rice_web
Oct 14, 07:58 PM
Next fall may even be a stretch. We may see the G5 at MWNY, or maybe even earlier (Apple always announces before shipping)
gozman
Sep 4, 07:56 PM
I believe you found an old PowerBook G3.
This is most likely pretty old, on the order of 3-4 years. Judging from the descriptions, it is most likely either the Wallstreet enclosure or more likely the Lombard/Pismo PowerBooks. I recognise the angled fans on the sides as being like those in my Pismo as is the push button release for the screen portion of the laptop. There is no such release button on the Walstreet models(they have a pull-release latch). Additionally, the drawings are purposefully vague to represent a more generic enclosure with the detail digrams focussing on the innovative and thus patented parts which could well explain the double squres represing "mouse" buttons.
BTW.... the head of the PowerBook Team has said repeatedly that Apple's reseach has found that most folks carry their internal expansion bay devices outside the Powerbook but in the same bag which means that there is little true portability gained by not providing internal expansion bays and thus the justification for dropping them on the PowerBook Ti line in favor of a slimmer design.
This is most likely pretty old, on the order of 3-4 years. Judging from the descriptions, it is most likely either the Wallstreet enclosure or more likely the Lombard/Pismo PowerBooks. I recognise the angled fans on the sides as being like those in my Pismo as is the push button release for the screen portion of the laptop. There is no such release button on the Walstreet models(they have a pull-release latch). Additionally, the drawings are purposefully vague to represent a more generic enclosure with the detail digrams focussing on the innovative and thus patented parts which could well explain the double squres represing "mouse" buttons.
BTW.... the head of the PowerBook Team has said repeatedly that Apple's reseach has found that most folks carry their internal expansion bay devices outside the Powerbook but in the same bag which means that there is little true portability gained by not providing internal expansion bays and thus the justification for dropping them on the PowerBook Ti line in favor of a slimmer design.
GeeYouEye
Oct 13, 01:06 AM
Originally posted by Durandal7
I think it's just fine where it is.
In other news, MacRumors is not a democracy but is in fact a dictatorship run by arn.
Pity, ain't it? Of course, there's cases where it's better for forums to be totally dictatorially controlled, or completely democratic (or something similar, like democratic, but with admin veto).
Worst are those that attempt hybridization. Scary stuff. [off-topic mode]There was one board where the owner admin was/is a paranoid freak who couldn't stand to be wrong, twisting, lying and distorting facts to make himself right. Sneaky sonofagun too... gave his favorite (read: ass-kissing) posters influence and mod powers. Those... aristocrats is the only appropriate word... could then start polls about whether to ban other members. Worse, all it took to warrant a banning is proving one of the aristocrats wrong or even just pissing them off. And not even second-chance bans, but IP bans, and deletions of any references to you.
And this to say nothing of the board itself. Hell, their political etc. discussion forum is completely one-sided (and totally in accordance with the admin's POV), and anyone who dares so much as disagree with anything instantly becomes a target of mod-sanctioned flaming. Makes our Political and War discussion forum look like the model of civilized debate.
There's a reason I no longer have any desire to post there.
So, I'm quite happy with arn's control (despite our disagreements on just about every change he makes to the board).[/off-topic mode]
That said, I vote move it to the bottom of the section whose name escapes me with Community Discussion, etc.
I think it's just fine where it is.
In other news, MacRumors is not a democracy but is in fact a dictatorship run by arn.
Pity, ain't it? Of course, there's cases where it's better for forums to be totally dictatorially controlled, or completely democratic (or something similar, like democratic, but with admin veto).
Worst are those that attempt hybridization. Scary stuff. [off-topic mode]There was one board where the owner admin was/is a paranoid freak who couldn't stand to be wrong, twisting, lying and distorting facts to make himself right. Sneaky sonofagun too... gave his favorite (read: ass-kissing) posters influence and mod powers. Those... aristocrats is the only appropriate word... could then start polls about whether to ban other members. Worse, all it took to warrant a banning is proving one of the aristocrats wrong or even just pissing them off. And not even second-chance bans, but IP bans, and deletions of any references to you.
And this to say nothing of the board itself. Hell, their political etc. discussion forum is completely one-sided (and totally in accordance with the admin's POV), and anyone who dares so much as disagree with anything instantly becomes a target of mod-sanctioned flaming. Makes our Political and War discussion forum look like the model of civilized debate.
There's a reason I no longer have any desire to post there.
So, I'm quite happy with arn's control (despite our disagreements on just about every change he makes to the board).[/off-topic mode]
That said, I vote move it to the bottom of the section whose name escapes me with Community Discussion, etc.
Anon
Oct 20, 10:32 PM
Ya know, something has been bothering me about the whole 64-bit processors let you do 64-bit integers and larger address spaces. While the larger address space thing is kind of a big deal since we now have 1 Gig DIMMS and it won't be that long before we have 4Gig Memory modules. But the 64-bit integer thing is big whoop, who really needs to add 2 64-bit numbers. :confused:
This attitude is simplistic and it completely ignores what data is. 64 bit registers will allow you to double the amount of data you can process in one opperation. Take text processing for example. Instead of working on 4 characters or bytes in one operation you now can work on 8 characters. Take 32bit graphics. You load half of the data in the high 32-bits and the other half in the lower 32-bits. Take any bit of data of any size and you can chomp through it twice as fast. You have doubled your throughput without increasing your mhz or ghz speed.
This attitude is simplistic and it completely ignores what data is. 64 bit registers will allow you to double the amount of data you can process in one opperation. Take text processing for example. Instead of working on 4 characters or bytes in one operation you now can work on 8 characters. Take 32bit graphics. You load half of the data in the high 32-bits and the other half in the lower 32-bits. Take any bit of data of any size and you can chomp through it twice as fast. You have doubled your throughput without increasing your mhz or ghz speed.
Gelfin
Sep 29, 11:10 AM
Originally posted by redAPPLE
good. a 20 gb ipod can sync within 7-8 minutes? is that a fact?
Not likely, but neither is the Jukebox likely to achieve four hours. I should have been more clear that this is the theoretical maximum based on the maximum throughput of the respective port hardware:
USB: 12mbit/sec is 1.5MB/sec. 20,000MB at 1.5MB/sec is about 3.7 hours.
Firewire: 400mbit/sec is 50MB/sec. 20,000MB at 50MB/sec is about 6.7 minutes.
You won't get the maximum throughput with either technology, but the example illustrates the difference between the two. Your results with either will vary.
good. a 20 gb ipod can sync within 7-8 minutes? is that a fact?
Not likely, but neither is the Jukebox likely to achieve four hours. I should have been more clear that this is the theoretical maximum based on the maximum throughput of the respective port hardware:
USB: 12mbit/sec is 1.5MB/sec. 20,000MB at 1.5MB/sec is about 3.7 hours.
Firewire: 400mbit/sec is 50MB/sec. 20,000MB at 50MB/sec is about 6.7 minutes.
You won't get the maximum throughput with either technology, but the example illustrates the difference between the two. Your results with either will vary.
nacl99
Oct 6, 12:41 PM
I still do not understand why Apple has not done something similar, they were soooooo close to releasing it, even had it up for a couple days as a new ?Panther> feature, and then didn't? Must have thought it would hurt .Mac sales, well most everything hurts .Mac sales...it's kind of a waste
so give us Home Pod, or whatever it was called I forget.
so give us Home Pod, or whatever it was called I forget.
King Cobra
Oct 14, 08:15 PM
Originally posted by job
more than 300 posts in 21 days? :eek:
There have been spammers that post over 250 posts in only three days. Luckily that won't happen again anytime soon.
In a few years that (must have posted before...) date is going to have to change. :D
more than 300 posts in 21 days? :eek:
There have been spammers that post over 250 posts in only three days. Luckily that won't happen again anytime soon.
In a few years that (must have posted before...) date is going to have to change. :D
neilrobinson
Jan 4, 07:45 AM
no new prices for au.... :mad:
edit: or speed bumps...
in fact SFA for australia again.
edit: or speed bumps...
in fact SFA for australia again.
MacBytes
Apr 19, 06:48 PM
http://www.macbytes.com/images/bytessig.gif (http://www.macbytes.com)
Category: 3rd Party Software
Link: Opera Software released Opera 8 for Windows and Linux. Beta 8 for Mac OS X is also now available. (http://www.macbytes.com/link.php?sid=20050419194826)
Posted on MacBytes.com (http://www.macbytes.com)
Approved by arn
Category: 3rd Party Software
Link: Opera Software released Opera 8 for Windows and Linux. Beta 8 for Mac OS X is also now available. (http://www.macbytes.com/link.php?sid=20050419194826)
Posted on MacBytes.com (http://www.macbytes.com)
Approved by arn
LimeiBook86
Aug 11, 12:01 AM
...okay, not really small, just 13 and stupid :(
hahahaha, that's great! ;)
I have to say that most of my favorite games are older ones I played as a child.
hahahaha, that's great! ;)
I have to say that most of my favorite games are older ones I played as a child.
MacsRgr8
Aug 13, 04:39 PM
Hmm.. gotta clear 'em out...
MrMacMan
Nov 16, 12:32 AM
And 601 Means you post to much...
:D
Haha just kidding.
:D
Haha just kidding.
TyleRomeo
Aug 30, 12:38 PM
Originally posted by ddtlm
TyleRomeo:
Interesting to note that Apple said "4-6 weeks" the day the 1.25 was announed, and this is 2 or 3 weeks later. Hmmm, still 4-6 weeks. I originally thought about getting one, but I have since given up and will wait till the next revision which may very well include a Power4-lite option, but we won't have much idea about that until October 15th.
Sorry ddtlm, I think you misread what i posted ( or a futzed up my post) anywho, orginally on august 13th the apple site said it would be a 6-8 week wait. Two weeks later on the 28th, the 6-8 week wait went down to 4-6 weeks.
I guarantee in 2 weeks it will say 2-4 weeks. And eventually it will widle away to 5-7 days, 3-5 days, and then 1-3
So still count on the powermac 1.25 coming out around the same time the october 1st monitor rebate occurs. And if my predictions are right those could include new monitors from Paris just two weeks prior.
tyler
TyleRomeo:
Interesting to note that Apple said "4-6 weeks" the day the 1.25 was announed, and this is 2 or 3 weeks later. Hmmm, still 4-6 weeks. I originally thought about getting one, but I have since given up and will wait till the next revision which may very well include a Power4-lite option, but we won't have much idea about that until October 15th.
Sorry ddtlm, I think you misread what i posted ( or a futzed up my post) anywho, orginally on august 13th the apple site said it would be a 6-8 week wait. Two weeks later on the 28th, the 6-8 week wait went down to 4-6 weeks.
I guarantee in 2 weeks it will say 2-4 weeks. And eventually it will widle away to 5-7 days, 3-5 days, and then 1-3
So still count on the powermac 1.25 coming out around the same time the october 1st monitor rebate occurs. And if my predictions are right those could include new monitors from Paris just two weeks prior.
tyler
Multimedia
Oct 10, 04:54 AM
Sorry about the turnaround, but the devil is in the details.
UPDATE 2:39 PDT 10.10.02 Apple New Mac Double Base RAM Offer A Hoax. Loophole Makes Offer Bogus!
Upon further investigation by reading the FINE PRINT in the Terms and Conditions:
http://store.apple.com/Catalog/US/Images/promo_doubleyourmemory.html
"...Additional RAM may be installed as either a single larger capacity replacement RAM DIMM chip or by adding additional RAM DIMM chip(s) as required, exact method to be determined at Apple's discretion..."
Called the Apple Store 800-MY-APPLE line and got confirmation that Apple will use that loophole whenever it wants to and that we can't be assured that a 512MB double order will yield two 512 MB sticks every time. We can't even specify that is the only way we'll exercise that option.
So FORGETABOUTIT . . .
As of today October 10, 2002 until December 31st, Apple is offering to double the base RAM for only $40 extra on all new Macs.
So you can get a single 512 stick with the dual 867 or dual 1 GHz MDD PowerMacs or 2 - 512 sticks with the dual 1.25 GHz for only $40 extra.
Sweet.
http://store.apple.com/Catalog/US/Images/promo_doubleyourmemory.html
UPDATE 2:39 PDT 10.10.02 Apple New Mac Double Base RAM Offer A Hoax. Loophole Makes Offer Bogus!
Upon further investigation by reading the FINE PRINT in the Terms and Conditions:
http://store.apple.com/Catalog/US/Images/promo_doubleyourmemory.html
"...Additional RAM may be installed as either a single larger capacity replacement RAM DIMM chip or by adding additional RAM DIMM chip(s) as required, exact method to be determined at Apple's discretion..."
Called the Apple Store 800-MY-APPLE line and got confirmation that Apple will use that loophole whenever it wants to and that we can't be assured that a 512MB double order will yield two 512 MB sticks every time. We can't even specify that is the only way we'll exercise that option.
So FORGETABOUTIT . . .
As of today October 10, 2002 until December 31st, Apple is offering to double the base RAM for only $40 extra on all new Macs.
So you can get a single 512 stick with the dual 867 or dual 1 GHz MDD PowerMacs or 2 - 512 sticks with the dual 1.25 GHz for only $40 extra.
Sweet.
http://store.apple.com/Catalog/US/Images/promo_doubleyourmemory.html
mjstew33
Apr 12, 02:46 PM
Very interesting.
I love my Mighty Mouse, I've never had any problems with it, and I would love it for it to be wireless! :)
I love my Mighty Mouse, I've never had any problems with it, and I would love it for it to be wireless! :)
eva01
Jul 15, 08:34 PM
I use 2-3, god is the one that doesn't exist ^_~ aliens do
madmaxmedia
Feb 21, 07:22 PM
With Audio Hijack Pro, no - it only works on Macs, and all Macs have identical sound hardware (no dedicated sound card comes with any of them) (except possibly the Mac clones, which I'm ignoring for the sake of simplicity). On the Winamp side, your soundcard might make a difference in what you hear on your computer - regardless of your soundcard, what you hear in Winamp is the sound data that gets written to the WAV file.
Thanks. So that means there is essentially no quality loss when the WMV file gets converted to WAV? I understand of course that the WMV file itself was lossy. But from your description the WAV file should be the de-compressed output with no other changes.
If you then rip the WAV to CD, you have the same CD that you would've otherwise paid an extra .99 a track for. If you re-compress, you will have some further sound quality degradation (sort of like re-saving JPEG files.)
Thanks. So that means there is essentially no quality loss when the WMV file gets converted to WAV? I understand of course that the WMV file itself was lossy. But from your description the WAV file should be the de-compressed output with no other changes.
If you then rip the WAV to CD, you have the same CD that you would've otherwise paid an extra .99 a track for. If you re-compress, you will have some further sound quality degradation (sort of like re-saving JPEG files.)
javajedi
Oct 11, 08:48 AM
Originally posted by ddtlm
javajedi:
Admittedly I am getting lost in what all the numbers people have mentioned are for, but looking at these numbers you have here and assuming that they are doing the same task, you can rest assured that the G3/G4 are running far inferior software. AltiVec and SSE2 or not, there is just nothing that can explain this difference other than an unfair playing field. There is no task that a P4 can do 11x or 12x the speed of a G4 (comparing top-end models here). The P4 posseses nothing that runs at 11x or 12x the speed. Not the clock, not the units, the bandwidth to memory and caches are not 11x or 12x as good, it is not 11x better at branch prediction. I absolutely refuse to accept these results without very substantial backing because they contradict reality as I know it. I know a lot about the P4 and the G4, and I know a lot about programming in a fair number of different languages, even some assembly. I insist that these results do not reflect the actual performance of the processors, until irrefutable proof is presented to show how they do.
I guess the 70 and 90 don't surprise me a lot for the G3/G4, depending on clock speed difference. But all this trendy wandwagon-esque G4-bashing is not correct just cause every one else is doing it. There are things about the G3 that are very nice, but the G4 is no slouch compared to it, and given the higher clock that it's pipeline allows, the G3 really can't keep up. The G4 not only sports a better standard FPU, but it also sports better integer units.
Keep in mind this test does not reflect balanced system performance. The point of this exercise has been to determine how the G4's FPU compares to an assortment of different processors and operating systems.
I'd like to know you you qualify "inferior software" on the x86. If the P4 is some how cheating, then all of the other processors are cheating as well. Again, we ran the exact same code. We even made it into C code on the mac for maximum speed. In fact I'd like for you to check the code out for yourself, so you can see there is no misdirection here. Keep in mind, other people here have ran it on Athlons in Linux and still get sub 10 second times. I've also had a friend of mine (who i can trust) run it under Yellow Dog on a G4, he got 100+ seconds. And I did not tell him the scores we've been getting on the Mac, I had him run the test first and tell me how long it took before I even said anything. The JRE and now Mac OS X have been factored out of this equation.
When you look at operations like these, for example scalar integer ops, that's all register. The fsb, bsb, or anything else doesn't matter. This is a direct comparison between the two units on the G4 vs everything else. Also, my question to you is, in what way are the integer and fpu units "better" in the G4? I did not build the chip so I can't say weather they are better or not better than those in the 750FX, but I can say I've ran a fair benchmark comparing the FPU on the G4 from everything to a P4, Athlon, C3, G3, different operating systems, on x86 Windows and Linux, and on the Mac, Mac OS X and Yellow Dog. The results are consistent across the board. What more "proof" do you want?
javajedi:
Admittedly I am getting lost in what all the numbers people have mentioned are for, but looking at these numbers you have here and assuming that they are doing the same task, you can rest assured that the G3/G4 are running far inferior software. AltiVec and SSE2 or not, there is just nothing that can explain this difference other than an unfair playing field. There is no task that a P4 can do 11x or 12x the speed of a G4 (comparing top-end models here). The P4 posseses nothing that runs at 11x or 12x the speed. Not the clock, not the units, the bandwidth to memory and caches are not 11x or 12x as good, it is not 11x better at branch prediction. I absolutely refuse to accept these results without very substantial backing because they contradict reality as I know it. I know a lot about the P4 and the G4, and I know a lot about programming in a fair number of different languages, even some assembly. I insist that these results do not reflect the actual performance of the processors, until irrefutable proof is presented to show how they do.
I guess the 70 and 90 don't surprise me a lot for the G3/G4, depending on clock speed difference. But all this trendy wandwagon-esque G4-bashing is not correct just cause every one else is doing it. There are things about the G3 that are very nice, but the G4 is no slouch compared to it, and given the higher clock that it's pipeline allows, the G3 really can't keep up. The G4 not only sports a better standard FPU, but it also sports better integer units.
Keep in mind this test does not reflect balanced system performance. The point of this exercise has been to determine how the G4's FPU compares to an assortment of different processors and operating systems.
I'd like to know you you qualify "inferior software" on the x86. If the P4 is some how cheating, then all of the other processors are cheating as well. Again, we ran the exact same code. We even made it into C code on the mac for maximum speed. In fact I'd like for you to check the code out for yourself, so you can see there is no misdirection here. Keep in mind, other people here have ran it on Athlons in Linux and still get sub 10 second times. I've also had a friend of mine (who i can trust) run it under Yellow Dog on a G4, he got 100+ seconds. And I did not tell him the scores we've been getting on the Mac, I had him run the test first and tell me how long it took before I even said anything. The JRE and now Mac OS X have been factored out of this equation.
When you look at operations like these, for example scalar integer ops, that's all register. The fsb, bsb, or anything else doesn't matter. This is a direct comparison between the two units on the G4 vs everything else. Also, my question to you is, in what way are the integer and fpu units "better" in the G4? I did not build the chip so I can't say weather they are better or not better than those in the 750FX, but I can say I've ran a fair benchmark comparing the FPU on the G4 from everything to a P4, Athlon, C3, G3, different operating systems, on x86 Windows and Linux, and on the Mac, Mac OS X and Yellow Dog. The results are consistent across the board. What more "proof" do you want?
Mr. Anderson
Jul 15, 08:52 PM
Whoo the iMacs are impressive. What speed are you averaging on the computer? I just added my brothers computer to the Macrumors folding.
I just started it today, so I have no idea. I'll see later next week how things go since I'll be putting my dual 1.25 back on the job after it finishes rendering this weekend.
D
I just started it today, so I have no idea. I'll see later next week how things go since I'll be putting my dual 1.25 back on the job after it finishes rendering this weekend.
D
thedanceman
Apr 5, 11:26 AM
When my ipod got stolen I tried the same thing with Apple. My ipod is registered in the system, but they too would not give me the ip address of anyone using my ipod. You would have better luck just knocking on the door when you see the tv on and the xbox connected to xbox live.
Jaffa Cake
Nov 28, 11:10 AM
Quark is getting desperate! Last time I called them, however, I could not understand their technical support personnel because they were in INDIA! No wonder they can "give away" their technical support.
-Aaron-
Quark Technical Support in the UK puts you through to their call centre in Switzerland (the +41 number mentioned in the article). Believe me, I've had hours of fun with these people in the past... which often ends with them cutting me off while on hold.
Quark Technical Support � if that isn't an oxymoron I don't know what is.
-Aaron-
Quark Technical Support in the UK puts you through to their call centre in Switzerland (the +41 number mentioned in the article). Believe me, I've had hours of fun with these people in the past... which often ends with them cutting me off while on hold.
Quark Technical Support � if that isn't an oxymoron I don't know what is.
Mr. Anderson
Aug 28, 09:42 AM
Ha! A Sawtooth 450 MHz G4 and I'm still using it at home as my main machine.....and I joined years ago....:D
I'll be getting a G5 soon, though.
D
I'll be getting a G5 soon, though.
D
bousozoku
Aug 25, 07:49 PM
However, you can't buy a Macintosh version of the 4Ti 4200.
Since nVidia doesn't create anything but the reference video cards, various companies create the actual retail and OEM versions. Apple is one of the OEMs and they really don't see any reason to put money into a weaker card. Two levels (for the PowerMacs) is enough. Perhaps, if one of the smaller Windows video card players were interested in a small market, they could be convinced to sell and support their cards.
Since nVidia doesn't create anything but the reference video cards, various companies create the actual retail and OEM versions. Apple is one of the OEMs and they really don't see any reason to put money into a weaker card. Two levels (for the PowerMacs) is enough. Perhaps, if one of the smaller Windows video card players were interested in a small market, they could be convinced to sell and support their cards.
realityisterror
Jun 22, 08:38 PM
Rumors??! oooh... I forgot about those.
The non-forum aspect of MacRumors had been completely forgotten until 2 minutes ago... :rolleyes:
But how could anyone bash PowerBook G5s? It's on par with one-liners such as "your momma" and "i know you are but what am i". The ultimate response to stupid questions...
And you people call yourselves fanboys! :eek:
The non-forum aspect of MacRumors had been completely forgotten until 2 minutes ago... :rolleyes:
But how could anyone bash PowerBook G5s? It's on par with one-liners such as "your momma" and "i know you are but what am i". The ultimate response to stupid questions...
And you people call yourselves fanboys! :eek:
No comments:
Post a Comment