WildCowboy
Jul 10, 02:58 PM
I think I need to start wearing glasses!
I could have sworn that the title was in regards to a Macrumors Page 3 unveiling.
I will now pay closer attention!
You and Westside_guy should get together...see post #24 in this thread. Then go see post #27.
I could have sworn that the title was in regards to a Macrumors Page 3 unveiling.
I will now pay closer attention!
You and Westside_guy should get together...see post #24 in this thread. Then go see post #27.
damson34
Apr 16, 12:11 AM
OS X is Unix, it is not Unix-like much like Linux.
It is the real deal, Unix '03 certified and all. The BSD userland qualifies as genuine Unix and the kernel provides the entire required POSIX syscall interfaces to pass the certification tests :
http://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/register/brand3581.htm
So yes, in a sense, OS X is built on top of Unix, NeXT's implementation of it which happens to use a Berkeley userland and a Carnegie made Mach kernel.
I'm pretty sure they probably got certified to call it Unix because even non tech people have at least heard the name Unix instead of Mach/BSD.
It is the real deal, Unix '03 certified and all. The BSD userland qualifies as genuine Unix and the kernel provides the entire required POSIX syscall interfaces to pass the certification tests :
http://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/register/brand3581.htm
So yes, in a sense, OS X is built on top of Unix, NeXT's implementation of it which happens to use a Berkeley userland and a Carnegie made Mach kernel.
I'm pretty sure they probably got certified to call it Unix because even non tech people have at least heard the name Unix instead of Mach/BSD.
COMtnBiker
Feb 1, 09:29 PM
these "Post your last purchase" threads are addicting. Interesting to see what people are out buying. :D
Bought a used cyclocross bike yesterday. Any bikers here?
http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j192/schmed123/redline.jpg
Bought a used cyclocross bike yesterday. Any bikers here?
http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j192/schmed123/redline.jpg
argopelter
Jun 7, 06:04 PM
As usual American's (yeah I'm American) love to blame someone for their own responsibility. It's so weird how people on here fight for freedom from the lockdowns that Apple puts on it's developers, freedoms from the limitations and restrictions Apple puts on the iPhone (hence why people jailbreak). Yet when a parent doesn't take accountability for their absence of judgement and legal obligation to be responsible for their child, everyone goes off on Apple for not having the protections in place to prevent this?
What people want is more choice. They're not asking Apple to disable app purchases by default, just put in some simple safeguards that make mistakes like this less likely.
You really believe that failing to log out should be a $1000 mistake? For an app they'll never use? What if the app cost $10,000? $100,000? $1 million? Would they need to go take out a loan and pay spend the rest of their lives paying off the app loan? It's a good thing Apple disagrees with you.
A
What people want is more choice. They're not asking Apple to disable app purchases by default, just put in some simple safeguards that make mistakes like this less likely.
You really believe that failing to log out should be a $1000 mistake? For an app they'll never use? What if the app cost $10,000? $100,000? $1 million? Would they need to go take out a loan and pay spend the rest of their lives paying off the app loan? It's a good thing Apple disagrees with you.
A
Glassman
Aug 15, 02:15 PM
Aww, no more blue filling up URL bar in Safari?
I question the same, I liked that a lot, hope it's configurable :( and what about the classical popping sidebars? I don't like the way new Preview handles them inside the window and it seems like this is the way of future, how sad :( I'm not very fond of Mail styled buttons, probably the only Mac design element I don't like very much..
I question the same, I liked that a lot, hope it's configurable :( and what about the classical popping sidebars? I don't like the way new Preview handles them inside the window and it seems like this is the way of future, how sad :( I'm not very fond of Mail styled buttons, probably the only Mac design element I don't like very much..
FX4568
Apr 19, 04:54 PM
These are all random/nonsensical figures you've made up FX4568. Outside of gaming, there are prescious few apps that will be affected by a 30% decrease in GPU.
This will be even more true as Apple becomes better at optimising for Grand Central dispatch (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Central_Dispatch). As an example the new Final Cut Pro X is said to optimise and scale well across all sizes of systems. I'd expect a much faster processor to 'soak up' the GPU drop in this instance.
No. Outside of gaming, a larger proportion of processing is done in the CPU than the GPU, and improving the CPU will yield greater benefits.
You can only really talk for yourself and others in this thread that subscribe to that opinion. What evidence to you have that the majority would notice?
I would expect that most MBA owners aren't hardcore gamers - it's just not that sort of machine. Medium power graphic uses, like productivity apps or watching movies wouldn't be noticeably impacted.
Of course, I don't have any figures to back up that belief either. ;)
Well, I wish I had a program to back up such GPU CPU usage, but I do not, so whether you believe my point is up to you.
I have NO idea as of how GCD affects GPU. The only thing that my mind connected the GDP to a GPU is when the GPU has an Open CL, Open CL is like GDP but not quite. GDP can be summarized as "GCD lifts the programmer from the burden of dealing with shared memory, threads, locks and semaphores which usually results in a great amount of pain." GCD does not direct GPU burden into the CPU. If it did, why doesnt Apple further continue on this technology? Wouldn't it be more efficient to Apple to develop this technology so far that GPUs are obsolete and instead of placing GPUs in a system, they could use extra battery? or extra RAM? GDP only takes advantage of multi core systems, but it certainly does not take the burden of GPU.
If it does, I would honestly like to know, as knowledge is always good.
Yea, I see the point where you are coming from. Neither of us know whether or not MBA owners have bought it for mild gaming or not, but hardcore gamers are certainly not in the radar of MBA buyers. But do not confuse hardcore gamers with games that tend to fall in the "hardcores." Almost all games could be run in MBA, of course few of them wont. But as of 90% of games, the 320M will. Again, do I have numbers to back it up? I certainly dont, but there was a chart somewhere that compared over 30 games with 320m and Intel 3000HD used in MBP 13", and the 13" could play less than the 320m ones. Why do I keep up bringing games as GPU comparisons? Because as my lack of knowledge shows, games are the ones that stress the most out of GPUs in my usage.
This will be even more true as Apple becomes better at optimising for Grand Central dispatch (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Central_Dispatch). As an example the new Final Cut Pro X is said to optimise and scale well across all sizes of systems. I'd expect a much faster processor to 'soak up' the GPU drop in this instance.
No. Outside of gaming, a larger proportion of processing is done in the CPU than the GPU, and improving the CPU will yield greater benefits.
You can only really talk for yourself and others in this thread that subscribe to that opinion. What evidence to you have that the majority would notice?
I would expect that most MBA owners aren't hardcore gamers - it's just not that sort of machine. Medium power graphic uses, like productivity apps or watching movies wouldn't be noticeably impacted.
Of course, I don't have any figures to back up that belief either. ;)
Well, I wish I had a program to back up such GPU CPU usage, but I do not, so whether you believe my point is up to you.
I have NO idea as of how GCD affects GPU. The only thing that my mind connected the GDP to a GPU is when the GPU has an Open CL, Open CL is like GDP but not quite. GDP can be summarized as "GCD lifts the programmer from the burden of dealing with shared memory, threads, locks and semaphores which usually results in a great amount of pain." GCD does not direct GPU burden into the CPU. If it did, why doesnt Apple further continue on this technology? Wouldn't it be more efficient to Apple to develop this technology so far that GPUs are obsolete and instead of placing GPUs in a system, they could use extra battery? or extra RAM? GDP only takes advantage of multi core systems, but it certainly does not take the burden of GPU.
If it does, I would honestly like to know, as knowledge is always good.
Yea, I see the point where you are coming from. Neither of us know whether or not MBA owners have bought it for mild gaming or not, but hardcore gamers are certainly not in the radar of MBA buyers. But do not confuse hardcore gamers with games that tend to fall in the "hardcores." Almost all games could be run in MBA, of course few of them wont. But as of 90% of games, the 320M will. Again, do I have numbers to back it up? I certainly dont, but there was a chart somewhere that compared over 30 games with 320m and Intel 3000HD used in MBP 13", and the 13" could play less than the 320m ones. Why do I keep up bringing games as GPU comparisons? Because as my lack of knowledge shows, games are the ones that stress the most out of GPUs in my usage.
Dbrown
Apr 19, 01:35 AM
Apple would get slaughtered if it entered the TV market. In order to compete with the big boys apple needs to actually own facilities that manufacture flat panels unless it wants to compete on the bottom end with vizio at walmart.
Aduntu
May 2, 03:28 AM
Will you keep Apple outta this? :d
That's impossible. She's the Apple laday. :D
That's impossible. She's the Apple laday. :D
Animalk
Oct 26, 08:42 PM
Anyone know if their is any work being done to put the OpenCL foundation (introduced with Snow Leopard for the Mac world) to good use?
Is anyone on top of the Grand Central and OpenCL scene able to chime in on this?
Is anyone on top of the Grand Central and OpenCL scene able to chime in on this?
meowtown
Apr 28, 06:19 PM
If you look really closely, you can see there is no difference. White stands out more than black, so really what you're seeing is the front face of the phone adding to the width because of this two dimensional perspective. The front face of black iPhone is visible too, it just isn't noticeable in front of that background. Look closely.
MacRumoron
Jul 24, 06:56 PM
after buying the regular mighty mouse, i will definitely not be buying this one :mad:
it is just way too uncomfortable for me
it is just way too uncomfortable for me
Pillar
Sep 13, 10:34 PM
magic trackpad. just set it up and i'm liking it so far.
Doylem
Apr 13, 03:59 AM
Harry the Herdwick says "Hi"...
http://img43.imageshack.us/img43/1413/herdwick.jpg
http://img43.imageshack.us/img43/1413/herdwick.jpg
FloatingBones
Nov 20, 01:03 AM
I don't need to do squat guy.
If you don't address those very good reasons, your argument won't be very convincing. We do not want the CPU suck, the identity leaking, the UI inconsistencies, and the very real risk of "zero day" Adobe bugs.
WTF do I care about your reasons for wanting to take away my choice to use Flash? I don't.
In other words, you are not competent to carry on a rational discussion. You're just here to vent.
It's not about "propping up" flash, it's about being able to access TODAY'S Internet, not hoping some day that we won't need Flash.
Users of those 120M+ devices don't have to hope. They are already free of Flash!
We just want to use the Internet unfettered by Steve Jobs playing the part of a Communist Dictator.
The analogy makes no sense. Nobody is forcing you to use any Apple product.
If you really want the "full web experience" of zero-day Adobe bugs, get an Android phone. Note: Android phones were vulnerable to the last zero-day Adobe bug. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
The only reasons I see from you are excuses to praise Steve.
The fact that I can't catch zero-day Adobe attacks on my iPhone is a great reason to praise Apple's decision.
which does NOTHING to make other Flash functions work, BTW, leaving many sites useless even so
Do tell: what exact sites are you talking about? What exact legacy flash applications are running on those sites to which you can find no substitute?
It's a drop in the ocean compared to the world at large nor should they have to be held hostage by Steve Jobs whose sole goal in life is to get you to pay him for every little thing you do in this world.
Nobody is holding a gun to your head. Nobody is holding you hostage.
If you don't like the choices that Apple made, then ditch your iOS device and get an Android. Simple.
He wants to push his warped agendas and ring every last cent out of you no matter how inconvenient it might be to you.
This is the first little lie in your rant. The iOS users don't find it inconvenient. If Flash were so damn important to them, they would have bought some device that could run Flash.
The people who bought those 120M+ devices disagree with you.
He wants to force the destruction of flash by denying his customers access to a large percentage of the world's web sites all the time while lying about iOS devices being able to access the 'real' or 'full' Internet.
This is the second little lie. Apple did provide a choice: they approved the SkyFire App. They didn't have to do that.
Apple has also announced they will approve Flash Apps using Adobe's cross-compiler for iOS. If there actually are crucial Flash apps -- you haven't named a single specific one so far -- the owners of those apps should be able to easily cross-compile their apps for the iOS App Store.
if you don't have Flash, you don't have the full Internet.
And that is the third little lie. Flash is a proprietary and legacy platform. It's on the way down now.
Even Adobe has acknowledged that a Flash-only choice is a bankrupt strategy (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999). After websites start offering their content with an open standard, you've gotta ask: what exactly is the value in continuing to prop up Flash?
I just want innovative products. That is what Steve is good at. That doesn't mean I want his arrogant ego side pushing those products with restrictions that have nothing to do with the technology and only to do with Steve's need to be a control freak.
And this is number four. If those words were true, you would be able to explain why my four huge concerns for running Flash in iOS Safari are not valid. But you can't do that!
If the flash experience is so great, please tell us what exact Flash sites are you talking about? What exact legacy flash applications are running on those sites to which you can find no substitute on your iOS device?
If you don't address those very good reasons, your argument won't be very convincing. We do not want the CPU suck, the identity leaking, the UI inconsistencies, and the very real risk of "zero day" Adobe bugs.
WTF do I care about your reasons for wanting to take away my choice to use Flash? I don't.
In other words, you are not competent to carry on a rational discussion. You're just here to vent.
It's not about "propping up" flash, it's about being able to access TODAY'S Internet, not hoping some day that we won't need Flash.
Users of those 120M+ devices don't have to hope. They are already free of Flash!
We just want to use the Internet unfettered by Steve Jobs playing the part of a Communist Dictator.
The analogy makes no sense. Nobody is forcing you to use any Apple product.
If you really want the "full web experience" of zero-day Adobe bugs, get an Android phone. Note: Android phones were vulnerable to the last zero-day Adobe bug. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
The only reasons I see from you are excuses to praise Steve.
The fact that I can't catch zero-day Adobe attacks on my iPhone is a great reason to praise Apple's decision.
which does NOTHING to make other Flash functions work, BTW, leaving many sites useless even so
Do tell: what exact sites are you talking about? What exact legacy flash applications are running on those sites to which you can find no substitute?
It's a drop in the ocean compared to the world at large nor should they have to be held hostage by Steve Jobs whose sole goal in life is to get you to pay him for every little thing you do in this world.
Nobody is holding a gun to your head. Nobody is holding you hostage.
If you don't like the choices that Apple made, then ditch your iOS device and get an Android. Simple.
He wants to push his warped agendas and ring every last cent out of you no matter how inconvenient it might be to you.
This is the first little lie in your rant. The iOS users don't find it inconvenient. If Flash were so damn important to them, they would have bought some device that could run Flash.
The people who bought those 120M+ devices disagree with you.
He wants to force the destruction of flash by denying his customers access to a large percentage of the world's web sites all the time while lying about iOS devices being able to access the 'real' or 'full' Internet.
This is the second little lie. Apple did provide a choice: they approved the SkyFire App. They didn't have to do that.
Apple has also announced they will approve Flash Apps using Adobe's cross-compiler for iOS. If there actually are crucial Flash apps -- you haven't named a single specific one so far -- the owners of those apps should be able to easily cross-compile their apps for the iOS App Store.
if you don't have Flash, you don't have the full Internet.
And that is the third little lie. Flash is a proprietary and legacy platform. It's on the way down now.
Even Adobe has acknowledged that a Flash-only choice is a bankrupt strategy (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999). After websites start offering their content with an open standard, you've gotta ask: what exactly is the value in continuing to prop up Flash?
I just want innovative products. That is what Steve is good at. That doesn't mean I want his arrogant ego side pushing those products with restrictions that have nothing to do with the technology and only to do with Steve's need to be a control freak.
And this is number four. If those words were true, you would be able to explain why my four huge concerns for running Flash in iOS Safari are not valid. But you can't do that!
If the flash experience is so great, please tell us what exact Flash sites are you talking about? What exact legacy flash applications are running on those sites to which you can find no substitute on your iOS device?
Surely
Jan 27, 05:40 PM
To add to my post-workout recovery drink:
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41HQMqZSk3L._AA300_PIbundle-1,TopRight,0,0AA300_SH20_.jpghttp://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41H0Rwu8BvL._AA300_PIbundle-1,TopRight,0,0AA300_SH20_.jpg
My post-workout recovery drink:
http://www.jonnyrash.com/img/sandbox/organic-valley-chocolate-milk.jpg
After researching, I discovered that chocolate milk has the same carb to protein ratio that expensive recovery drink mixes have (such as the P90X Recovery Drink). So, instead of spending around $60/month, I've elected to go with the chocolate milk, and to add a few supplements that are important for muscle recovery (which are found in those expensive drinks). Any excuse to drink chocolate milk is a good one.
SMRT
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41HQMqZSk3L._AA300_PIbundle-1,TopRight,0,0AA300_SH20_.jpghttp://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41H0Rwu8BvL._AA300_PIbundle-1,TopRight,0,0AA300_SH20_.jpg
My post-workout recovery drink:
http://www.jonnyrash.com/img/sandbox/organic-valley-chocolate-milk.jpg
After researching, I discovered that chocolate milk has the same carb to protein ratio that expensive recovery drink mixes have (such as the P90X Recovery Drink). So, instead of spending around $60/month, I've elected to go with the chocolate milk, and to add a few supplements that are important for muscle recovery (which are found in those expensive drinks). Any excuse to drink chocolate milk is a good one.
SMRT
Evangelion
Jul 25, 11:14 AM
2 Mac Mini should still be very small
Imagine two Mac Mini back-to-back. That is how much desk-space the tower would consume. Now, it could be as high as four Mini's stacked on top of each other, so the volume would be eight times as much as the Mini has, but the actual space needed on the desktop would be just two Mini's worth.
Imagine two Mac Mini back-to-back. That is how much desk-space the tower would consume. Now, it could be as high as four Mini's stacked on top of each other, so the volume would be eight times as much as the Mini has, but the actual space needed on the desktop would be just two Mini's worth.
Sambo110
Apr 15, 08:03 PM
Only updated my iPad to 4.3, was too lazy to update my iPod Touch, but with all these battery drain issues I might hold off, 4.3 doesn't have anything I need for my iPod.
ladymacintosh
Apr 22, 04:53 PM
I'm not digging this. I think it will be too hard to hold onto being that thin and the prospect of pad charging leads me to wonder how on earth you go about charging it in a car? Doesn't sound very convenient. Not to mention, how long of a battery life could this thing possibly have?
*LTD*
Apr 22, 05:00 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; de-de) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
nah there r better looking HTC out there by now, the new one they got (forgot its name) with the slide out keyboard is pure sex ^^
If it has a slide-out keyboard it's already fail.
nah there r better looking HTC out there by now, the new one they got (forgot its name) with the slide out keyboard is pure sex ^^
If it has a slide-out keyboard it's already fail.
PBF
Apr 14, 08:30 AM
Someone at iPhone Dev Forums said that iOS Simulator in Lion will gain ability to download/run apps.
That pretty much means that another "groundbreaking" feature in Lion is ability to run iOS apps (besides iOS Simulator).
That pretty much means that another "groundbreaking" feature in Lion is ability to run iOS apps (besides iOS Simulator).
MacVault
Oct 24, 08:08 AM
Here comes the moaning.......... ;)
Yea... WHERE THE [censored] ARE THE MACBOOKS?! I want a Core 2 Duo MacBook, not MacBook Pro :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:
Yea... WHERE THE [censored] ARE THE MACBOOKS?! I want a Core 2 Duo MacBook, not MacBook Pro :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:
hansiedejong
Jan 27, 10:34 AM
Why? I'd love to buy some Beats headphones. Like the style of it.
johneaston
May 2, 03:40 AM
Because they have to bury him within 24 hours
Why?
Why?
mgguy
May 2, 01:23 AM
Oh yeah, the game is over. This will be seen as Obama doing what Bush could not, no matter what. Everyone at Fox News has to be crying in their beer right now.
No. It's still the economy stupid.
No. It's still the economy stupid.