Vegasman
Apr 26, 01:00 PM
so instead you're going to store them all on multiple machines? what do you think the cloud is for? lol
Uh no...
You need to follow the thread. The poster was using his 2 TB drive as his cloud using a 5$ software.
Uh no...
You need to follow the thread. The poster was using his 2 TB drive as his cloud using a 5$ software.
anim8or
Apr 25, 04:03 AM
This is a disgrace.
Standing there watching this unfold and doing nothing but film and laugh at the poor victim.
Nobody deserves to be kicked the head repeatedly, i hope they catch those 2 girls and lock them up and throw away the key!
As for those 'defending' the employees for not intervening, shame on you... The 2 girls clearly did not have any weapons, hence the brutality of their attack using their fists and feet, a whole 3 or minutes go past, if they had a weapon they would have used it by then instead of taking such horrific actions like stamping on the victim's head!!! There were at least 4 full grown MEN capable of stopping that and it takes a female OAP to at least try... Cowards.
No, i don't think it is sackable to not intervene, but it is just as cruel as taking part IMO, i hope they live with that image in their heads forever.
Standing there watching this unfold and doing nothing but film and laugh at the poor victim.
Nobody deserves to be kicked the head repeatedly, i hope they catch those 2 girls and lock them up and throw away the key!
As for those 'defending' the employees for not intervening, shame on you... The 2 girls clearly did not have any weapons, hence the brutality of their attack using their fists and feet, a whole 3 or minutes go past, if they had a weapon they would have used it by then instead of taking such horrific actions like stamping on the victim's head!!! There were at least 4 full grown MEN capable of stopping that and it takes a female OAP to at least try... Cowards.
No, i don't think it is sackable to not intervene, but it is just as cruel as taking part IMO, i hope they live with that image in their heads forever.
jbanger
Nov 29, 01:58 AM
I'm from the old school of Schmidt Stixx and Powell & Peralta. I'm looking for a board with totem poles on either side of a temple. I'm unsure which of those companies made them Stixx or Peralta but its hasn't been in production since 87. if anybody knows and can find the name/picture it would be helpful (Yes these where the days when the young adult Tony Hawk ripped the scene just prior to showing that the 720 was possible and doable with STYLE).
that kind of sounds familiar, let me put my thinking cap on....
that kind of sounds familiar, let me put my thinking cap on....
gri
Jun 17, 02:02 PM
$1000 worth of a beating he'd get if i were his parent. Luckily for kids, i hate them and would never have one. Ever.
You don't know what you are missing.
You don't know what you are missing.
more...
ChrisAlexander
Apr 14, 08:08 AM
FiINALLY an app that will work on my ix.Mac.MarketingName :apple:
saving107
Apr 13, 07:41 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
this is soooooo 2010.
It's better than being two-thousand and late....
(couldn't resist)
this is soooooo 2010.
It's better than being two-thousand and late....
(couldn't resist)
more...
macman312
Apr 12, 07:11 PM
While this is possible I don't think it will be true. Firstly Apple is one to keep to traditions and ever since 2007 the release/announcement a new iphone in june/july and a new ipod range in september. So apple please keep to your traditions of ANNOUNCING a new iphone you don't have to release it till JUly/september but just so the teleco companies can prepare and get a list of people who would like one please announce it at the WWDC :apple::apple::apple::apple::apple::apple::apple::apple::apple::D:D:D:D:cool::cool::D:D:apple::apple :
Popeye206
Apr 13, 09:21 PM
It could be a bad mod job, I doubt some random AT&T employee got a hold of an actual White iPhone 4.
Agreed... if it's not announced, it's not in the wild. Probably one of those conversion jobs... someone was selling a white conversion kit for $200.
Agreed... if it's not announced, it's not in the wild. Probably one of those conversion jobs... someone was selling a white conversion kit for $200.
more...
twoodcc
Oct 27, 08:43 AM
If you only have 4 cores and I have 8 that isn't very much of a difference even taking into account the mhz discrepency. It might be worth trying to see if my 920 would be ok at stock speed with bigadv units.
well at stock speed it takes my 920 about 43 min per frame. Not bad, but I think that barely gets a bonus. But it is definitely worth it though
well at stock speed it takes my 920 about 43 min per frame. Not bad, but I think that barely gets a bonus. But it is definitely worth it though
![arnold schwarzenegger terminator salvation. arnold schwarzenegger terminator salvation cgi. [links updated] Ending CGI Cutscene with Final Song; [links updated] Ending CGI Cutscene with Final Song All](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_vN9vEUUsPHfzXtQra-wccbDQkaF138S0msFav7lYx97P_Qb5LaQeM3I0yE8pi_RoImA751nPocQ1DgifdtOzVBWemgI0XA4xjzG63jDhyd=s0-d "arnold schwarzenegger terminator salvation cgi. [links updated] Ending CGI Cutscene with Final Song; [links updated] Ending CGI Cutscene with Final Song All")
Surely
Mar 1, 11:37 AM
I heard some radio jocks this morning say that they think this whole Charlie Sheen thing is a bit. Kinda like the whole Joaquin Phoenix thing or a radio shock jock who just goes way over the top. Of course the partying and lifestyle is real, but they were talking about this present media tour and the crazy talk he's spouting. It all equals more publicity for him, the network, and the show.
After thinking about it this explanation sounds pretty reasonable. If it's not that, then as many have said he's had a break with reality of some sort and the eventual end is not going to be pretty.
I watched the Piers Morgan interview......I still think he's ****ing with people.
I've met a bunch of Hollywood types, and for some of them, their reality is not the same as our reality.
After thinking about it this explanation sounds pretty reasonable. If it's not that, then as many have said he's had a break with reality of some sort and the eventual end is not going to be pretty.
I watched the Piers Morgan interview......I still think he's ****ing with people.
I've met a bunch of Hollywood types, and for some of them, their reality is not the same as our reality.
more...
RBR2
Apr 13, 11:58 AM
Do you trust Wikipedia? :) In fact the line above this one on Wikipedia says:
Everything I've read that is sourced to Intel says an add-on card won't be possible. It's my guess that the integration for Thunderbolt needs to be deeper than an PCI Express card, especially with its capability to carry video/data. It may be that Intel does not want people confused by data-only Thunderbolt ports. OTOH, I'm not a Thunderbolt engineer, so I may be completely mistaken. :D
Technical issues aside - odds are that Apple would rather sell you a new Mac Pro with Thunderbolt onboard.
I am not a Thunderbolt engineer either...in fact, it is interesting (and odd) that Intel is only now announcing the availability of a TB developer kit.
Do you trust the Wiki? While a grain of salt is advisable, I merely reference the item. It does seem to me, however, that the line you reference is talking about a non-GPU PCIe card. I had posted an earlier comment referencing the Intel position that there could not be a TB card (because TB must directly access both the graphics processor and the PCIe lanes). This means that there will not be a simple TB add-on card like adding a FW800/USB 2 card in the past.
The line I referenced seems to indicate that it would be possible for a TB controller to be on a graphics card (and thereby gaining direct access to the GPU) and have direct access to the PCIe lane(s) in which the "TB enabled Graphics Card" is mounted with true (video and data) TB port(s) on the outside.
Would Apple prefer to sell you a new machine? Of course they would. Apple have a well established, if nasty, pattern of abandoning the purchasers of earlier hardware to their fate (not co-incidentally, it is one of the arguments against the use of the Mac platform frequently aired by the PC community).
I believe I mentioned third party developers. If not I do so now. It would be an interesting project for a third party manufacturer to integrate a TB controller and associated ports onto a graphics card that is otherwise the same as a supported graphics card so that it would be recognized by the OS.
Whether Apple have tied access to the TB ports in some bizarre manner which would make this impossible only some clever engineers would know after looking at the new OS & hardware implementation. Apple probably could not care less, but it is a market opportunity for somebody nonetheless.
The reason for the earlier reference to the data only possibility is the reality that external storage for Mac Pros is severely hampered by the lack of a fast interface unless one has made the transition to fibre.
A good RAID array could challenge the current TB bandwidth, but I doubt anyone would complain too loudly considering the lack of alternatives and the degree of improvement over the status quo.
Cheers
Everything I've read that is sourced to Intel says an add-on card won't be possible. It's my guess that the integration for Thunderbolt needs to be deeper than an PCI Express card, especially with its capability to carry video/data. It may be that Intel does not want people confused by data-only Thunderbolt ports. OTOH, I'm not a Thunderbolt engineer, so I may be completely mistaken. :D
Technical issues aside - odds are that Apple would rather sell you a new Mac Pro with Thunderbolt onboard.
I am not a Thunderbolt engineer either...in fact, it is interesting (and odd) that Intel is only now announcing the availability of a TB developer kit.
Do you trust the Wiki? While a grain of salt is advisable, I merely reference the item. It does seem to me, however, that the line you reference is talking about a non-GPU PCIe card. I had posted an earlier comment referencing the Intel position that there could not be a TB card (because TB must directly access both the graphics processor and the PCIe lanes). This means that there will not be a simple TB add-on card like adding a FW800/USB 2 card in the past.
The line I referenced seems to indicate that it would be possible for a TB controller to be on a graphics card (and thereby gaining direct access to the GPU) and have direct access to the PCIe lane(s) in which the "TB enabled Graphics Card" is mounted with true (video and data) TB port(s) on the outside.
Would Apple prefer to sell you a new machine? Of course they would. Apple have a well established, if nasty, pattern of abandoning the purchasers of earlier hardware to their fate (not co-incidentally, it is one of the arguments against the use of the Mac platform frequently aired by the PC community).
I believe I mentioned third party developers. If not I do so now. It would be an interesting project for a third party manufacturer to integrate a TB controller and associated ports onto a graphics card that is otherwise the same as a supported graphics card so that it would be recognized by the OS.
Whether Apple have tied access to the TB ports in some bizarre manner which would make this impossible only some clever engineers would know after looking at the new OS & hardware implementation. Apple probably could not care less, but it is a market opportunity for somebody nonetheless.
The reason for the earlier reference to the data only possibility is the reality that external storage for Mac Pros is severely hampered by the lack of a fast interface unless one has made the transition to fibre.
A good RAID array could challenge the current TB bandwidth, but I doubt anyone would complain too loudly considering the lack of alternatives and the degree of improvement over the status quo.
Cheers
Chundles
Oct 24, 08:23 AM
I've currently got a single 1GB stick in a three year old PB - will that be OK to swap into a new MBP?
Iain
No, RAM from any PPC Mac won't work in any Intel Mac. Apple use a different type of RAM in their Intel machines and whilst all Intel Macs (aside from the Mac Pro) use the same type of RAM the same isn't true of the old PPC Macs.
Your 1GB stick won't work at all.
Iain
No, RAM from any PPC Mac won't work in any Intel Mac. Apple use a different type of RAM in their Intel machines and whilst all Intel Macs (aside from the Mac Pro) use the same type of RAM the same isn't true of the old PPC Macs.
Your 1GB stick won't work at all.
more...
Eidorian
Jul 25, 09:56 AM
How rude.:mad:All that I have is Apple Store experience and testing one at work. We did get a Software Update for it but back in 10.4.2 for the wired one.
Damtoft
Apr 22, 04:31 PM
yuk, looks awfull :eek:, I highly doubt its gonna look like that
more...
bobber205
Jul 24, 03:14 PM
Now that it's Bluetooth, I'll have to seriously consider buying one...
seenew
Jul 24, 10:12 PM
Wouldn't it be "non-touch?"
None-touch doesn't sound right..
None-touch doesn't sound right..
more...
mc68k
Oct 29, 12:24 PM
guess what came into work yesterday
http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/9518/screenshot20091029at102.th.png (http://img255.imageshack.us/i/screenshot20091029at102.png/)
http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/9518/screenshot20091029at102.th.png (http://img255.imageshack.us/i/screenshot20091029at102.png/)
FX4568
Apr 22, 09:51 AM
Thats probably because the new MBPs completely obliterate the MBA in terms of specs. Run a photoshop render, any render you like, on both machines, you'll see a HUGE difference. The are quiet up till around 70c, which only happens when gaming or doing anything CPU intensive, the same as the MBA.
Oh really? Man, I didnt know.
You are comparing a 2011 chip vs few years ago. Also, from your signature, you are comparing a 15 inch laptop with a 13 ULTRAPORTABLE.
Furthermore, this thread is talking about the GPU sacrifice for the CPU gain... We arent talking about how the CPU in the MBA is better or worse, of course Sandy Bridge will blow the C2D out of the water.
The difference is not in the processors, unless you are doing something such as handbrake, but instead, for the average user, is the GPU, SSD, and software.
Oh really? Man, I didnt know.
You are comparing a 2011 chip vs few years ago. Also, from your signature, you are comparing a 15 inch laptop with a 13 ULTRAPORTABLE.
Furthermore, this thread is talking about the GPU sacrifice for the CPU gain... We arent talking about how the CPU in the MBA is better or worse, of course Sandy Bridge will blow the C2D out of the water.
The difference is not in the processors, unless you are doing something such as handbrake, but instead, for the average user, is the GPU, SSD, and software.
Illuminated
Jan 29, 10:50 AM
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5056/5397569736_b3f2b18cb9_b.jpg
I *just* opened this a few minutes ago. My girlfriend got it for me for my birthday. I absolutely love it... wanted one for a while. :)
Uh? what is that?
I *just* opened this a few minutes ago. My girlfriend got it for me for my birthday. I absolutely love it... wanted one for a while. :)
Uh? what is that?
gregdig
Dec 1, 03:44 PM
The day that I have to go out and buy virus protection for OS X is the day I consider going back to Windows.
Switching to Windows because you have to use antivirus software on your Mac would just be like jumping out of the frying pan and into the fire.
During the 15 years or so that Macs were around before the advent of OS X, most Mac users had antivirus software running on their computers. It was necessary, it was no big deal, and it was certainly no reason to start using a Windows box.
Switching to Windows because you have to use antivirus software on your Mac would just be like jumping out of the frying pan and into the fire.
During the 15 years or so that Macs were around before the advent of OS X, most Mac users had antivirus software running on their computers. It was necessary, it was no big deal, and it was certainly no reason to start using a Windows box.
txmatt
Apr 19, 02:04 PM
But my point is that even if we get a 40% boost in our CPU, it is near useless.
For example, lets say you have 100/100 in a test. Having a theoretical 40% boost will give you a 140/100. I mean, thats cool. Overkill. That is currently the CPU we have. We have enough to accomplish our tasks, and any more would be an overkill in the things we need our computer to process.
On the other hand, on the GPU side, you have a 80/100 (which is what the NVIDIA 320m is) and we see a 30% performance drop, that will result to a 42.5/100. At lower levels, difference between a 80/100 and 42.5/100 is the difference between a pass and a fail.
Of course, having a better CPU might be fulfilling to you and might give you the sense that you are the "latest in tech," but seriously, it is not about the CPU any more, it is about SSDs, ergonomics, GPU, and ultimately, Software.
I had to finally register to comment on the hypocrisy in this and many other threads like it. Because some people want frame rates for gaming on an MBA, then your needs for GPU performance are valid, and others who don't game but could use CPU performance have invalid needs? Rubbish.
A perfect example is the above. So the C2D rates as a 100/100 for CPU performance and thus any improvement is useless? Really?! Nice to see that you framed the argument such that any improvement you don't see as needed is useless.
On Sunday I combined 6 or 8 short 720p video clips into a 7 minute video for YouTube with a simple title screen and transitions. It took the C2D ~40 minutes to process the video and save in a new format. So you're really going to argue that there is nothing to be gained from a significant bump in processor speed?
For me and many other potential MBA purchasers, a CPU bump from the media processing abilities of the Core i processors would be welcome, and GPU performance over and above the ability to play real-time HD video is useless. We shouldn't be saddled with an out-of-date processor or forced to subsidize "unnecessary" frame rate performance just to appease game-players. And that perspective is as valid as yours.
For example, lets say you have 100/100 in a test. Having a theoretical 40% boost will give you a 140/100. I mean, thats cool. Overkill. That is currently the CPU we have. We have enough to accomplish our tasks, and any more would be an overkill in the things we need our computer to process.
On the other hand, on the GPU side, you have a 80/100 (which is what the NVIDIA 320m is) and we see a 30% performance drop, that will result to a 42.5/100. At lower levels, difference between a 80/100 and 42.5/100 is the difference between a pass and a fail.
Of course, having a better CPU might be fulfilling to you and might give you the sense that you are the "latest in tech," but seriously, it is not about the CPU any more, it is about SSDs, ergonomics, GPU, and ultimately, Software.
I had to finally register to comment on the hypocrisy in this and many other threads like it. Because some people want frame rates for gaming on an MBA, then your needs for GPU performance are valid, and others who don't game but could use CPU performance have invalid needs? Rubbish.
A perfect example is the above. So the C2D rates as a 100/100 for CPU performance and thus any improvement is useless? Really?! Nice to see that you framed the argument such that any improvement you don't see as needed is useless.
On Sunday I combined 6 or 8 short 720p video clips into a 7 minute video for YouTube with a simple title screen and transitions. It took the C2D ~40 minutes to process the video and save in a new format. So you're really going to argue that there is nothing to be gained from a significant bump in processor speed?
For me and many other potential MBA purchasers, a CPU bump from the media processing abilities of the Core i processors would be welcome, and GPU performance over and above the ability to play real-time HD video is useless. We shouldn't be saddled with an out-of-date processor or forced to subsidize "unnecessary" frame rate performance just to appease game-players. And that perspective is as valid as yours.
cmaier
Apr 12, 08:56 AM
As a typical consumer, same as a prosumer, or pro -- speed. For example, backing up your iDevice, importing big megapixel photos and HD videos will be a whole lot quicker.
It will also make connections easier as TB can handled video, audio, and data in the same cable.
It's amazing how people who hang out at a site dedicated to Apple don't really know anything about Apple R&D. This is so old news. But here for your edification:
http://www.intel.com/technology/io/thunderbolt/index.htm
Take hard note of the sentence: "Developed by Intel (under the code name Light Peak), and brought to market with technical collaboration from Apple."
That doesn't say anything remotely similar to "envisioned by apple.". In fact, it suggests the opposite - intel thought of it, and Apple helped "bring it to market."
It will also make connections easier as TB can handled video, audio, and data in the same cable.
It's amazing how people who hang out at a site dedicated to Apple don't really know anything about Apple R&D. This is so old news. But here for your edification:
http://www.intel.com/technology/io/thunderbolt/index.htm
Take hard note of the sentence: "Developed by Intel (under the code name Light Peak), and brought to market with technical collaboration from Apple."
That doesn't say anything remotely similar to "envisioned by apple.". In fact, it suggests the opposite - intel thought of it, and Apple helped "bring it to market."
Chupa Chupa
Apr 12, 07:45 AM
A dumb question (probably?):
I am not a video expert; not a music producer; not a sound engineer; no relation with servers, whatsoever.
So from that perspective, what is in store for me with respect to thunderbold?
- A normal consumer
I am not a strict normal consumer but I guess 99% of the world is.
As a typical consumer, same as a prosumer, or pro -- speed. For example, backing up your iDevice, importing big megapixel photos and HD videos will be a whole lot quicker.
It will also make connections easier as TB can handled video, audio, and data in the same cable.
Citation needed.
It's amazing how people who hang out at a site dedicated to Apple don't really know anything about Apple R&D. This is so old news. But here for your edification:
http://www.intel.com/technology/io/thunderbolt/index.htm
Take hard note of the sentence: "Developed by Intel (under the code name Light Peak), and brought to market with technical collaboration from Apple."
I am not a video expert; not a music producer; not a sound engineer; no relation with servers, whatsoever.
So from that perspective, what is in store for me with respect to thunderbold?
- A normal consumer
I am not a strict normal consumer but I guess 99% of the world is.
As a typical consumer, same as a prosumer, or pro -- speed. For example, backing up your iDevice, importing big megapixel photos and HD videos will be a whole lot quicker.
It will also make connections easier as TB can handled video, audio, and data in the same cable.
Citation needed.
It's amazing how people who hang out at a site dedicated to Apple don't really know anything about Apple R&D. This is so old news. But here for your edification:
http://www.intel.com/technology/io/thunderbolt/index.htm
Take hard note of the sentence: "Developed by Intel (under the code name Light Peak), and brought to market with technical collaboration from Apple."
Banyan Bruce
Mar 31, 01:53 PM
The brown leather looks hideous..if I'd wanted a leather calendar, I'd buy one. :confused:
Even worst than the awful wood background that appears in several apps. :mad:
Reacent Post
Even worst than the awful wood background that appears in several apps. :mad:
0 comments:
Post a Comment