Boomchukalaka
Apr 6, 03:15 PM
YEP...over 100,000 people bought a Xoom...and clearly half of them will be on this forum telling everybody how much better it is than the iPad...;)
kdarling
Apr 19, 01:49 PM
One of the three basics that must be proven in order to win a trade dress case, is the likelihood of confusion.
In other words, would someone think they're buying one thing but really getting another, such as might happen with shoes or pills or whatever.
Does anyone think that a normal person would actually confuse a Samsung Galaxy (especially with that huge "Samsung" on it) with an Apple iPhone when they're buying it?
I mean, is Apple going to claim that they're losing sales because the Galaxy is so close to the iPhone that people can't tell the difference? If so, that sure doesn't say much for the iPhone. Or it says a lot for the Galaxy.
In other words, would someone think they're buying one thing but really getting another, such as might happen with shoes or pills or whatever.
Does anyone think that a normal person would actually confuse a Samsung Galaxy (especially with that huge "Samsung" on it) with an Apple iPhone when they're buying it?
I mean, is Apple going to claim that they're losing sales because the Galaxy is so close to the iPhone that people can't tell the difference? If so, that sure doesn't say much for the iPhone. Or it says a lot for the Galaxy.
BlizzardBomb
Aug 6, 05:04 PM
One thing has me wondering... What's the default aqua wallpaper of Leopard going to be? :confused: :)
wiestlingjr
Jun 11, 06:03 PM
Bibbz
I just talked to my local radioshack and they are also taking preorders. He told me he can't guarantee me the 24th. He said he's not sure when they will come in. How accurate is this? I really don't want to preorder if its not going to be there on the 24th.
I just talked to my local radioshack and they are also taking preorders. He told me he can't guarantee me the 24th. He said he's not sure when they will come in. How accurate is this? I really don't want to preorder if its not going to be there on the 24th.
tortoise
Aug 23, 03:04 PM
Do you have a reference showing that this translates to better performance in real-world application tests in a head to head competition?
Not handy, since a lot of this happened on mailing lists.
The short version is that the memory performance scales in a very sub-linear fashion as a function of the number of cores being used, whereas Opteron scalability is almost linear up to a large number of cores. The good news is that for single dual-core processors the memory performance is on par with dual-core Opterons and their in-cache performance can be better. The bad news is that this performance does not hold as you scale cores in a system. So for some applications (e.g. those that live mostly in cache) the Woodcrest processors will be mildly faster than Opterons, but for most the performance is about even in real app benchmarks.
I've seen fairly comprehensive benchmarks for both databases and scientific computing applications, both of which thoroughly exercise the memory subsystem. Even though a single Intel core theoretically has more bandwidth, the high latency means that the real bandwidth is about the same as the slower Opterons (which have real bandwidth that approaches theoretical) and the cross-sectional bandwidth of Opterons when you get up to 4 cores and higher is much higher since the scaling is almost linear with the number of cores. For Intel, I think it was the case that a bigger cache was a cheaper design choice than a truly scalable memory subsystem. As a result, they will have different competencies. Some types of floating point codes should run very well on Intel.
Not handy, since a lot of this happened on mailing lists.
The short version is that the memory performance scales in a very sub-linear fashion as a function of the number of cores being used, whereas Opteron scalability is almost linear up to a large number of cores. The good news is that for single dual-core processors the memory performance is on par with dual-core Opterons and their in-cache performance can be better. The bad news is that this performance does not hold as you scale cores in a system. So for some applications (e.g. those that live mostly in cache) the Woodcrest processors will be mildly faster than Opterons, but for most the performance is about even in real app benchmarks.
I've seen fairly comprehensive benchmarks for both databases and scientific computing applications, both of which thoroughly exercise the memory subsystem. Even though a single Intel core theoretically has more bandwidth, the high latency means that the real bandwidth is about the same as the slower Opterons (which have real bandwidth that approaches theoretical) and the cross-sectional bandwidth of Opterons when you get up to 4 cores and higher is much higher since the scaling is almost linear with the number of cores. For Intel, I think it was the case that a bigger cache was a cheaper design choice than a truly scalable memory subsystem. As a result, they will have different competencies. Some types of floating point codes should run very well on Intel.
JohnnyQuest
Apr 7, 11:09 PM
I really hate Best Buy. But unfortunately, there's no Apple Store in my town.
padr�
Sep 19, 10:18 AM
so... after reading here for a while i got a question, its kinda stupid, i'm good at that,
first off, i was doubting between the 24" and the macpro so i disided that for my needs i should realy go with a macpro, but know that i'm hearing things about this 8 core macpro, i'm realy doubting about ordering my quad macpro this month,
has anybody got an idea of how long it would be before apple launches " a macpro octo " :confused:
thx for your time :)
first off, i was doubting between the 24" and the macpro so i disided that for my needs i should realy go with a macpro, but know that i'm hearing things about this 8 core macpro, i'm realy doubting about ordering my quad macpro this month,
has anybody got an idea of how long it would be before apple launches " a macpro octo " :confused:
thx for your time :)
aloshka
Apr 25, 03:08 PM
My Garmin saves way points too!
SUE THEM!!!! I don't understand how my personal information can be on my phone. I'm suing everyone! I'm suing mac rumors too, because I just posted a private message, and it's visible on this forum.
SUE THEM!!!! I don't understand how my personal information can be on my phone. I'm suing everyone! I'm suing mac rumors too, because I just posted a private message, and it's visible on this forum.
MacRumors
Aug 16, 10:33 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Barefeats provides (http://www.barefeats.com/quad06.html) benchmarks comparing the Quad 3GHz Mac Pro (Xeon) vs the Quad G5 2.5GHz Power Mac (G5). This represents the new top of the line vs the old top of the line Mac.
They provide benchmarks for both non-Universal and Universal applications between the Mac Pro 3GHz, Mac Pro 2.66GHz and PowerMac G5 Quad 2.5GHz.
The top-end Mac Pro performed well compared to the Quad G5 with both Photoshop CS2 and After Effects 7.0 despite running under Rosetta emulation on the Mac Pro. Universal upgrades to these applications should provide additional performance boosts.
Meanwhile, Universal applications iMovie HD 6, Final Cut Pro 5, FileMaker Pro 8.5 and Cinebench 9.5 generally showed substantial improvements even in the 2.66GHz Mac Pro vs the 2.5GHz PowerMac.
There's no doubt that both versions of the Mac Pro are faster than the G5 Quad-Core running Universal Binary apps like iMovie, Final Cut Pro, etc. As you can see from the four UB tests we ran in this session, the Mac Pro 2.66GHz was as much as 62% faster than the Quad-Core G5/2.5GHz. The Mac Pro 3.0GHz was as much as 85% faster.
Barefeats provides (http://www.barefeats.com/quad06.html) benchmarks comparing the Quad 3GHz Mac Pro (Xeon) vs the Quad G5 2.5GHz Power Mac (G5). This represents the new top of the line vs the old top of the line Mac.
They provide benchmarks for both non-Universal and Universal applications between the Mac Pro 3GHz, Mac Pro 2.66GHz and PowerMac G5 Quad 2.5GHz.
The top-end Mac Pro performed well compared to the Quad G5 with both Photoshop CS2 and After Effects 7.0 despite running under Rosetta emulation on the Mac Pro. Universal upgrades to these applications should provide additional performance boosts.
Meanwhile, Universal applications iMovie HD 6, Final Cut Pro 5, FileMaker Pro 8.5 and Cinebench 9.5 generally showed substantial improvements even in the 2.66GHz Mac Pro vs the 2.5GHz PowerMac.
There's no doubt that both versions of the Mac Pro are faster than the G5 Quad-Core running Universal Binary apps like iMovie, Final Cut Pro, etc. As you can see from the four UB tests we ran in this session, the Mac Pro 2.66GHz was as much as 62% faster than the Quad-Core G5/2.5GHz. The Mac Pro 3.0GHz was as much as 85% faster.
THX1139
Aug 19, 07:34 PM
... For anyone out there who has been needlessly influenced by this guy to wait for a system that will only be outdated by the one that will come after it, please uninfluence yourself, and buy the stupid computer that you want, when you want it.
Jeeshh!!
I agree. I'm noticing a trend. People who are looking at the Macpro in a negative way come in three flavors. The first type are invested in G5 (especially quad) and are desperately trying justify that their investment is sound, when they actually desire a Macpro. They can feel better about their old machines by making the new ones seem bad. The are almost "smug" about waiting until a better one comes out. The second flavor are people who hate the Mac culture and are pissed that the Mac is catching up to the windows workstation sector. The third type are people who can't afford a Macpro and go out of their way to publicly discredit the machine so that they can feel good about their iMacs or Minis. There are others, but you get the point.
I also find it amusing when I see posters participating in Macpro discussions when they have publicly stated that they have no intention of buying a Macpro. WTF?? Don't they have a life outside of macrumors? If I owned a G5 Quad and had no intention of buying a Macpro, I'd be spending all of my spare time doing cool stuff with my machine... instead of wasting that time participating in discussions that have nothing to do with me. I might read though some of the threads now and then, just to keep up with technology - but to particpate and debate, what a waste. I guess some folks have no life.
Jeeshh!!
I agree. I'm noticing a trend. People who are looking at the Macpro in a negative way come in three flavors. The first type are invested in G5 (especially quad) and are desperately trying justify that their investment is sound, when they actually desire a Macpro. They can feel better about their old machines by making the new ones seem bad. The are almost "smug" about waiting until a better one comes out. The second flavor are people who hate the Mac culture and are pissed that the Mac is catching up to the windows workstation sector. The third type are people who can't afford a Macpro and go out of their way to publicly discredit the machine so that they can feel good about their iMacs or Minis. There are others, but you get the point.
I also find it amusing when I see posters participating in Macpro discussions when they have publicly stated that they have no intention of buying a Macpro. WTF?? Don't they have a life outside of macrumors? If I owned a G5 Quad and had no intention of buying a Macpro, I'd be spending all of my spare time doing cool stuff with my machine... instead of wasting that time participating in discussions that have nothing to do with me. I might read though some of the threads now and then, just to keep up with technology - but to particpate and debate, what a waste. I guess some folks have no life.
BWhaler
Aug 26, 06:49 PM
Only if you have no sense of humour! :p
It's not really that.
It's just that the joke is soooo done. Played out.
It's time to turn the page.
It's not really that.
It's just that the joke is soooo done. Played out.
It's time to turn the page.
SlavKO
Jun 9, 10:50 AM
Regarding RadioShack preorder(if it works like before)
Is it possible to preorder from one store and pickup at another store? The reason I ask is that I will be out of town on launch day and would like to pick up at a different radioshack then I have access to...
Thx
Is it possible to preorder from one store and pickup at another store? The reason I ask is that I will be out of town on launch day and would like to pick up at a different radioshack then I have access to...
Thx
JAT
Mar 22, 02:06 PM
I'm glad that RIM and Samsung come with those prices.
Next months will be crucial for me to decide the successor of my iPad 1.
Come: present tense. See: iPad2
Will come: future tense. See: Samsung tablet.
May come: conditional tense. See: RIM tablet.
Next months will be crucial for me to decide the successor of my iPad 1.
Come: present tense. See: iPad2
Will come: future tense. See: Samsung tablet.
May come: conditional tense. See: RIM tablet.
twoodcc
Nov 30, 05:20 PM
so far i like this game. i haven't had time to play it alot, but i'm a level 6 right now, and i'm about 9% game complete.
SgtPepper12
Apr 27, 08:13 AM
Oh my god I knew it! Apple collects the data and does evil things with it! I can't imagine what kind of evil things they are going to do with it!
No, seriously, I really don't. Printing out huge posters with a map of your latest locations saying "LOOK AT WHERE THIS GUY WAS. HE WAS AT THE SUPERMARKET LATELY. HE SURELY BOUGHT SOME THINGS THERE, LIKE TOMATOES. YEAH THIS KIND OF THINGS." maybe.
Strange people.
No, seriously, I really don't. Printing out huge posters with a map of your latest locations saying "LOOK AT WHERE THIS GUY WAS. HE WAS AT THE SUPERMARKET LATELY. HE SURELY BOUGHT SOME THINGS THERE, LIKE TOMATOES. YEAH THIS KIND OF THINGS." maybe.
Strange people.
jhedges3
Aug 11, 02:57 PM
See now that is something I never understood, how the cell service can be so poor in a place like NYC, yet I was making calls on my CDMA phone in the middle of Wyoming this summer. In fact, there are few places in very unpopulated midwest and west that you can't get a decent signal at least with a CDMA phone. People that come here with GSM are out of luck anywhere except metro areas.
New York has more of something than Wyoming, which is buildings. These buildings make it more difficult for signal to get to people, I think. For whatever reasons CDMA seems to work much better here than GSM.
New York has more of something than Wyoming, which is buildings. These buildings make it more difficult for signal to get to people, I think. For whatever reasons CDMA seems to work much better here than GSM.
icloud
Aug 7, 09:34 PM
This preview of Leopard seemed really like a glaze over of some "fun" little advancements, it did not look polished at all...to all those dissapointed in what leopard has to offer, not to be punny, but steve has barely let the cat out of the bag
tonne more to come
tonne more to come
Yanwoo
Aug 6, 02:00 PM
Was just trying to price out an IMac on the Apple store and the option of upgrade the keyboard/mouse to a wireless version was gone??
Something new in the offing to be announced tomorrow perhaps??
Something new in the offing to be announced tomorrow perhaps??
e�Studios
Dec 9, 05:12 PM
I love racing my VW Bus. I also love racing the Vauxhall Tigra, which has about 96hp iirc. If all you want to do it buy an F1 and drive as quickly as possible dont even bother looking in GT5's direction. I get bored when i get to the faster races because you get stuck with the same dull cars every game. Woohoo, lets all buy a 458 Italia, F1, or Murcielago... :rolleyes:
I like the early races where i can tune up a Cappucino and get at most 200hp out of it.
GT5 is a game for people who love cars. Not people who only love fast cars. People who love all cars.
I'm sure you'd be happy if everyone started with a Zonda in their garage, but for people who like to drive something fresh and fun the exhaustive list in GT5 is perfect.
+1, as a car enthusiast I love GT and how its laid out. If all I wanted were the fastest cars I would play an arcade racer, its the fun in getting a car and tuning it the way you want it tuned and for how you drive it that appeals to me in GT. The car list comes secondary in my opinion, while yes it does matter to a certain degree its not the end all be all to a simulation game.
I am having a great time with GT5, overall its the game I expected and the game I have loved for so many years. The only one gripe I have is they took away the brake mods. You can fine tune the brake balance controller which is great, but it would have been nice to have upgrades in that category.
I like the early races where i can tune up a Cappucino and get at most 200hp out of it.
GT5 is a game for people who love cars. Not people who only love fast cars. People who love all cars.
I'm sure you'd be happy if everyone started with a Zonda in their garage, but for people who like to drive something fresh and fun the exhaustive list in GT5 is perfect.
+1, as a car enthusiast I love GT and how its laid out. If all I wanted were the fastest cars I would play an arcade racer, its the fun in getting a car and tuning it the way you want it tuned and for how you drive it that appeals to me in GT. The car list comes secondary in my opinion, while yes it does matter to a certain degree its not the end all be all to a simulation game.
I am having a great time with GT5, overall its the game I expected and the game I have loved for so many years. The only one gripe I have is they took away the brake mods. You can fine tune the brake balance controller which is great, but it would have been nice to have upgrades in that category.
SevenInchScrew
Dec 9, 01:09 AM
DoFoT:
It depends on what you want from a game. If you care more about driving and tuning than painting and whatnot go buy GT5. Its all about driving and not much else.
I love it because i'm a bit of a car nerd. If you like cars you will like GT5. If you love cars you will love GT5, its just that simple.
I guess I'll throw in my counterpoint to that then, just to give him another opinion to mull over, because I love cars and don't love GT5....
The game is not real good. Every time I've played it, I can't help but think of how it could have been SOOO much better, if they just trimmed back on the crazy feature list a bit. The game tries to be everything to everyone who likes cars. But the problem with that is, trying to do many things means you'll never excel at any of them. Often the implementation of things in this game is a little weak or unfulfilling because of that. For example...
NASCAR is in, but is pretty plain and boring, and doesn't feel like a real cup race. If you like NASCAR, you'd be better served with a full game based on that.
Same with WRC stuff. Yes, the rally is pretty decent. But, I've played a bunch of REALLY awesome rally games before, and this is nowhere near as good.
Day and Night cycles, and Weather effects look amazing.... on the very few tracks that you can actually have them function on.
The sounds of the cars, just as with every GT game that has come before it, is terrible. Very few cars actually sound like their real-world version, and when you tune them up, they get even less distinctive.
The car list, while huge, is FILLED with cars that I have absolutely no desire to drive in a racing game. I get Kaz's intention, bringing in cars from many eras and different parts of the automotive spectrum to see them, and maybe appreciate them more. But this is a racing game at its core, and I don't ever want to race a VW Kombi.
And lastly, the menus are just pitiful. It really feels like they designed them first, all those years ago, and then never touched them again. So many games have come and gone with great menu systems, and this game took nothing away from them, because they are just awful in this game.
This game really had the potential to be amazing. If they got rid of NASCAR, WRC, Karts, etc, and took out about 4-500 of the boring, crappy cars, we'd be getting somewhere. Use the time and effort that those removed things would have occupied to make some manageable menus, more Premium cars, and get the Day-Night cycle and Weather on all tracks. That would have been great. But that isn't what we got.
Don't get me wrong, it is a good game. But GT games aren't supposed to just be good, they are supposed to be GREAT. But even after a 6 year wait, we only got pretty good.
But hey, as I've said on many occasions, it does make some DAMN GOOD screenshots. Almost unreal at times...
Click to HUGE-size
http://imgur.com/hLJ12.jpg
http://imgur.com/V06hb.jpg
http://imgur.com/Vciun.jpg
http://imgur.com/ZGPiF.jpg
http://imgur.com/IMrhk.jpg
It depends on what you want from a game. If you care more about driving and tuning than painting and whatnot go buy GT5. Its all about driving and not much else.
I love it because i'm a bit of a car nerd. If you like cars you will like GT5. If you love cars you will love GT5, its just that simple.
I guess I'll throw in my counterpoint to that then, just to give him another opinion to mull over, because I love cars and don't love GT5....
The game is not real good. Every time I've played it, I can't help but think of how it could have been SOOO much better, if they just trimmed back on the crazy feature list a bit. The game tries to be everything to everyone who likes cars. But the problem with that is, trying to do many things means you'll never excel at any of them. Often the implementation of things in this game is a little weak or unfulfilling because of that. For example...
NASCAR is in, but is pretty plain and boring, and doesn't feel like a real cup race. If you like NASCAR, you'd be better served with a full game based on that.
Same with WRC stuff. Yes, the rally is pretty decent. But, I've played a bunch of REALLY awesome rally games before, and this is nowhere near as good.
Day and Night cycles, and Weather effects look amazing.... on the very few tracks that you can actually have them function on.
The sounds of the cars, just as with every GT game that has come before it, is terrible. Very few cars actually sound like their real-world version, and when you tune them up, they get even less distinctive.
The car list, while huge, is FILLED with cars that I have absolutely no desire to drive in a racing game. I get Kaz's intention, bringing in cars from many eras and different parts of the automotive spectrum to see them, and maybe appreciate them more. But this is a racing game at its core, and I don't ever want to race a VW Kombi.
And lastly, the menus are just pitiful. It really feels like they designed them first, all those years ago, and then never touched them again. So many games have come and gone with great menu systems, and this game took nothing away from them, because they are just awful in this game.
This game really had the potential to be amazing. If they got rid of NASCAR, WRC, Karts, etc, and took out about 4-500 of the boring, crappy cars, we'd be getting somewhere. Use the time and effort that those removed things would have occupied to make some manageable menus, more Premium cars, and get the Day-Night cycle and Weather on all tracks. That would have been great. But that isn't what we got.
Don't get me wrong, it is a good game. But GT games aren't supposed to just be good, they are supposed to be GREAT. But even after a 6 year wait, we only got pretty good.
But hey, as I've said on many occasions, it does make some DAMN GOOD screenshots. Almost unreal at times...
Click to HUGE-size
http://imgur.com/hLJ12.jpg
http://imgur.com/V06hb.jpg
http://imgur.com/Vciun.jpg
http://imgur.com/ZGPiF.jpg
http://imgur.com/IMrhk.jpg
bokdol
Aug 18, 09:48 AM
I know if it is it will work, what i'm asking is, is it? Or is that not known at this time?
http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/06/27/woodcrest_servers_are_covertown_servers/
i guess it will be
http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/06/27/woodcrest_servers_are_covertown_servers/
i guess it will be
John.B
Apr 6, 10:31 AM
Now just add that Thunderbolt port to the MBAs and I'll be first in line! :D
jvmxtra
Apr 6, 04:03 PM
wait, theres other brands of tablets out there?
love it!!
love it!!
AidenShaw
Mar 26, 11:23 PM
As an amateur OS X developer, I really hate this attitude because it will end up slowing Lion adoption. That really sucks, because there are a ton of awesome changes in 10.6 that I (and many, many other developers) would love to take advantage of to make their software even greater, but it's not going to be viable to go Lion-only for said features until Lion is installed on the majority of Macs out there.
Yes, we've heard of this - it's the "XP syndrome" all over again.
Yes, we've heard of this - it's the "XP syndrome" all over again.
