adroit
Nov 15, 11:25 AM
That really depends on the program, on how "parallelizable" the application is.
The simplest way to think of it is like this: Let's say you have a program that first has to calculate A. Then, when it's done that, it uses the result of A to calculate B. Then, when it's done that, uses the result of B to calculate C, then C to D, and so on. That's a *serial* problem there. The calculation of B can't begin until A is done, so it doesn't matter how many processors you have running, all computation is held up on one spot.
On the other hand, let's say you have an application that needs to calculate A, B, C and D, but those four values are not dependent on each other at all. In that case, you can use four processors at the same time, to calculate all four values at the same time.
Think of it like baking a cake. You can't start putting on the icing until the cake is done baking. And you can't start baking the cake until the ingredients are all mixed together. But you can have people simultaneously getting out and measuring the ingredients.
So that problem is partially parallelizable, but the majority of its workload is a serial process.
Some software applications, just by their very nature, will never be able to do anything useful with multiple processors.
This is true, but there are still many many ways to optimize the multi-core processor that's not currently being use.
For example, I am waiting for a program to compile right now. Although I have a dual core on my computer, the compiler only compile one file at a time and usually takes about 10 min to do a full compile . If I have an 8 core computer with a multi-threaded compiler then I can cut the total time to jsut over a min + couple of seconds for linking time.
I think the main problem with muti-threading program is that it is difficult to implement, especially for coders who only knows high-level languages. Muti-threading in low-level program such as C is not easy but at least it is straight-forward. But trying to muti-thread high-level language such as VB or C# can get you into a big headace since everything is abstracted from the programmer. To do that, you need to get into unsafe code and call a bunch of DLLs, and it's easy to get memory leaks. Basically it can start to get very complicated, very quickly.
The simplest way to think of it is like this: Let's say you have a program that first has to calculate A. Then, when it's done that, it uses the result of A to calculate B. Then, when it's done that, uses the result of B to calculate C, then C to D, and so on. That's a *serial* problem there. The calculation of B can't begin until A is done, so it doesn't matter how many processors you have running, all computation is held up on one spot.
On the other hand, let's say you have an application that needs to calculate A, B, C and D, but those four values are not dependent on each other at all. In that case, you can use four processors at the same time, to calculate all four values at the same time.
Think of it like baking a cake. You can't start putting on the icing until the cake is done baking. And you can't start baking the cake until the ingredients are all mixed together. But you can have people simultaneously getting out and measuring the ingredients.
So that problem is partially parallelizable, but the majority of its workload is a serial process.
Some software applications, just by their very nature, will never be able to do anything useful with multiple processors.
This is true, but there are still many many ways to optimize the multi-core processor that's not currently being use.
For example, I am waiting for a program to compile right now. Although I have a dual core on my computer, the compiler only compile one file at a time and usually takes about 10 min to do a full compile . If I have an 8 core computer with a multi-threaded compiler then I can cut the total time to jsut over a min + couple of seconds for linking time.
I think the main problem with muti-threading program is that it is difficult to implement, especially for coders who only knows high-level languages. Muti-threading in low-level program such as C is not easy but at least it is straight-forward. But trying to muti-thread high-level language such as VB or C# can get you into a big headace since everything is abstracted from the programmer. To do that, you need to get into unsafe code and call a bunch of DLLs, and it's easy to get memory leaks. Basically it can start to get very complicated, very quickly.
Fukui
Mar 24, 10:57 AM
Some companies have a lovely large market share, and are teetering on the edge as they are just not profitable.
Marc
Amazon.com anyone?
Marc
Amazon.com anyone?
SirOmega
Aug 24, 11:21 PM
Yeah! I was looking at a bunch of minis for a rendering farm, and given the SSE performance improvement over the yonahs (the Pentium-M series have been weak in FP traditionally) this should be fun.
treblah
Jul 19, 05:51 PM
Good Lord, 9.5 Billion in the Bank!
Dear Apple,
This just makes .Mac sucking that much more incredible.
Please hire some .Mac engineers.
Thanks,
Every Apple User in the World
Dear Apple,
This just makes .Mac sucking that much more incredible.
Please hire some .Mac engineers.
Thanks,
Every Apple User in the World
marksman
Mar 25, 05:57 PM
naysayers are probably more concerned with the fact that you can't look at the tv screen while fumbling for the touch controls on the ipad; physical buttons enable the player to just feel for the controls, without having to look down and miss the action on tv. the only games that would work for this are racing games, where you just tilt the ipad.
what a world of difference some buttons would make <sigh>
Not really. Properly designed controls on touch screen will be just fine... You will see...
Anyone who thinks that the long-term viability of the IOS ecosystem as a significant home game player because of the lack of hard controls is just missing the picture.
I can't figure out why some people think you have to look at the screen of a touchscreen device to use it to manipulate things in a game world. Between rotation and movement of the device itself with properly placed buttons you can do a lot with it, none of it requiring looking at the touch screen.
I suspect most people could distinguish between the lower left corner of their device and the upper right corner, for instance, without looking at the screen.
what a world of difference some buttons would make <sigh>
Not really. Properly designed controls on touch screen will be just fine... You will see...
Anyone who thinks that the long-term viability of the IOS ecosystem as a significant home game player because of the lack of hard controls is just missing the picture.
I can't figure out why some people think you have to look at the screen of a touchscreen device to use it to manipulate things in a game world. Between rotation and movement of the device itself with properly placed buttons you can do a lot with it, none of it requiring looking at the touch screen.
I suspect most people could distinguish between the lower left corner of their device and the upper right corner, for instance, without looking at the screen.
roland.g
Sep 1, 01:32 PM
Has apple done this before? I'm not trying to make it sound like i'm rude, I really just dont know. I know that when the first MBP's came out they did that silent upgrade in power but I didnt think it was price.
When they had 17" Lampshade G4 iMacs, the price came down one day without notice. I think they also dropped the price $100 on G5 iMac when they upped specs adding Airport (and maybe BT) standard. That was when they went $1,799 to $1,699.
When they had 17" Lampshade G4 iMacs, the price came down one day without notice. I think they also dropped the price $100 on G5 iMac when they upped specs adding Airport (and maybe BT) standard. That was when they went $1,799 to $1,699.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 2, 04:21 PM
Nope, the new Jetta is built in Mexico. Off the top of my head, I'd say that the only German-built Volkswagens you can buy in the USA are the GTI and Tiguan. The Phaeton and R32 are (or were) also German-made. The Touareg is built in Slovakia, the Routan is built by Chrysler, and the Jetta, non-GTI Golf (except the R32) and New Beetles are all made in Mexico. Not sure about the Eos.
My father bought a 1988 Jetta brand new and it was a lemon. It had every issue under the sun, not the least of which is that it rusted terribly in five years (big holes in the floor and wheelwells!). I agree that the Mexican-built Volksawgens have struggled with build quality at times over the years, but that sweet Audi 1.8 turbo was a great motor.
As for the Cruze, I'm not sure how GM would manage a US-market diesel version. My best guess is that the diesel model would be built alongside the other US-market Cruzes at the Lordstown, OH assembly plant using complete VM Motori engines shipped from Italy.
My father bought a 1988 Jetta brand new and it was a lemon. It had every issue under the sun, not the least of which is that it rusted terribly in five years (big holes in the floor and wheelwells!). I agree that the Mexican-built Volksawgens have struggled with build quality at times over the years, but that sweet Audi 1.8 turbo was a great motor.
As for the Cruze, I'm not sure how GM would manage a US-market diesel version. My best guess is that the diesel model would be built alongside the other US-market Cruzes at the Lordstown, OH assembly plant using complete VM Motori engines shipped from Italy.
Whistleway
Jan 2, 10:36 AM
doesn't seem like there is much to get excited about!
Or basically all rumors are messed up. No one knows whats coming except iLife and OS X preview. Talk about all the time wasted on these rumors :(
Or basically all rumors are messed up. No one knows whats coming except iLife and OS X preview. Talk about all the time wasted on these rumors :(
hellomoto4
Mar 30, 09:43 PM
http://i.imgur.com/ct17x.png
Before, the menubar would slide down and cover the toolbar.
Wahoo. Thank god they fixed this, I thought the DP1 behaviour was horrible (and very un-Apple-like)
Downloading DP2 now. Will post any significant changes as well.
Before, the menubar would slide down and cover the toolbar.
Wahoo. Thank god they fixed this, I thought the DP1 behaviour was horrible (and very un-Apple-like)
Downloading DP2 now. Will post any significant changes as well.
SuperCachetes
Mar 2, 03:01 PM
The VW diesels are very well-built cars. A friend bought an '09 Jetta TDI and he is satisfied with it. I checked out the BMW 335d at the Detroit Auto show a year ago or so, and while I like the car BMW only offers it as a sedan and the base price is a laughably expensive $44k. If you won't buy a VW and want a newish diesel, your only other vaguely affordable option is a used W210/W211 (1996-2009) Mercedes Benz E-Class diesel. Nice cars, but you'll have to find one and it will be used (and not particularly cheap).
Are the Diesel versions built in Germany?
The Jetta I have is a 2000 1.8T, assembled in Puebla, and I would not call it "well-built" at all. I won't go so far as to call it a lemon, but there's evidence of poor engineering and poor assembly throughout the car. I suppose it was a first-year model...
In hindsight, I do wish I'd have gotten the Diesel variant of the era, but all in all, I still think I could've done better with a Honda. YMMV.
Are the Diesel versions built in Germany?
The Jetta I have is a 2000 1.8T, assembled in Puebla, and I would not call it "well-built" at all. I won't go so far as to call it a lemon, but there's evidence of poor engineering and poor assembly throughout the car. I suppose it was a first-year model...
In hindsight, I do wish I'd have gotten the Diesel variant of the era, but all in all, I still think I could've done better with a Honda. YMMV.
Stoutman11
Jan 28, 02:08 PM
http://www.coates3.com/gallery2/d/44261-1/painted+grill-0270.jpg
I put some painted grills on it yesterday, and had pre- and post-cat O2 sensors installed along with the fuel filter today. It looks pretty good for a car with 103k miles on the odo (I'm the original owner).
very clean! looks nice
I put some painted grills on it yesterday, and had pre- and post-cat O2 sensors installed along with the fuel filter today. It looks pretty good for a car with 103k miles on the odo (I'm the original owner).
very clean! looks nice
Erwin-Br
Apr 21, 12:30 PM
If this were Google or M$ you apologists would be foaming at the mouth.
The anti-Google folks on this forum have used the privacy issue as ammunition against Google for quite some time now. To my surprise (or not really) all of the sudden privacy is not important to then anymore.
At least with Google you KNOW data is collected.
The anti-Google folks on this forum have used the privacy issue as ammunition against Google for quite some time now. To my surprise (or not really) all of the sudden privacy is not important to then anymore.
At least with Google you KNOW data is collected.
apb3
Aug 16, 01:23 PM
It wouldn't necessarily require ANY extra DRM, they'd just build it in to the update of the ipod and itunes software. Buy a song directly on the iPod, it only gets transferred to computers with your itunes shopping account. That's pretty much how it works already.
Build what into the update?? more Digital rights management... And we go back to Apple's one-way iTunes to iPod transfer selling point to music labels. Once the floodgates to two-way transfer are opened officially, bye bye contracts with major lables and forget about movies.
Build what into the update?? more Digital rights management... And we go back to Apple's one-way iTunes to iPod transfer selling point to music labels. Once the floodgates to two-way transfer are opened officially, bye bye contracts with major lables and forget about movies.
MacBoobsPro
Aug 7, 05:19 AM
Thats interesting coming from a New Zealander. Very interesting
Thats what i thought :rolleyes:
Thats what i thought :rolleyes:
heffemonkeyman
Sep 6, 08:11 PM
Too expensive if you ask me. In the cinema I pay $2 for a not so new movie (1/2 year old?), indie stuff/classics/etc. costs $4, new big movies $5.
What planet are you on?
What planet are you on?
NeoMac
Apr 12, 01:51 PM
No, but I sure would like to learn! My mid life crisis is right around the corner and I would like to buy a sports car preferably a convertible with a manual transmission. I realize it's clich� but I still would like to do that! :)
a456
Sep 1, 02:19 PM
At WWDC, Apple mentioned one of Leopard's features - 64 bit application support. Let's fast forward to Leopard's release day and look at Apple's line. I'm guessing that all all their machines will have 64-bit processors, but surely the difference in processors used in the Macbook, Macbook Pro, the iMac, and the mini, surely can't be just speed, and all using the Merom? The iMac will have Conroe, maybe an E6600.
If the iMac had the Conroe and this is more powerful than the Merom wouldn't this continue to place the processing power of the consumer desktop above the power of the 'pro' laptop, which has been one of the problems for some time now? If they both had Merom at least they would be equal. Don't know about the Macbook and the Mini though, I guess the distinction is that they don't have separate graphics cards.
If the iMac had the Conroe and this is more powerful than the Merom wouldn't this continue to place the processing power of the consumer desktop above the power of the 'pro' laptop, which has been one of the problems for some time now? If they both had Merom at least they would be equal. Don't know about the Macbook and the Mini though, I guess the distinction is that they don't have separate graphics cards.
Vegasman
May 2, 05:37 PM
iOS style multitasking features (benefits) are indeed in Lion.
Applications written for Lion can "suspend and resume" without having to "save and close" documents. The reason the little light below running apps on the Dock was removed is that "running" is now more of a decision between the App and OS -- not so much the user. (APP - "Am I idle right now? Can I resume from this point very quickly? If so, I'll just suspend myself till the user or an event wakes me back up. No need to burn RAM or CPU, the user won't even notice I'm not here.)
Uh? Don't our apps and operating systems already do this automatically already?
Applications written for Lion can "suspend and resume" without having to "save and close" documents. The reason the little light below running apps on the Dock was removed is that "running" is now more of a decision between the App and OS -- not so much the user. (APP - "Am I idle right now? Can I resume from this point very quickly? If so, I'll just suspend myself till the user or an event wakes me back up. No need to burn RAM or CPU, the user won't even notice I'm not here.)
Uh? Don't our apps and operating systems already do this automatically already?
juanm
Jan 1, 06:45 PM
Steve will take the stage and announce that they have created artificial life that can sing every song on your iPod while cleaning your house, he says they will be called PodPeople.:rolleyes:
Or maybe... iRobot? :D
Sorry, but I had to say it.
Or maybe... iRobot? :D
Sorry, but I had to say it.
mdatwood
Apr 26, 02:02 PM
Matts Macintosh describes 1984 Mac System 1 comes with dash-board like widgets. Video:
http://obamapacman.com/2011/04/1984-mac-os-system-1-gui-apps-video/
Interesting video, although being able to open a calculator seems to be a generous definition of widget.
http://obamapacman.com/2011/04/1984-mac-os-system-1-gui-apps-video/
Interesting video, although being able to open a calculator seems to be a generous definition of widget.
Nameci
Apr 11, 01:41 AM
Easy for a stick shift... I can drive almost anything as long as it has 2 wheels or more...
pika2000
Oct 9, 04:36 PM
This issue seems to be mostly discussed in US centric blogs/sites/forums and US users. The iPhone 4 is shipped worldwide. So why aren't we seeing the same amount of outrage from users overseas?
Zadillo
Oct 23, 06:51 AM
At this point does anyone even need a "source" for one of these rumors? It seems like at this point anyone can say "MBP updates coming as early as THIS WEEK!!" and it is eventually going to be true, as Abstract says.
Earendil
Nov 28, 12:56 PM
Assuming for a second that this is true, I do not see Apple in this space. 17" LCD monitors have been around for years and they are inexpensive now. Why would Apple enter this market when it is unlikely to get the ussual return on investment?
Best point yet.
I think if we all dig deep down the only reason we want Apple to enter this market is so that we can have what can already be had, but with an Apple logo on it. Even I'll admit it.
17" cheap consumer monitors don't need innovation. They don't need a refresh, they don't need love from Apple's design team. Give it a few year s(if not a lot less) and the 17" monitors will be the equivalent of the 15" or 13" monitors. And who wants APple to design a cool 15" LCD :\
I think (and I could be wrong) that when people today buy a 17" monitor they are going for the cheapest display they can get so they can use their computer. If they have a little extra cash, they look at larger monitors. Aside from Apple never being able to compete for the cheapest of the cheap, it's also not what they do, or ever had done afaik.
I'd rather seem Apple make a consumer level 20" and sell it for $300 :D
And knock a little off the pro models if at all possible...
~Tyler
Best point yet.
I think if we all dig deep down the only reason we want Apple to enter this market is so that we can have what can already be had, but with an Apple logo on it. Even I'll admit it.
17" cheap consumer monitors don't need innovation. They don't need a refresh, they don't need love from Apple's design team. Give it a few year s(if not a lot less) and the 17" monitors will be the equivalent of the 15" or 13" monitors. And who wants APple to design a cool 15" LCD :\
I think (and I could be wrong) that when people today buy a 17" monitor they are going for the cheapest display they can get so they can use their computer. If they have a little extra cash, they look at larger monitors. Aside from Apple never being able to compete for the cheapest of the cheap, it's also not what they do, or ever had done afaik.
I'd rather seem Apple make a consumer level 20" and sell it for $300 :D
And knock a little off the pro models if at all possible...
~Tyler
No comments:
Post a Comment