Analog Kid
Apr 6, 02:04 PM
Xoon...
daneoni
Aug 27, 08:01 PM
Do you mean Vista Premium compliance? I'm pretty sure I've seen "Ready for Vista" stickers on plenty of current notebooks featuring GMA950 graphics, for example.
And btw, I have to say "good job" to Apple for doing whatever was necessary to avoid having to put a bunch of goofy decals on their computers. The most amazing thing to me is the number of PC notebook users that leave all those stickers on (I've even seen some people leave the "features" stickers on).
Yeah i never got that either. First thing i do is scrape them off even if i have to use a knife
And btw, I have to say "good job" to Apple for doing whatever was necessary to avoid having to put a bunch of goofy decals on their computers. The most amazing thing to me is the number of PC notebook users that leave all those stickers on (I've even seen some people leave the "features" stickers on).
Yeah i never got that either. First thing i do is scrape them off even if i have to use a knife
shamino
Jul 20, 11:28 AM
Not quite the first. Sun has been shipping a commercial 8-core systems for about a year now.
Yes. This is their UltraSPARC T1 (http://www.sun.com/processors/UltraSPARC-T1/) chip.
The T2000 has all 8 cores on one chip but each core also does four-way hyper threading so they claim 32 hardware threads.
The T1 chip ships in several different configurations. 4-, 6- and 8-cores, at 1.0 or 1.2GHz. All sporting 4 threads per core.
The price for an 8-core T1000 is about $8K.
While this is their least expensive 8-core box, you should point out (for the benefit of everyone else reading this message) that the price is not just for the CPU. It's for a high-end server that includes 8G of RAM, 4 Gigabit Ethernet ports, remote management software, Java Enterprise, and Solaris 10. All in a 1U-high rack chassis.
A system with 8 cores and 8GB RAM burns about 250W.
You are being very misleading here. According to Sun's spec sheet (http://www.sun.com/servers/coolthreads/t1000/specifications.jsp), it has a 300W power supply. Peak power consumption for the entire system is 220W, and typical consumption is 180W.
But those are for the entire system. Sun's page on the UltraSPARC T1 (http://www.sun.com/processors/UltraSPARC-T1/) processor itself says that the CPU (in its 32-thread configuration) consumes 72W. The rest of that power consumption is from parts other than the CPU.
It's also worth noting Intel's Xeon spec sheet (http://www.intel.com/products/processor/xeon/specs.htm), which lists the fastest chips as consuming 130W for the CPU package alone! And that is with only four threads (two cores with 2-way hyperthreading.) I can guarantee you that a system based on one of these will have peak power consumption far greater than 220W.
Yes. This is their UltraSPARC T1 (http://www.sun.com/processors/UltraSPARC-T1/) chip.
The T2000 has all 8 cores on one chip but each core also does four-way hyper threading so they claim 32 hardware threads.
The T1 chip ships in several different configurations. 4-, 6- and 8-cores, at 1.0 or 1.2GHz. All sporting 4 threads per core.
The price for an 8-core T1000 is about $8K.
While this is their least expensive 8-core box, you should point out (for the benefit of everyone else reading this message) that the price is not just for the CPU. It's for a high-end server that includes 8G of RAM, 4 Gigabit Ethernet ports, remote management software, Java Enterprise, and Solaris 10. All in a 1U-high rack chassis.
A system with 8 cores and 8GB RAM burns about 250W.
You are being very misleading here. According to Sun's spec sheet (http://www.sun.com/servers/coolthreads/t1000/specifications.jsp), it has a 300W power supply. Peak power consumption for the entire system is 220W, and typical consumption is 180W.
But those are for the entire system. Sun's page on the UltraSPARC T1 (http://www.sun.com/processors/UltraSPARC-T1/) processor itself says that the CPU (in its 32-thread configuration) consumes 72W. The rest of that power consumption is from parts other than the CPU.
It's also worth noting Intel's Xeon spec sheet (http://www.intel.com/products/processor/xeon/specs.htm), which lists the fastest chips as consuming 130W for the CPU package alone! And that is with only four threads (two cores with 2-way hyperthreading.) I can guarantee you that a system based on one of these will have peak power consumption far greater than 220W.
Tailpike1153
Apr 27, 08:58 AM
I think it was not a bug, nut data waiting to be sent to Apple for profit generating purposes.
But if Apple has been using this acquired data, why on earth is it allowing Google and others to eat away at its mobile & tablet marketshare? Why collect data if it isn't relevant to you business.
But if Apple has been using this acquired data, why on earth is it allowing Google and others to eat away at its mobile & tablet marketshare? Why collect data if it isn't relevant to you business.
gorgeousninja
Mar 22, 08:43 PM
This is just a preview of the future, Android based tablets will clean the iPads clock. Apple made the so-called iPad 2 as a 1.5. Low res camera, not enough RAM, and low res screen. It's going to be a verrrry long 2012 for Apple. Sure it's selling like hot cakes now, but when buyers see tablets that they don't have to stand inline for, that have better equipment and are cheaper ... Apples house of cards will come crashing down around them.
The only strength that Apple has is the app ecosystem; which is why they are going after Amazon for spiting on the sidewalk. They know the world of hurt coming their way.
All hail the unicorn rider!
It's great that you're such a fan of imitators and snake-oil products cos a lot of manufacturers are counting on the fact some people are so gullible.
I know the strategy of throwing enough mud hoping some of it will stick, but you've called 'Fail' on Apple so often that it becomes just a jaded cliche...
maybe next time you could be positive about an Apple product.
Not only would the shock nearly kill us, it might put more people off buying it than the juvenile drama of proclaiming ' a world of hurt'.
ps Oh and you do realize in your post that you've admitted to the app store concept as being an Apple product do you?
That does contradict a lot of the usual haters, so you might want to confer with yourselves on how exactly Android was secretly ahead of Apple on that.
The only strength that Apple has is the app ecosystem; which is why they are going after Amazon for spiting on the sidewalk. They know the world of hurt coming their way.
All hail the unicorn rider!
It's great that you're such a fan of imitators and snake-oil products cos a lot of manufacturers are counting on the fact some people are so gullible.
I know the strategy of throwing enough mud hoping some of it will stick, but you've called 'Fail' on Apple so often that it becomes just a jaded cliche...
maybe next time you could be positive about an Apple product.
Not only would the shock nearly kill us, it might put more people off buying it than the juvenile drama of proclaiming ' a world of hurt'.
ps Oh and you do realize in your post that you've admitted to the app store concept as being an Apple product do you?
That does contradict a lot of the usual haters, so you might want to confer with yourselves on how exactly Android was secretly ahead of Apple on that.
Vercingetorix
Mar 31, 10:33 PM
I completely disagree.
Going open sounded like a great idea in the beginning. Fast forward to today, and manufacturers have used the openness against the platform by creating custom versions of android that aren't readily upgradable.
This has hurt the platform more than 'being open' helped it and google is right to start regulating what can and cannot be done.
I think we're all pretty lucky to have experienced both sides of the spectrum to be honest :)
Whether they're right to start regulating or not, they're still shamless hypocrites. What happened to all the principles that they waved around in the air? Andy Rubin himself said that the "definition of open" was that anyone could download the Android source and do whatever they wanted to it. Now people have to kiss his ring?
Google are the ones who waved the bloody shirt and shrieked about how Android-vs-the-iPhone was about freedom. Just because they're forced to backtrack now doesn't mean it's not blatant hypocrisy.
Going open sounded like a great idea in the beginning. Fast forward to today, and manufacturers have used the openness against the platform by creating custom versions of android that aren't readily upgradable.
This has hurt the platform more than 'being open' helped it and google is right to start regulating what can and cannot be done.
I think we're all pretty lucky to have experienced both sides of the spectrum to be honest :)
Whether they're right to start regulating or not, they're still shamless hypocrites. What happened to all the principles that they waved around in the air? Andy Rubin himself said that the "definition of open" was that anyone could download the Android source and do whatever they wanted to it. Now people have to kiss his ring?
Google are the ones who waved the bloody shirt and shrieked about how Android-vs-the-iPhone was about freedom. Just because they're forced to backtrack now doesn't mean it's not blatant hypocrisy.
ergle2
Sep 20, 02:23 PM
...except that he's a she...a demi-goddess.
She certainly has the attitude of one.
Frequent updates are a good thing. I would not want to stop the march of progress just so I could personally feel better about a little money I spent.
The only real downside I see is that Intel Macs are unlikely to hold their value anywhere near as well as the PPC line did due to the quicker changes we'll see now.
I keep systems til they fall apart, pretty much, but there's quite a few on the various forums who say they always buy and sell 2-3 years later to upgrade.
She certainly has the attitude of one.
Frequent updates are a good thing. I would not want to stop the march of progress just so I could personally feel better about a little money I spent.
The only real downside I see is that Intel Macs are unlikely to hold their value anywhere near as well as the PPC line did due to the quicker changes we'll see now.
I keep systems til they fall apart, pretty much, but there's quite a few on the various forums who say they always buy and sell 2-3 years later to upgrade.
camelsnot
Apr 8, 03:59 AM
You know that no one thinks that way right? I never understood all of these "fanboy" posts saying things that these mysterious "fanyboys" that I've never seen supposedly say.
You must not frequent Apple forums. There are quite a few people who think Apple can do no wrong and twist their own morals and thoughts to justify things that Apple does in these forums. They think they are Apple's personal crusaders. It's sad really, that some people can't think for themselves and they're so blinded by a tech company who could give two craps about them at the end of the day. While Apple does some good things for customers, it's not because they care. It's because they know by doing that, these customers will return. It's simple business, and $teve Job$ is a business and marketing god.
Good on Apple for keeping people so mentally invested in their company. It's a testament to the power of perception and lack of mental clarity from some of its consumers.
Charge on, Apple. :apple:
You must not frequent Apple forums. There are quite a few people who think Apple can do no wrong and twist their own morals and thoughts to justify things that Apple does in these forums. They think they are Apple's personal crusaders. It's sad really, that some people can't think for themselves and they're so blinded by a tech company who could give two craps about them at the end of the day. While Apple does some good things for customers, it's not because they care. It's because they know by doing that, these customers will return. It's simple business, and $teve Job$ is a business and marketing god.
Good on Apple for keeping people so mentally invested in their company. It's a testament to the power of perception and lack of mental clarity from some of its consumers.
Charge on, Apple. :apple:
ergle2
Sep 14, 08:42 PM
I think you're a bit arse-about-face there. Someone else has already pointed out the differences between XP and Windows 2003 aren't trivial, so I won't go into that. However, if you're sufficient vintage, you should remember the "outrage" when someone demonstrated that you could turn NT 4 Workstation into NT 4 Server (including the boot and login screens) just by changing a few Registry settings (although the part that usually doesn't get said is that those Registry settings then triggered a whole range of different tuning settings for the scheduler, memory management, etc). NT 3.5 & 3.51 were the same, and IIRC, NT 3.1 didn't even have a "Server" version.
The comments about separate platforms in the NT era I took to refer to NT3.x/4 vs Win9x.
Quite a few bits of XP Pro functionality can be enabled in XP home with some minor hex editing, too.
And of course, NT started as a reimplementation of VMS for a failed Intel RISC CPU...
The comments about separate platforms in the NT era I took to refer to NT3.x/4 vs Win9x.
Quite a few bits of XP Pro functionality can be enabled in XP home with some minor hex editing, too.
And of course, NT started as a reimplementation of VMS for a failed Intel RISC CPU...
jav6454
Feb 28, 04:48 PM
Well, I have nothing to say, but that the University has grounds for dismissal if difference of opinion arises.
True, you can argue the gay card, but in this case, they college played the rights cards to get rid of him. Was it the best choice? No.
Still, it's the college's right on who teaches or not; and seeing how it's a Catholic Church college, I'd say it was bound to happen.
True, you can argue the gay card, but in this case, they college played the rights cards to get rid of him. Was it the best choice? No.
Still, it's the college's right on who teaches or not; and seeing how it's a Catholic Church college, I'd say it was bound to happen.
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 11, 02:09 PM
If long run is 10yrs, I'll grant you that. But in the US and much of Asia (Australia maybe) where there's CDMA carriers, CDMA2000 1x-EVDx is going to be around for a while.
Actually WCDMA also inherits much of it's tech from CDMA/IS-95 and I have seen some documentation that shows that WCDMA can be compatible with CDMA2000 just like UTMS/WCDMA is compatible with GSM. But it sounds as if the upgrade path for GSM/GPRS/EDGE to WCDMA is easier than going from CDMA2000 1x to WCDMA.
But since for the next several years CDMA2000 1x-EVDO will be better than the GSM related technologies. And by the time WCDMA takes over, the iPhone will be as antiquated as the Newton.
Apple needs to create both versions as CDMA has about 5x% of the US market... and Apple has and probably will continue to cater to the US market first.
OK. let us just cut to the chase. The keyword here is hand-over. CDMA2000 doesnt support it from GSM. GSM has 81%. Hence cdma is and will always be a small local network that can be used in small pockets on this planet. Furthermore, I seriously doubt ITU/FOMA will change anything in the standard to allow any compability for CDMA2000 since it is not in their interest.
The faster cdam/CDMA2000 moves to oblivion the better.
We would all benefit from one standard, cheaper phones, worldwide access, lower minute rates (from higher competition) Just look at how Vz bills you.
Having multiple standard on cellphones is just as clever as having two incompatible internet.
Actually WCDMA also inherits much of it's tech from CDMA/IS-95 and I have seen some documentation that shows that WCDMA can be compatible with CDMA2000 just like UTMS/WCDMA is compatible with GSM. But it sounds as if the upgrade path for GSM/GPRS/EDGE to WCDMA is easier than going from CDMA2000 1x to WCDMA.
But since for the next several years CDMA2000 1x-EVDO will be better than the GSM related technologies. And by the time WCDMA takes over, the iPhone will be as antiquated as the Newton.
Apple needs to create both versions as CDMA has about 5x% of the US market... and Apple has and probably will continue to cater to the US market first.
OK. let us just cut to the chase. The keyword here is hand-over. CDMA2000 doesnt support it from GSM. GSM has 81%. Hence cdma is and will always be a small local network that can be used in small pockets on this planet. Furthermore, I seriously doubt ITU/FOMA will change anything in the standard to allow any compability for CDMA2000 since it is not in their interest.
The faster cdam/CDMA2000 moves to oblivion the better.
We would all benefit from one standard, cheaper phones, worldwide access, lower minute rates (from higher competition) Just look at how Vz bills you.
Having multiple standard on cellphones is just as clever as having two incompatible internet.
0815
Apr 25, 02:01 PM
What I don't understand is even if Apple is tracking us, why did Steve Jobs simply lie about the claims, thats whats fishy about all this..
Because Apple is not tracking you. Apple does not get any of that data, they will never see or touch it. It is data that is stored locally on your phone out of reach from everyone except you. "Apple tracks you" would mean that the phone is sending the data 'home', but it doesn't. APPLE HAS NO IDEA WHERE THE F YOU ARE OR WERE (and they probably couldn't care less)
Because Apple is not tracking you. Apple does not get any of that data, they will never see or touch it. It is data that is stored locally on your phone out of reach from everyone except you. "Apple tracks you" would mean that the phone is sending the data 'home', but it doesn't. APPLE HAS NO IDEA WHERE THE F YOU ARE OR WERE (and they probably couldn't care less)
dukeblue91
Apr 6, 01:30 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)
Motorola doesn't "get" tablets yet, but the G1 didn't sell well either. Let's look at the market again in two years, I bet it'll look a lot different.
Not if you take any one model against whatever current iPad model.
The same goes for the iPhone vs anyone else.
Motorola doesn't "get" tablets yet, but the G1 didn't sell well either. Let's look at the market again in two years, I bet it'll look a lot different.
Not if you take any one model against whatever current iPad model.
The same goes for the iPhone vs anyone else.
SoGood
Apr 27, 08:34 AM
Iraqis are dying, Afghani are dying, Syrians are dying, American soldiers are dying, British soldiers are dying, Australian soldiers are dying, elderly around the world are losing medical services... And civvies and senators are busy complaining about a location log in an iPhone? There are some screwed up heads in this world!
milo
Jul 27, 04:11 PM
I'm sorry. I thought that it was adequately implied that I meant the fastest chip, to date. Anyway, that's what I meant if I've been misunderstood.
I wasn't disagreeing with the "to date" part, just with the notion that a higher clock speed is the same as a faster chip.
The 2.7 G5 will continue to be the highest clocked chip in a mac to date. But chips with lower clock speeds will likely prove to be faster in benchmarks, meaning it's not the fastest chip.
I wasn't disagreeing with the "to date" part, just with the notion that a higher clock speed is the same as a faster chip.
The 2.7 G5 will continue to be the highest clocked chip in a mac to date. But chips with lower clock speeds will likely prove to be faster in benchmarks, meaning it's not the fastest chip.
citizenzen
Mar 18, 09:06 PM
I am very unhappy that Obama did not get us out of a state of War. Which pacifist do you plan on voting for this next time around?
What pacifist ever has a realistic chance of becoming the next "commander-in-chief"?
That's why 5P's contention is so ridiculous.
Candidates must paint themselves as "strong" and capable of leading our military, otherwise there'd be little chance they'd be elected as president.
What pacifist ever has a realistic chance of becoming the next "commander-in-chief"?
That's why 5P's contention is so ridiculous.
Candidates must paint themselves as "strong" and capable of leading our military, otherwise there'd be little chance they'd be elected as president.
Blue Fox
Apr 25, 01:35 PM
Only Apple? The Android system does the same thing, AND sends the information off to Google. The iPhone/iPad just logs the data to a file. Seems a bit unfair to me, but we'll see.
kvizzel
Apr 8, 05:09 AM
When you are as HUGE as best buy, and you are selling a product as huge as the iPad, it makes sense to create a demand. People do this all the time. You can't get it now, so the second it becomes available to you, you buy it in fear that you might have to wait another month. This happens all the time with a lot of products.
Why would this matter.
I would understand it if they were able to raise the prices, but no...
So... the point of this?
Why would this matter.
I would understand it if they were able to raise the prices, but no...
So... the point of this?
Tones2
Apr 19, 01:37 PM
You failed to read the blog. Wanna try again?
What, that ONE GUY thinks Apple has a solid case? Yeah, I got that part. :rolleyes:
The point being that almost EVERY smart phone even before the iPhone has a black, rectangular shape with square application icons on the Home Screen and a button or three at the bottom. Some closer than others to the iPhone and to EACH OTHER. Jeez...
What, that ONE GUY thinks Apple has a solid case? Yeah, I got that part. :rolleyes:
The point being that almost EVERY smart phone even before the iPhone has a black, rectangular shape with square application icons on the Home Screen and a button or three at the bottom. Some closer than others to the iPhone and to EACH OTHER. Jeez...
dba7dba
Mar 22, 04:27 PM
Samsung can say all they want about their products. There are the following glaring issues:
1. Has anyone realize how much less Samsung's profit margins will be on the Galaxy Tab versus the iPad2? (ie. Apple retains a high profitability based on inhouse product development rather than contracting to third parties like other hardware developers)
2. Given what I perceive to be an extremely small profit margin, I find it difficult from an investor standpoint to endorse Samsung's business model.
3. It is next to impossible from a longterm business perspective that Samsung can price match Apple in this respect. It's an unsustainable business practice.
You obviously don't know much about samsung. Samsung makes RAM and CPU that apple uses in iphone/ipad. Possibly LCD too. A4 was definitely made by samsung. It's pretty certain A5 is also made by samsung, despite rumors TSMC will make them for apple.
Samsung being samsung, they can match Apple in price in tablet forever (well maybe not forever but for a long time) even without making much profit (not that they would do it). Samsung is HUGE. They have plenty of other stuff they can sell with profit.
1. Has anyone realize how much less Samsung's profit margins will be on the Galaxy Tab versus the iPad2? (ie. Apple retains a high profitability based on inhouse product development rather than contracting to third parties like other hardware developers)
2. Given what I perceive to be an extremely small profit margin, I find it difficult from an investor standpoint to endorse Samsung's business model.
3. It is next to impossible from a longterm business perspective that Samsung can price match Apple in this respect. It's an unsustainable business practice.
You obviously don't know much about samsung. Samsung makes RAM and CPU that apple uses in iphone/ipad. Possibly LCD too. A4 was definitely made by samsung. It's pretty certain A5 is also made by samsung, despite rumors TSMC will make them for apple.
Samsung being samsung, they can match Apple in price in tablet forever (well maybe not forever but for a long time) even without making much profit (not that they would do it). Samsung is HUGE. They have plenty of other stuff they can sell with profit.
Xian Zhu Xuande
Mar 31, 03:02 PM
This is a smart move. It had to happen sooner or later.
John Gruber would eat Steve Job's ***** if he could. His opinion is extremely biased.
Except... he's right. This was a bait-and-switch from Google. I don't think it was a bad move for the future of the platform, but it does render a lot of their PR commentary through history as bogus. As for Gruber, you clearly don't like him, but while he is certainly a fan of Apple he is usually correct.
John Gruber would eat Steve Job's ***** if he could. His opinion is extremely biased.
Except... he's right. This was a bait-and-switch from Google. I don't think it was a bad move for the future of the platform, but it does render a lot of their PR commentary through history as bogus. As for Gruber, you clearly don't like him, but while he is certainly a fan of Apple he is usually correct.
regandarcy
Apr 5, 05:48 PM
New iMacs would be great. Let's not forget new MacBook airs. They need sandy bridge and thunderbolt too! :-)
Doubt it will be MacBook airs. But updating the iMacs along with the new final cut pro does make sense.
Doubt it will be MacBook airs. But updating the iMacs along with the new final cut pro does make sense.
arkitect
Mar 22, 12:55 PM
Competition is good.
I agree.
But who in their right minds would want to own something called a Playbook? :o
I agree.
But who in their right minds would want to own something called a Playbook? :o
iliketyla
Apr 6, 01:53 PM
I don't really watch television at all, so I was just wondering if there are many commercials for tablets besides the iPad?
I can't recall ever seeing a Xoom commercial even in passing, although I have seen an iPad commercial.
I can't recall ever seeing a Xoom commercial even in passing, although I have seen an iPad commercial.
No comments:
Post a Comment