't have the production, yet.
Do you have a particular need for 64 bit computing?
maxjg
Aug 7, 12:19 AM
I am buying an iMac very soon, and I just want a 64-bit intel core in it. Cmon merom!
jeanlain
Apr 6, 05:51 PM
I can't even edit an audio clip in quicklime (10.1). This looks like a regression because Quicktime X allows trimming in 10.6.
EDIT: scratch that, I wasn't looking in the right menu. It works fine.
EDIT: scratch that, I wasn't looking in the right menu. It works fine.
kjjnk
Apr 12, 09:17 PM
Wow, it looks absolutely stunning.
Baseline
Nov 15, 08:41 AM
seriously though, how hard is it to get a program to multi-thread? (if thats the right term; being a complete programming novice, i've no idea)
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.
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.
No comments:
Post a Comment