Thirteenva
Sep 12, 01:33 PM
Originally posted by Snowy_River
I'm surprised that no one has put forward a guess about the meaning of this. We have Jobs saying that new PowerMacs after Jan 1 will not support booting into MacOS 9 anymore, and now we have an offer that really amounts to on the order of $700 off all current PowerMacs that ends on Dec 31. This seems to me to be (possibly) adding up to a new crop of PowerMacs coming as of the first of the year.
But, then, what do I know? ;)
LOL,Well i call your rumor and raise you the rumor on the front page that says no G5 till late 2003. So which is it... ;)
I'm surprised that no one has put forward a guess about the meaning of this. We have Jobs saying that new PowerMacs after Jan 1 will not support booting into MacOS 9 anymore, and now we have an offer that really amounts to on the order of $700 off all current PowerMacs that ends on Dec 31. This seems to me to be (possibly) adding up to a new crop of PowerMacs coming as of the first of the year.
But, then, what do I know? ;)
LOL,Well i call your rumor and raise you the rumor on the front page that says no G5 till late 2003. So which is it... ;)
JSRockit
Sep 8, 06:55 PM
I hope they are wrong. It is really sad. Apple just keeps falling behind more and more.
noht*
Sep 1, 01:21 PM
Says RS/6000.
yeah, but so what?
afaik rs/6000 was a server line at ibm which was rebranded the pSeries some two years ago...but they did/do use ppc processors of various flavors.
what i see from this message is that this patch enables altivec support on the powerpc64 target of the linux64 build of gcc, so if you happen to have a 64-bit powerpc with altivec, try to compile it on your box.
anyway, this might be completly wrong, just trying to show my pov.
noht
yeah, but so what?
afaik rs/6000 was a server line at ibm which was rebranded the pSeries some two years ago...but they did/do use ppc processors of various flavors.
what i see from this message is that this patch enables altivec support on the powerpc64 target of the linux64 build of gcc, so if you happen to have a 64-bit powerpc with altivec, try to compile it on your box.
anyway, this might be completly wrong, just trying to show my pov.
noht
BlueSky
Sep 10, 08:49 AM
Hi - I am looking for a good contact mgmt application - something like ACT for Win.. with ability to print labels.. any idea?
Tks
Paul
Tks
Paul
JackAxe
Mar 20, 06:46 AM
I found some more pictures of closer shots and once again I was repulsed by the texture. The misshaped buttons bother me. :)
I don't mind clear if well presented.
The white has grown on me. I'm just glad they didn't use that tacky indigo blue from the Cube. I waited for the black version before picking one up.
<]=)
I don't mind clear if well presented.
The white has grown on me. I'm just glad they didn't use that tacky indigo blue from the Cube. I waited for the black version before picking one up.
<]=)
Mr. Anderson
Oct 9, 11:57 AM
Originally posted by jefhatfield
now that there are so many new posters every day, i guess anyone with at least thirty posts and 12 months since join date are old skool members
Yes, but there is a core group of you that's more than just been around for a year. I've not even been here that long and I've seen tons of changes.
now that there are so many new posters every day, i guess anyone with at least thirty posts and 12 months since join date are old skool members
Yes, but there is a core group of you that's more than just been around for a year. I've not even been here that long and I've seen tons of changes.
livingfortoday
Jan 21, 05:44 PM
I plan on buying a new Intel iMac in the next week or so, and have a few questions.
1) Will the folding app run on the Intel chip fine? I figure it should, considering it's written for Mac OSX and not for individual processors, but just making sure.
2) More importantly. Since the iMac has a dual-core processor, will it run as if it's got two processors, or as one?
Anything else I should keep in mind? Will the iMac stay cool? My old Cube used to heat up like mad, but I figure that the Core Duo's have better heat management...
Thanks!
1) Will the folding app run on the Intel chip fine? I figure it should, considering it's written for Mac OSX and not for individual processors, but just making sure.
2) More importantly. Since the iMac has a dual-core processor, will it run as if it's got two processors, or as one?
Anything else I should keep in mind? Will the iMac stay cool? My old Cube used to heat up like mad, but I figure that the Core Duo's have better heat management...
Thanks!
Jeffx342
Sep 4, 08:12 PM
If Apple is discontinueing the Powerbook Ti the reason is because its difficult to produce, pain in the ass to squeeze hardware into, and expensive. Why would they replace with something even better? doesn't make any sence
If Apple discontinued the Powerbooks they will just stick with iBook
-cant tell you where I herd this rumor sry
If Apple discontinued the Powerbooks they will just stick with iBook
-cant tell you where I herd this rumor sry
Macaholic G5
Nov 4, 11:36 PM
Are you ready to rumble with an SMP client? ARE YOU?! Well, let us see what the high performance FAQ (http://folding.stanford.edu/FAQ-highperformance.html) has to say;
November 2006 The SMP client is now looking good enough that we are starting a more broad alpha test outside of Stanford. If that looks good, we will move to a broader beta test of this new client.
Interesting! Very interesting! Hope to see you there! :)
November 2006 The SMP client is now looking good enough that we are starting a more broad alpha test outside of Stanford. If that looks good, we will move to a broader beta test of this new client.
Interesting! Very interesting! Hope to see you there! :)
MisterMe
Jun 16, 07:32 PM
hate to nit pick but a lot of the things in your list are not valid completes or comments. ...Read and be wise (http://blogs.msdn.com/philipsu/archive/2006/06/14/631438.aspx).
wrldwzrd89
Sep 19, 04:30 PM
well i finally got around to testing firefox more intensely against safari. I checked my process veiwer often on both of them, and i found out that safari used between 20-40 megs of memory while firefox used between 50-80. These changes depended on how many tabs/windows i had open. I was surprised at these results. from everyones talk i figured firefox would have been more memory efficient than safari.
There's a simple reason for that - Firefox uses the Gecko rendering engine, which the developers admit is nowhere near full optimization. Once Gecko is cleaned up, Firefox (and other Gecko-based browsers) will use less memory.
There's a simple reason for that - Firefox uses the Gecko rendering engine, which the developers admit is nowhere near full optimization. Once Gecko is cleaned up, Firefox (and other Gecko-based browsers) will use less memory.
excalibur313
Mar 30, 09:05 PM
I have a good friend who worked for the artist that designed the apple logo. (he's also done lots of others like ebay) That isn't to say that jobs and company didn't tell this guy the general idea but I think that he probably had the biggest influence.
eyelikeart
Sep 5, 09:13 AM
he he he...I'm loving it! :D
however...I'm feeling lazy today...anyone wanna fine my first post?? ;)
however...I'm feeling lazy today...anyone wanna fine my first post?? ;)
void
Sep 15, 10:57 PM
Very clever naming scheme. This would breathe some new life into the product line and if they updated all of their products simoultaneously, it would cause a wave of sales that would skyrocket their stock.
macMonte
Mar 23, 07:00 PM
Has anyone been able to get Starcraft: Broodwar running on any Intel Mac? I would love to run it on my Mac Pro, but only the original Starcraft seems to work. Thanks to anyone who can help.
twoodcc
Dec 10, 03:29 PM
Dang, I'm only #78 on the MR team on SETI. I think it's cause I run Rosetta (no MR team), Einstein (11 on the MR team! .. out of 13), and SETI on my Mini, and fold on the Powerbook. SETI gets the least CPU time of the three, too, I'm afraid.
well it depends on how you look at the rankings. by default, it's set to 'recent average credit'. based on that, i'm now # 10, using a mac pro and macbook
well it depends on how you look at the rankings. by default, it's set to 'recent average credit'. based on that, i'm now # 10, using a mac pro and macbook
Dreadnought
Jun 7, 02:37 PM
mc64k, I here a new challenge for you! Make your scripts to work native for Intel Macs!!
WildCowboy
Apr 25, 04:04 PM
Apple ignited the personal computer revolution in the 1970s with the Apple II and reinvented the personal computer in the 1980s with the Macintosh. Today, Apple continues to lead the industry in innovation with its award-winning desktop and notebook computers, OS X operating system, and iLife and professional applications. Apple is also spearheading the digital music revolution with its iPod portable music players and iTunes online music store.
Linkety (http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=107357&p=irol-faq#corpinfo2)
Linkety (http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=107357&p=irol-faq#corpinfo2)
job
Oct 13, 05:10 PM
i don't have one.
i did have an old Mac II that had Lode Runner installed. my old performa still has a three marathons installed. sadly i rarely have the time to play anything anymore.
i did have an old Mac II that had Lode Runner installed. my old performa still has a three marathons installed. sadly i rarely have the time to play anything anymore.
nuckinfutz
Sep 14, 03:45 AM
Originally posted by scem0
That would be great. WHy doesnt apple do what AMD does and assign numbers to their processors like the AMD 2400 XP etc. Probably because the dual 1.25 is about a 2500 and the p4 is up to 2800, which shows someone who doesnt know anything about computers that as of now PCs are faster.
Because Apple realizes a bad idea when they see it. Unlike the many PC Manufacturers Apple doesn't have to "differentiate" it's products from it's virtually identical competitors by focusing in on Clock speed or HD size or whatever catagory you want to use. They simply provide a nice neat solution at a given price. I guess you could say it's the advantage of "ruling the roost".
Apple is not concerned right now with highlighting speed because they are in fact behind so what they must highlight is that advantages of their os and included iApps.
That would be great. WHy doesnt apple do what AMD does and assign numbers to their processors like the AMD 2400 XP etc. Probably because the dual 1.25 is about a 2500 and the p4 is up to 2800, which shows someone who doesnt know anything about computers that as of now PCs are faster.
Because Apple realizes a bad idea when they see it. Unlike the many PC Manufacturers Apple doesn't have to "differentiate" it's products from it's virtually identical competitors by focusing in on Clock speed or HD size or whatever catagory you want to use. They simply provide a nice neat solution at a given price. I guess you could say it's the advantage of "ruling the roost".
Apple is not concerned right now with highlighting speed because they are in fact behind so what they must highlight is that advantages of their os and included iApps.
DakotaGuy
Oct 8, 08:47 PM
Who really gives a damn?
I would rather be sitting at my "old" iMac DV with a sllllloooow 400Mhz G3 then my buddies new 2. whatever GHz Wintel computer. Why you might ask? Because mine works and works right everytime. He has already had his back to the store 3 times for service and faulty components, not to mention problems with XP. In fact, I can get more done in less time, because I have never experienced any downtime with my Mac. For the last 3 years it has never failed me once, never re-loaded the OS only upgraded it, and never had any hardware problems. Everyone says Apple's hardware is junk because it is not as fast. Okay so maybe you can buy a cheap PC with 2 million GHz, but I can tell you in the end the Apple will outlast it and be more productive.
Downtime and OS problems cause a lot more downtime, then a couple of seconds here and there. You complain about Mac speed, but what if, like most PC's Apple only cared about speed and not overall hardware and software quality...all we would have is a fast POS IMHO.
So as I might get flamed for this post, get off Apple's back. Their products are not the pieces of crap everyone on here tries to make them out to be. You pay more for Apple because they don't sacrifice quality. If you want only speed and don't care about software, OS, or hardware quality, then why are you here??? Get a cheapo PC. The new Macs are not slow computers, sure there are some PC's that are a little faster and win the old GHz race, but when you make a purchase you have to look at the entire picture. Look at everything the machine offers, value, quality, style, longevity, productivity, etc... Apple is better.
I would rather be sitting at my "old" iMac DV with a sllllloooow 400Mhz G3 then my buddies new 2. whatever GHz Wintel computer. Why you might ask? Because mine works and works right everytime. He has already had his back to the store 3 times for service and faulty components, not to mention problems with XP. In fact, I can get more done in less time, because I have never experienced any downtime with my Mac. For the last 3 years it has never failed me once, never re-loaded the OS only upgraded it, and never had any hardware problems. Everyone says Apple's hardware is junk because it is not as fast. Okay so maybe you can buy a cheap PC with 2 million GHz, but I can tell you in the end the Apple will outlast it and be more productive.
Downtime and OS problems cause a lot more downtime, then a couple of seconds here and there. You complain about Mac speed, but what if, like most PC's Apple only cared about speed and not overall hardware and software quality...all we would have is a fast POS IMHO.
So as I might get flamed for this post, get off Apple's back. Their products are not the pieces of crap everyone on here tries to make them out to be. You pay more for Apple because they don't sacrifice quality. If you want only speed and don't care about software, OS, or hardware quality, then why are you here??? Get a cheapo PC. The new Macs are not slow computers, sure there are some PC's that are a little faster and win the old GHz race, but when you make a purchase you have to look at the entire picture. Look at everything the machine offers, value, quality, style, longevity, productivity, etc... Apple is better.
WinterMute
Feb 12, 06:21 AM
Looks pretty nifty. (http://www.bitsonwheels.com/)
Looks good, I've just got Azureus working, let me know if this is a better option.
Looks good, I've just got Azureus working, let me know if this is a better option.
Dreadnought
Jun 6, 02:58 PM
i personally think that MacOS X are fine as they are, but we however could do with and extra 10k a day.... especially at the moment since we have dropped below 50k per day. i wish they would...
We could also use th eextra 10K per day. And because you are now producing under the 50K a day, we will assimilate you! Resistence is futile!:D HAHAHAHA
We could also use th eextra 10K per day. And because you are now producing under the 50K a day, we will assimilate you! Resistence is futile!:D HAHAHAHA
tjwett
Oct 22, 03:27 PM
if that mini powerbook thing were real the pics would have been yanked long ago. kewl looking though.
No comments:
Post a Comment