samcraig
Apr 27, 11:19 AM
News on slashdot.org:
77 Million Accounts Stolen From Playstation Network.
Earth will not stop turning, but I think this is just slightly, slightly worse than a file that shows where you haven't exactly been at some point in the past if someone steals your iPhone.
See title of the thread: "Apple addresses controversy". There is and there never was a problem, but the idiocracy forced Apple to act to end the controversy. Right now, who do you think should worry more, iPhone owners or PS3 owners?
Both are issues. Both are being addressed. Why must someone (you) throw one company under the bus in favor of supporting another. Both had/have issues and both are responding.
77 Million Accounts Stolen From Playstation Network.
Earth will not stop turning, but I think this is just slightly, slightly worse than a file that shows where you haven't exactly been at some point in the past if someone steals your iPhone.
See title of the thread: "Apple addresses controversy". There is and there never was a problem, but the idiocracy forced Apple to act to end the controversy. Right now, who do you think should worry more, iPhone owners or PS3 owners?
Both are issues. Both are being addressed. Why must someone (you) throw one company under the bus in favor of supporting another. Both had/have issues and both are responding.
FF_productions
Aug 15, 09:50 PM
Well, we all knew that the G5 isn't a "bad" chip necessarily.. It's older tech, and I think, wasn't really meant for this kind of work (non-server applications).
Preaching to the choir am I?
I actually want a G5 now that they have started coming down in price. I could get a dual g5 for a pretty good price, it sure is a step up from a Dual G4.
Preaching to the choir am I?
I actually want a G5 now that they have started coming down in price. I could get a dual g5 for a pretty good price, it sure is a step up from a Dual G4.
Tones2
Apr 11, 01:39 PM
Yeah, like all those trailblazing Android tablets that are 1-2 years ahead of the iPad, right? :rolleyes:
I'm talking PHONE. Wait 2 years or so on the tablets and it'll be the same thing. Apple just got too big of a head start on tablets.
Tony
I'm talking PHONE. Wait 2 years or so on the tablets and it'll be the same thing. Apple just got too big of a head start on tablets.
Tony
MacinDoc
Aug 26, 08:39 PM
I agree. But I refuse to buy any "So-Called" MacBook Pro until they have implemented the easy access HD professional feature they put in the MacBook. I would rather buy a C2D MacBook with that feature than ever buy a MBP without it. :mad:
Apple has, on occasion, introduced new or upgraded features on its consumer computers when those computers were refreshed between refresh cycles of their professional computers. For example, at one time, the iMac had a faster SuperDrive than the Power Mac. Of course, with the next refresh of the pro computers, the new/upgraded features seen previously in the consumer products have always been added.
Apple has, on occasion, introduced new or upgraded features on its consumer computers when those computers were refreshed between refresh cycles of their professional computers. For example, at one time, the iMac had a faster SuperDrive than the Power Mac. Of course, with the next refresh of the pro computers, the new/upgraded features seen previously in the consumer products have always been added.
DStaal
Sep 13, 10:03 AM
I'm just wondering if I can drop one of these into an iMac... Are they pin-compatible? Also sort of wondering about a heat issue.
Nope - Different processor archetecture. Even if the pins were the same, the motherboards are different.
Both Clovertown and Woodcrest are 'Xeon' chips, which is a particular processor family. Chips in one processor family may be replaceable with others from that family, but generally different families are not replacable with each other. (Unless specifially designed to do so.)
Also, the iMac is a 32-bit computer, and these are 64-bit chips, reducing any possiblity to zero.
Nope - Different processor archetecture. Even if the pins were the same, the motherboards are different.
Both Clovertown and Woodcrest are 'Xeon' chips, which is a particular processor family. Chips in one processor family may be replaceable with others from that family, but generally different families are not replacable with each other. (Unless specifially designed to do so.)
Also, the iMac is a 32-bit computer, and these are 64-bit chips, reducing any possiblity to zero.
G4er?
Apr 25, 01:41 PM
But the government allows automakers to install black boxes in your car. In which the data could potentially be used against you.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 23, 05:50 PM
Here we have an article laying out the case for non intervention (http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/03/2011322135442593945.html) by a Princeton law professor (emeritus) published by Al Jazeera. A worthy read, and here are two exerpts I've commented on.
In effect, overall historical trends vindicate trust in the dynamics of self-determination, even if short-term disasters may and do occur, and similarly underscores the problematic character of intervention, even given the purest of motivations, which rarely, if ever, exists in world politics.
I find it hard to disagree with this, but watching Gaddafi strongarm his way back into authority is a very bitter pill to swallow - plus, historical trends also suggest that other nations rarely resist the temptation to intervene when they feel they have something to gain by intervention (be it increased political influence, territorial gains, economic interests etc). The current structure of the UN is unable to prevent this. Also, even without direct intervention, the process of self-determination does not exist in a total vaccum. I wonder how the author regards more passive measures such as official censure, economic sanctions, asset-freezing etc etc? Do he consider those to be intereferences to self-determination?
The Charter in Article 2(7) accepts the limitation on UN authority to intervene in matters "essentially within the domestic jurisdiction" of member states unless there is a genuine issue of international peace and security present, which there was not, even in the claim, which was supposedly motivated solely to protect the civilian population of Libya.
But such a claim was patently misleading and disingenuous as the obvious goals, as manifest from the scale and character of military actions taken, were minimally to protect the armed rebels from being defeated, and possibly destroyed, and maximally, to achieve a regime change resulting in a new governing leadership that was friendly to the West, including buying fully into its liberal economic geopolitical policy compass.
Using a slightly altered language, the UN Charter embedded a social contract with its membership that privileged the politics of self-determination and was heavily weighted against the politics of intervention.
Neither position is absolute, but what seems to have happened with respect to Libya is that intervention was privileged and self-determination cast aside.
It is an instance of normatively dubious practise trumping the legal/moral ethos of containing geopolitical discretion with binding rules governing the use of force and the duty of non-intervention.
We do not know yet what will happen in Libya, but we do know enough to oppose such a precedent that exhibits so many unfortunate characteristics.
It is time to restore the global social contract between territorial sovereign states and the organised international community, which not only corresponds with the outlawry of aggressive war but also reflect the movement of history in support of the soft power struggles of the non-Western peoples of the world.
I do agree with him that it would be foolish not to recognize that the ultimate goal here is - yet again - regime change regardless of what the official statements and resolutions state.
But while the author adheres to a legal argument, reality is more expansive in my mind. Isn't the UN, by it's very nature, interventionalist on some level? Also, at what point does outside influence affect "self-determination" to the point that it is no longer that? Surely there will always be outside influence - but when does it interfere with self-determination?
Of course, all of these considerations are irrelevant if you are against the concept of the UN or even foreign alliances, as a vocal minority of conservatives are in the US. I imagine they'd prefer to let the "free market" somehow decide what happens.
In effect, overall historical trends vindicate trust in the dynamics of self-determination, even if short-term disasters may and do occur, and similarly underscores the problematic character of intervention, even given the purest of motivations, which rarely, if ever, exists in world politics.
I find it hard to disagree with this, but watching Gaddafi strongarm his way back into authority is a very bitter pill to swallow - plus, historical trends also suggest that other nations rarely resist the temptation to intervene when they feel they have something to gain by intervention (be it increased political influence, territorial gains, economic interests etc). The current structure of the UN is unable to prevent this. Also, even without direct intervention, the process of self-determination does not exist in a total vaccum. I wonder how the author regards more passive measures such as official censure, economic sanctions, asset-freezing etc etc? Do he consider those to be intereferences to self-determination?
The Charter in Article 2(7) accepts the limitation on UN authority to intervene in matters "essentially within the domestic jurisdiction" of member states unless there is a genuine issue of international peace and security present, which there was not, even in the claim, which was supposedly motivated solely to protect the civilian population of Libya.
But such a claim was patently misleading and disingenuous as the obvious goals, as manifest from the scale and character of military actions taken, were minimally to protect the armed rebels from being defeated, and possibly destroyed, and maximally, to achieve a regime change resulting in a new governing leadership that was friendly to the West, including buying fully into its liberal economic geopolitical policy compass.
Using a slightly altered language, the UN Charter embedded a social contract with its membership that privileged the politics of self-determination and was heavily weighted against the politics of intervention.
Neither position is absolute, but what seems to have happened with respect to Libya is that intervention was privileged and self-determination cast aside.
It is an instance of normatively dubious practise trumping the legal/moral ethos of containing geopolitical discretion with binding rules governing the use of force and the duty of non-intervention.
We do not know yet what will happen in Libya, but we do know enough to oppose such a precedent that exhibits so many unfortunate characteristics.
It is time to restore the global social contract between territorial sovereign states and the organised international community, which not only corresponds with the outlawry of aggressive war but also reflect the movement of history in support of the soft power struggles of the non-Western peoples of the world.
I do agree with him that it would be foolish not to recognize that the ultimate goal here is - yet again - regime change regardless of what the official statements and resolutions state.
But while the author adheres to a legal argument, reality is more expansive in my mind. Isn't the UN, by it's very nature, interventionalist on some level? Also, at what point does outside influence affect "self-determination" to the point that it is no longer that? Surely there will always be outside influence - but when does it interfere with self-determination?
Of course, all of these considerations are irrelevant if you are against the concept of the UN or even foreign alliances, as a vocal minority of conservatives are in the US. I imagine they'd prefer to let the "free market" somehow decide what happens.
littleman23408
Dec 6, 03:00 PM
but at least you don't have to watch it
Its hard for me to watch, because I want to race, I don't want to watch the driver race for me, lol. I was very tempted to exit the race and go back to a-spec. I will definately have to not watch the next time I try one.
Its hard for me to watch, because I want to race, I don't want to watch the driver race for me, lol. I was very tempted to exit the race and go back to a-spec. I will definately have to not watch the next time I try one.
hadleydb
Aug 17, 01:15 PM
I need one... or is it more of a want? Need.:eek:
Hellhammer
Aug 8, 04:29 AM
I bought GT PSP and its as if the developers actively tried to suck all the enjoyment out of the series.
I've seen several people saying that it's starting to be a car encyclopedia rather than an enjoyable racing game. I kinda agree with that. My last experience with GT is GT2 on PS1 I think but I'm looking forward on this game. Hopefully it will be what I expect, a good, solid driving game. I hope they have spent time on the actual driving too, not just with the cars and 3D stuff etc
I've seen several people saying that it's starting to be a car encyclopedia rather than an enjoyable racing game. I kinda agree with that. My last experience with GT is GT2 on PS1 I think but I'm looking forward on this game. Hopefully it will be what I expect, a good, solid driving game. I hope they have spent time on the actual driving too, not just with the cars and 3D stuff etc
Stella
Aug 7, 04:43 PM
Is Leopard going to take advantage of the 64 bit Dual G5?
Whats the point? Its history.
My guess is, that its how Tiger is now.
Whats the point? Its history.
My guess is, that its how Tiger is now.
rockthecasbah
Nov 28, 06:37 PM
There's a reason and i pay for my music and don't just steal off of P2P sites!!! I doubt this would ever happen since the iTunes Music Store / Apple is so powerful that having Universal not be hosted would hurt them more than Apple. Record labels are just sickening. Someone who buys an iPod isn't even necessarily going to buy music in general (or at least from Universal) anyway, so their idea that they are entitled to a cut of the profits is just unfounded.
dgree03
Apr 6, 03:48 PM
But hey, haven't you heard, Honeycomb is a real tablet OS. (Whatever the heck that means.)
Google must have used that line in a PowerPoint somewhere because I see it regurgitated verbatim on every single iPad vs. Honeycomb thread.
The Google brainwashing continues. ;)
What you and every other non-informed are missing is the Xoom lack of apps is a not really a con for 2 reason.
1. Unlike iOS, ALL APPS, in the android market scale to fit the 1280x800 screen. No x1 or x2 crap. So I can still ENJOY my facebooke app on a larger screen. Nothing is lost. "optimized for tablets" gives me the same information just with a different interface. So long has my twitter app or facebooke or squeezebox app scale so i can see all. I am a happy camper.
2. Unlike iOS i would argue that the xoom needs LESS apps to do functions that take iOS 3 or 4 apps to do. I dont need goodreader or the like because I have a native file system. I dont need skyfire because i have flash. I dont need to open in here, open in there. Every app can have access to each other...
Google must have used that line in a PowerPoint somewhere because I see it regurgitated verbatim on every single iPad vs. Honeycomb thread.
The Google brainwashing continues. ;)
What you and every other non-informed are missing is the Xoom lack of apps is a not really a con for 2 reason.
1. Unlike iOS, ALL APPS, in the android market scale to fit the 1280x800 screen. No x1 or x2 crap. So I can still ENJOY my facebooke app on a larger screen. Nothing is lost. "optimized for tablets" gives me the same information just with a different interface. So long has my twitter app or facebooke or squeezebox app scale so i can see all. I am a happy camper.
2. Unlike iOS i would argue that the xoom needs LESS apps to do functions that take iOS 3 or 4 apps to do. I dont need goodreader or the like because I have a native file system. I dont need skyfire because i have flash. I dont need to open in here, open in there. Every app can have access to each other...
Hellhammer
Dec 7, 08:49 AM
Anyone know where to get a fast car? My level isn't enough for the good ones in store (only 21 atm, need 23) but all my opponents have +900hp ~700kg cars so my 840hp Lambo just doesn't cut it anymore. Have around 1.8m cash plus 40 cars so money isn't an issue but I just can't find any :(
Raidersmojo
Jun 16, 05:33 PM
I work for radioshack and they were doing a nationwide release at the same time for iphone 4, because when we did the evo release, the east coast took all the phones before the west got anything.
this time they did a major release at 12:00 Central. totally screwed everyone since everyone waited for 1 to generate pins.
luckily, got two for customers, and four for myself (had my dad buy them)
two 32 Gigs and two 16's. I hope they come because our manager was talking about how potentially we might not get the phone.
this time they did a major release at 12:00 Central. totally screwed everyone since everyone waited for 1 to generate pins.
luckily, got two for customers, and four for myself (had my dad buy them)
two 32 Gigs and two 16's. I hope they come because our manager was talking about how potentially we might not get the phone.
caspersoong
Apr 13, 04:53 AM
The longer the wait, the less likely for my family to buy it.
spinko
Jul 15, 06:25 AM
For what it's worth, Alienware's top-of-the-line ALX series desktops (actually, all of their desktops, I believe) have the power supply at the top, too. I know some will scoff but they are lauded for their gaming performance and they brag about their cooling technology.
-Squire
well, that looks a real mess.. but I suppose it's a good idea since heated air tends to rise.. :-)
-Squire
well, that looks a real mess.. but I suppose it's a good idea since heated air tends to rise.. :-)
LethalWolfe
Apr 10, 10:31 PM
Unless, like I posted earlier, the iPad app functions as a UI for the main application over the network. The Mac (or cluster of macs) takes care of the heavy lifting, and the iPad is used to make edits remotely, and broadcast to HDTV's.
AirPlay & AirEdit.
If you had a cluster of Mac Pro's using thunderbolt (or whatever...ethernet, fibre, etc) to talk to each other, and you used the iPad as a remote UI, you could edit, compress, and broadcast from anywhere.
Apple has all the pieces in place to do this. AirPlay, AppleTV, iPad, iTunes as a media hub for all the devices to communicate, Qmaster, etc...
This has been a long time coming. I remember in 2006-2007 hearing rumors that Apple was working on a tablet like controller for logic. It was to be used to edit the timeline, or act as a virtual mixer, etc. This has been brewing for years, and I think it's almost a reality.
Avid demo'd basically this last year at NAB. IIRC all the media was on servers in Virginia and the presenter did the demonstration on a laptop using a web app.
Lethal
AirPlay & AirEdit.
If you had a cluster of Mac Pro's using thunderbolt (or whatever...ethernet, fibre, etc) to talk to each other, and you used the iPad as a remote UI, you could edit, compress, and broadcast from anywhere.
Apple has all the pieces in place to do this. AirPlay, AppleTV, iPad, iTunes as a media hub for all the devices to communicate, Qmaster, etc...
This has been a long time coming. I remember in 2006-2007 hearing rumors that Apple was working on a tablet like controller for logic. It was to be used to edit the timeline, or act as a virtual mixer, etc. This has been brewing for years, and I think it's almost a reality.
Avid demo'd basically this last year at NAB. IIRC all the media was on servers in Virginia and the presenter did the demonstration on a laptop using a web app.
Lethal
0815
Mar 31, 05:28 PM
The problem that has always existed, not just with Android, is that the carriers customize the OS, release it with a phone, and you can forget about getting any updates for it. Maybe one update for the lifetime of the device, if you are lucky. My HTC TouchPro 2 has only seen in almost 2 years just one update to WM 6.5, and it was not even close to the most current revision at that time.
This just shows that carriers and manufacturers don't want to keep maintaining their phones. They want to sell and forget, and push a new model out the door.
Sad, but true... :(
Correct - and that is what Apple realized and didn't allow and got bashed for.
This just shows that carriers and manufacturers don't want to keep maintaining their phones. They want to sell and forget, and push a new model out the door.
Sad, but true... :(
Correct - and that is what Apple realized and didn't allow and got bashed for.
gnasher729
Aug 17, 12:59 PM
The interesting thing to note from the Anandtech review is that to saturate a 2 core setup, all you need is one program. To saturate a quad, you need to be doing a bit more at the same time. To saturate an octo, you need to be doing a hell of a lot of things at the same time.
No, you only need software that doesn't think multiple processors = two processors. Early versions of Handbrake used only two processors, new version uses four. Photoshop will use as many processors as there are. Other applications will follow.
No, you only need software that doesn't think multiple processors = two processors. Early versions of Handbrake used only two processors, new version uses four. Photoshop will use as many processors as there are. Other applications will follow.
MikeD23nu
Apr 6, 03:29 PM
Perfect day for this news....
I have a new 13" MBA sitting here at my desk unopened...just dropped off from FedEx today. I'm debating whether or not to just return it and wait for the refresh or be happy with what I got.
I'm a very light user..web, email, iTunes, sync iPhone and iPad. Do I really need the Sandy Bridge power..probably not but I dont want to have the "old not so shiny ball" come June (as the rumors suggest).
Any help from the MR community is greatly appreciated!
I have a new 13" MBA sitting here at my desk unopened...just dropped off from FedEx today. I'm debating whether or not to just return it and wait for the refresh or be happy with what I got.
I'm a very light user..web, email, iTunes, sync iPhone and iPad. Do I really need the Sandy Bridge power..probably not but I dont want to have the "old not so shiny ball" come June (as the rumors suggest).
Any help from the MR community is greatly appreciated!
Cowinacape
Jul 14, 07:35 PM
All this talk about gamers, and video cards, wonder if they will intro a SLi Macpro *wipes away drool* :D
skunk
Apr 27, 04:51 PM
The bigger deal here is the tendency of some fathers to name their kids the EXACT same name they have and add a "2nd". I've always thought that practice couldn't be stupidier. :PIt's just like kings, innit?
edenwaith
Jul 14, 04:39 PM
2003: "In 12 months, we'll be at 3GHz".
Mid 2006: "I want to talk about 2.66GHz" although 4 cores running at 2.66GHz (Yum! :D ).
Kind of odd/funny how we seem to be going backwards in processor speeds. Instead of 3.6 GHz Pentiums, we are looking at 2.x GHz Intel Cores. It would be interesting to see how well a single Core processor matches up to PowerPC, or a Pentium, or AMD.
However, I am finding one of my predicitions finally happen...it appears that a ceiling has been currently met on how fast the current line of processors can go, and now we are relying on multiple cores/processors to distribute work, instead of relying on just one fast chip.
So when will we start seeing 8 chips in a computer? Perhaps this will become the new measurement...not processor speeds, but the number of processors (or cores).
Mid 2006: "I want to talk about 2.66GHz" although 4 cores running at 2.66GHz (Yum! :D ).
Kind of odd/funny how we seem to be going backwards in processor speeds. Instead of 3.6 GHz Pentiums, we are looking at 2.x GHz Intel Cores. It would be interesting to see how well a single Core processor matches up to PowerPC, or a Pentium, or AMD.
However, I am finding one of my predicitions finally happen...it appears that a ceiling has been currently met on how fast the current line of processors can go, and now we are relying on multiple cores/processors to distribute work, instead of relying on just one fast chip.
So when will we start seeing 8 chips in a computer? Perhaps this will become the new measurement...not processor speeds, but the number of processors (or cores).
No comments:
Post a Comment