paul4339
Apr 27, 01:20 AM
...Thats the exact same thing going on here with App store. Companies trademark "generic" terms all the time. Most trademarks ARE generic. But once it becomes used to associate a brand or product, its no longer generic.
I think that's the point MS was making with it's objection, citing that Eastern Airlines had tried to trademark "Shuttle", and even though people associated Shuttle with Eastern, because the word was used so often, "shuttle" had (or became?) a "de-facto secondary" meaning. The courts ruled against Eastern and all the other airlines (New York airlines shuttle, Delta shuttle, etc) were allowed to use the word. MS then pointed out a list of examples of how 'app store' is used and has now attained a "de-facto secondary' meaning too. (I'm not saying it's right or wrong, just pointing out the Microsoft's case)
I think that's the point MS was making with it's objection, citing that Eastern Airlines had tried to trademark "Shuttle", and even though people associated Shuttle with Eastern, because the word was used so often, "shuttle" had (or became?) a "de-facto secondary" meaning. The courts ruled against Eastern and all the other airlines (New York airlines shuttle, Delta shuttle, etc) were allowed to use the word. MS then pointed out a list of examples of how 'app store' is used and has now attained a "de-facto secondary' meaning too. (I'm not saying it's right or wrong, just pointing out the Microsoft's case)
newrigel
Nov 16, 11:03 PM
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.
CONTENT CREATION PRO'S will see the benefit! Like DAW's host running multiple plugins and virtual instruments etc. Video guy's that are rendering in the background while doing a file format conversion task while @ the same time doing a cut copy paste edit on some video... Any processes that are CONCURRENT! THESE are the things that will take advantage of multiple cores... the kids on myspace farting around on the net emailing and such are really useless for multiple cores and us pro guy's NEED this multitasking power... BRING IT ON!
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.
CONTENT CREATION PRO'S will see the benefit! Like DAW's host running multiple plugins and virtual instruments etc. Video guy's that are rendering in the background while doing a file format conversion task while @ the same time doing a cut copy paste edit on some video... Any processes that are CONCURRENT! THESE are the things that will take advantage of multiple cores... the kids on myspace farting around on the net emailing and such are really useless for multiple cores and us pro guy's NEED this multitasking power... BRING IT ON!
tny
Jul 18, 07:20 AM
This does play into the news published about the industry allowing people to burn movies to DVDs but can someone do the math? What would the file size be for 2 hour movie at present? What about if it were compressed into a zip or tz file? What would it be if the quality were improved? How long would it take to download these files with dialup, on dsl, on cable. I would think that most people would not be downloading using their offices T1 connection ;)
How long would you wait or tie up your computer's internet connection to download an old movie from Disney?
Here is another issue to think about. With large files being downloaded to your HD and then errasing them you will have to defragment your HD quite often or you will suffer. Is there rumor of improved Disk Utility or other method of handling this?
Zip, Tar, and GZip are all but irrelevant here, as the compression used in MPEG2 and MP4 leave little room for Zip to optimize (I just zipped an 850 MB MP4 video, and picked up 12 MB in the compression).
I have a 2.5 hour movie in EyeTV right now; in MPEG2 format (CD quality), it's 7.5 GB. The MP4 re-coding I did is I think 1.4 GB (that's on another computer). This is 29.97 FPS/640x480 video; your mileage may vary, as both MPEG2 and MP4 compression vary depending upon the nature of the content.
Where I live, Cable gives 6 Mbps down, burstable to 12 Mbps for the first 50 or so MB, a lot higher than T1's 1.5 Mbps down (though of course a T1 also has 1.5 Mbps up, and Cable around here does maybe 512 kbps). Obviously the cable speed is dependent to some extent on the traffic at surrounding homes, though I think they have significantly reduced the pool size for cable (somebody else may know a lot more about this than I do), which would give you a lot closer to that ideal 6 Mbps (assuming that the server can maintain that speed, which few can).
I suspect that you can count on the videos being 320x240, not 640x480. It looks about as good as VHS, and will cost Apple less in infrastructure costs (which they will have to be a lot more careful with than they have been with music).
This is a very bad idea. Given how well sales of DVDs do, I'd think that the movie industry would realize that the ownership model will be very successful for them. It's bad for Apple, too, as they have to have pretty much the same infrastructure for rental that they would have for an ownership model, but smaller margins (unless the movie industry is stupid enough to think we'll rent for $9.99).
How long would you wait or tie up your computer's internet connection to download an old movie from Disney?
Here is another issue to think about. With large files being downloaded to your HD and then errasing them you will have to defragment your HD quite often or you will suffer. Is there rumor of improved Disk Utility or other method of handling this?
Zip, Tar, and GZip are all but irrelevant here, as the compression used in MPEG2 and MP4 leave little room for Zip to optimize (I just zipped an 850 MB MP4 video, and picked up 12 MB in the compression).
I have a 2.5 hour movie in EyeTV right now; in MPEG2 format (CD quality), it's 7.5 GB. The MP4 re-coding I did is I think 1.4 GB (that's on another computer). This is 29.97 FPS/640x480 video; your mileage may vary, as both MPEG2 and MP4 compression vary depending upon the nature of the content.
Where I live, Cable gives 6 Mbps down, burstable to 12 Mbps for the first 50 or so MB, a lot higher than T1's 1.5 Mbps down (though of course a T1 also has 1.5 Mbps up, and Cable around here does maybe 512 kbps). Obviously the cable speed is dependent to some extent on the traffic at surrounding homes, though I think they have significantly reduced the pool size for cable (somebody else may know a lot more about this than I do), which would give you a lot closer to that ideal 6 Mbps (assuming that the server can maintain that speed, which few can).
I suspect that you can count on the videos being 320x240, not 640x480. It looks about as good as VHS, and will cost Apple less in infrastructure costs (which they will have to be a lot more careful with than they have been with music).
This is a very bad idea. Given how well sales of DVDs do, I'd think that the movie industry would realize that the ownership model will be very successful for them. It's bad for Apple, too, as they have to have pretty much the same infrastructure for rental that they would have for an ownership model, but smaller margins (unless the movie industry is stupid enough to think we'll rent for $9.99).
stoid
Aug 6, 09:57 PM
I'm at work tomorrow too, but seeing as my 'boss'/co-worker is also a huge Apple fanboy, and since the Keynote starts at noon local (CDST) I'm expecting that we'll fire up macrumorslive and eat lunch whilst get text updates. Too bad there's no live video tho...
dXTC
Mar 23, 08:09 AM
As I think I've mentioned before at some point, my next iPod purchase will most likely be the classic. My wife has a touch; while I find it somewhat nifty, I'm not a fan of the iPod app.
My wishes for the 10th Anniversary classic:
![justin bieber fit. the (Part 1] Justin Bieber](http://hollywoodcrush.mtv.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/040810_bieber2.jpg "the (Part 1] Justin Bieber")
the (Part 1] Justin Bieber
caribbeanjustin bieber
fit justin love you get
Slim-fit t-shirt, justin item
with Justin Bieber.
Justin+ieber+music+2011
justin bieber rolling stone
new Justin Bieber movie,
justin bieber concert
justin bieber never say never
Justin Bieber Skater Slim-Fit
justin bieber dancing
justin bieber never say never
justin bieber never say never.
My wishes for the 10th Anniversary classic:
TheAnswer
Jul 18, 11:41 AM
I don't know if the rumor is true or not, especially since lately AI and TS seem to be at odds about all the hardware news at WWDC, but here is what I'd like to see:
1. Streaming of movies now in theatres at least at DVD quality.
2. Streaming rentals of movies out of DVD at a little better resolution than we have now.
3. The option to purchase a DVD or HD quality version of a movie we have just watched the streaming rental of, with the ability to burn a copy.
1. Streaming of movies now in theatres at least at DVD quality.
2. Streaming rentals of movies out of DVD at a little better resolution than we have now.
3. The option to purchase a DVD or HD quality version of a movie we have just watched the streaming rental of, with the ability to burn a copy.
jgould
Feb 23, 11:38 AM
iMark,
Nice and clean. I love simple setups.
Nice and clean. I love simple setups.
Mal67
Apr 20, 03:46 AM
I hope so, and I also hope they don't skimp out on the Mini.
According to the Buyer's Guide, it's been over 300 days since the Mini was updated and the average is 248 days. So they're a tad behind.
I don't think Apple have any excuses on this one. It's been far too long.
According to the Buyer's Guide, it's been over 300 days since the Mini was updated and the average is 248 days. So they're a tad behind.
I don't think Apple have any excuses on this one. It's been far too long.
whooleytoo
Sep 6, 02:08 PM
Look, they discontinued the $50 BTO superdrive option on the lower end model. Are they purposely trying to drive me to Velocity Micro?
It's the one thing I don't like about buying Apple - they deliberately restrict options on their lower cost hardware to push you to choose a more expensive model. Other OEMs seem happy to allow you to choose your model, then add on whatever you choose, with Apple you only really have options if you choose the most expensive model (Mac Pro) to begin with.
That's why we're never likely to see a cheap mini-tower Mac again, with upgradable CPU & GPU.*
I should add though, I'm glad there is an option in the mini line not to have a DVD writer, if it saves a few euros. I've had 3 Macs with them and have burnt a total of 2 DVDs, a complete waste of money.
(* yes, that was said deliberately in the hope of having egg on my face in a week's time. ;) )
It's the one thing I don't like about buying Apple - they deliberately restrict options on their lower cost hardware to push you to choose a more expensive model. Other OEMs seem happy to allow you to choose your model, then add on whatever you choose, with Apple you only really have options if you choose the most expensive model (Mac Pro) to begin with.
That's why we're never likely to see a cheap mini-tower Mac again, with upgradable CPU & GPU.*
I should add though, I'm glad there is an option in the mini line not to have a DVD writer, if it saves a few euros. I've had 3 Macs with them and have burnt a total of 2 DVDs, a complete waste of money.
(* yes, that was said deliberately in the hope of having egg on my face in a week's time. ;) )
Fiveos22
Aug 6, 09:52 PM
Nothing they haven't done before. Like the "Redmond, start your photocopiers" thing for Tiger. And Redmond did exactly that, it seems. ;)
--Eric
They did at WWDC '04 (when Tiger was introduced) with slogans like "Redmond, Start Your Photocopiers" and the word "Longhorn" in the Spotlight search field. ;)
http://www.preshaa.com/archive/work/ninja.jpg
/ninja'd!
//sorry, I had to
--Eric
They did at WWDC '04 (when Tiger was introduced) with slogans like "Redmond, Start Your Photocopiers" and the word "Longhorn" in the Spotlight search field. ;)
http://www.preshaa.com/archive/work/ninja.jpg
/ninja'd!
//sorry, I had to
danielwsmithee
Nov 27, 03:09 PM
I'm sorry, why is their target audience dwindling?It all comes down to how much extra you are willing to pay for the increased monitor specification. Most will pay 20% very few will pay 75%.
Frobozz
Mar 25, 09:40 AM
Nop... consider.
2x CPUs 130W rated. So thats 260W, right there. However, no CPU consumes the rated, so it's give or take ~260W.
Each 5770 is ~108W, given two, that's ~216 W. Right off the bat we have ~476 W being consumed. Not bad; however let's look at the side where its not a dual 5770 setup.
The PSU on the Mac Pro is rated for 980 W of power, but for simplicity sake let's say 1 kW. Now, factor in the Super drive, Ethernet, Airport, at least 1 HDD and peripheral docks/cards you are looking at ~100 W. Take into account a 20 W per 1GB of memory (assume 6GB) and you've got ~120 W more. So far ~ 220 W more.
Now we have ~480 W [~260W + ~220W]consumption leaving only ~520 W left for a GPU. Currently, the HD 6970 requires 2x 8-pin connectors to provide 150 W per pin. That's 300W right off. So we are left with ~220 W in the system. Now, factor in that PCIe slot power draw at 75 W and we've got a ~145 W left over. ~145 W is cutting it too close and something will yield (yes I do realize 145 W is a lot more, but read on). Now, the sad part, we were assuming 1kW PSU which is not the case; it's 980 W meaning there will be less power, ~125 W. Now, also take into consideration no PSU is 100% efficient, hence there will be greater power outlet draw and the PSU will be operating at high voltage/amps and its life span will decrease dramatically over very high usage.
In other words the current PSU may come up short. Add to that the fact that all current shipping and past model Mac Pros don't have extra dual 8-pin connectors. They have dual 6-pins. There is an adapter to make a 6-pin into an 8-pin, but it is risky at best, big no-no.
So as you can see an HD 6970 would be barely supported on current models. Future models? Perhaps yes assuming Apple bumps to 1.1kW or 1.2kW PSU.
Take into account this was calculated assuming 6GB of memory and 1 HDD, anymore RAM (20 W/1GB) or HDDs (10W/disc) and the consumption will go up. Also, assuming nothing is hooked up to peripheral ports; like a small external drive that draws 5-10 W.
I have an 850 watt PSU in my gaming rig with a 4870x2 and custom coolers all around on the CPU, GPU, and case. I think your calculations are pretty close to correct if you wanted to run everything in the case at once. But that's not typical to run everything at max all at once. I suppose Apple might not want to get in the business of telling people it's okay to buy this honking huge GPU as long as you're not running a lot of extra hard drives and extra PCI-E cards.
But, for people looking to simply drop in a fast GPU and not have a lot of extra bells and whistles (read: a gaming rig), they would be fine with 850 watts or so, even with a 6970. Or at least damn close.
The tricky part with GPU's is that the high end units commonly exceed rated specifications at max load, so these calculations are tricky. And your point about running too close to your max is also a good one. It's fair to say that when you add up all your max dissipation, add 20% or so, and that's the wattage your PSU needs.
2x CPUs 130W rated. So thats 260W, right there. However, no CPU consumes the rated, so it's give or take ~260W.
Each 5770 is ~108W, given two, that's ~216 W. Right off the bat we have ~476 W being consumed. Not bad; however let's look at the side where its not a dual 5770 setup.
The PSU on the Mac Pro is rated for 980 W of power, but for simplicity sake let's say 1 kW. Now, factor in the Super drive, Ethernet, Airport, at least 1 HDD and peripheral docks/cards you are looking at ~100 W. Take into account a 20 W per 1GB of memory (assume 6GB) and you've got ~120 W more. So far ~ 220 W more.
Now we have ~480 W [~260W + ~220W]consumption leaving only ~520 W left for a GPU. Currently, the HD 6970 requires 2x 8-pin connectors to provide 150 W per pin. That's 300W right off. So we are left with ~220 W in the system. Now, factor in that PCIe slot power draw at 75 W and we've got a ~145 W left over. ~145 W is cutting it too close and something will yield (yes I do realize 145 W is a lot more, but read on). Now, the sad part, we were assuming 1kW PSU which is not the case; it's 980 W meaning there will be less power, ~125 W. Now, also take into consideration no PSU is 100% efficient, hence there will be greater power outlet draw and the PSU will be operating at high voltage/amps and its life span will decrease dramatically over very high usage.
In other words the current PSU may come up short. Add to that the fact that all current shipping and past model Mac Pros don't have extra dual 8-pin connectors. They have dual 6-pins. There is an adapter to make a 6-pin into an 8-pin, but it is risky at best, big no-no.
So as you can see an HD 6970 would be barely supported on current models. Future models? Perhaps yes assuming Apple bumps to 1.1kW or 1.2kW PSU.
Take into account this was calculated assuming 6GB of memory and 1 HDD, anymore RAM (20 W/1GB) or HDDs (10W/disc) and the consumption will go up. Also, assuming nothing is hooked up to peripheral ports; like a small external drive that draws 5-10 W.
I have an 850 watt PSU in my gaming rig with a 4870x2 and custom coolers all around on the CPU, GPU, and case. I think your calculations are pretty close to correct if you wanted to run everything in the case at once. But that's not typical to run everything at max all at once. I suppose Apple might not want to get in the business of telling people it's okay to buy this honking huge GPU as long as you're not running a lot of extra hard drives and extra PCI-E cards.
But, for people looking to simply drop in a fast GPU and not have a lot of extra bells and whistles (read: a gaming rig), they would be fine with 850 watts or so, even with a 6970. Or at least damn close.
The tricky part with GPU's is that the high end units commonly exceed rated specifications at max load, so these calculations are tricky. And your point about running too close to your max is also a good one. It's fair to say that when you add up all your max dissipation, add 20% or so, and that's the wattage your PSU needs.
twoodcc
Mar 25, 12:12 PM
congrats to 4JNA for 6 million points!
JesterJJZ
Apr 12, 09:05 PM
Good live updates here.
http://www.photographybay.com/2011/04/12/final-cut-pro-user-group-supermeet-liveblog/#more-19204
http://www.photographybay.com/2011/04/12/final-cut-pro-user-group-supermeet-liveblog/#more-19204
Aniej
Dec 3, 03:52 AM
one thing i was wondering about the iTV is: why hasn't it got an iPod dock on top of it?!
I mean I get what you are saying, but it doesn't seem like it would be very useful for two reasons. 1. By the very nature of how iTV works, you have a Mac somewhere else in the house and therefore have a tiny, hidden out of the way docking station right there. 2. iTV should either slip seemlesly into your aray of tv components and look elegant. Slapping an ipod on it makes it look like just another charging dock station and not nearly as sleek as the houaing it is in now.
I mean I get what you are saying, but it doesn't seem like it would be very useful for two reasons. 1. By the very nature of how iTV works, you have a Mac somewhere else in the house and therefore have a tiny, hidden out of the way docking station right there. 2. iTV should either slip seemlesly into your aray of tv components and look elegant. Slapping an ipod on it makes it look like just another charging dock station and not nearly as sleek as the houaing it is in now.
saxon48
Mar 22, 04:08 PM
Phew. Killing the Classic would be a terrible mistake. The death of an icon right there.
iW00t
Jan 2, 11:44 PM
Anyway do you guys think a ultra portable Apple laptop is in the works?
Like say a 12 inch Macbook Pro?
Like say a 12 inch Macbook Pro?
ju5tin81
Oct 23, 03:21 PM
How exactly is Apple making a big deal out of small updates? The recent processor updates Apple has done (Core Duo to Core 2 Duo on the iMac and the speedbumped Core Duos on the MBP earlier this year) were quiet launches, with no announcements or hoopla at all really. The only real hoopla with the iMac was about the 24" screen, but it was certainly subdued. Hell, Apple made a bigger deal out of the Apple Hi-Fi.
The only people making a big deal out of it are ourselves.
Lets not also forget that the MacBook just appeared one day! A 'whole' Tuesday before the rumour sites thought it would. :rolleyes:
(With minimal fanfare)
The only people making a big deal out of it are ourselves.
Lets not also forget that the MacBook just appeared one day! A 'whole' Tuesday before the rumour sites thought it would. :rolleyes:
(With minimal fanfare)
thejadedmonkey
Nov 28, 07:46 AM
Congratulations, you just lost any arguments you wish to make. If Apple monitors are vastly overpriced for what you get, if you don't have any need for something that is superior to a regular consumer model, then why in the hell did you buy one?
Maybe he got an apple one first and didn't like it (but who's going to trash it), or one was a gift, or perhaps he wanted to go with the whole apple-theme.. Maybe he has TWO computers.
Why are you looking for a fight? I happen to have two different lava lamps. why? Because I can. thank you, don't bite my head off because I have two.
Maybe he got an apple one first and didn't like it (but who's going to trash it), or one was a gift, or perhaps he wanted to go with the whole apple-theme.. Maybe he has TWO computers.
Why are you looking for a fight? I happen to have two different lava lamps. why? Because I can. thank you, don't bite my head off because I have two.
AppliedVisual
Nov 16, 11:19 AM
The bandwidth of DIMMs doesn't really change with their capacity (assuming their timings are the same). It is the number of active channels that gives you the increase in memory bandwidth.
Usually true, but with FB-DIMMs the 256MB and 512MB only use one of the onboard buffer channels (as in buffer channels on the module itself). Whiel the timings and I/O speeds are the same as other larger capacity modules, they are only capable of sustaining 1/2 the full bandwidth load. OTOH, the latency is a bit lower with 256MB and 512MB modules as the modules' onboard memory controller only has to deal with a single channel buffer.
Anyway, If you can live with 2GB in a Mac Pro, then 4x512MB wouldn't be a bad deal. I'm not sure if you really could get by with only 2GB in one of these... If so, you probably don't need a Mac Pro and that's a whole different discussion.
But If you're going with 4GB or more, you definitely will want 1GB or 2GB modules to capitalize on the increased bandwidth abilities and I wouldn't recommend mixing half gate buffer and full gate buffer modules within the same system.
Usually true, but with FB-DIMMs the 256MB and 512MB only use one of the onboard buffer channels (as in buffer channels on the module itself). Whiel the timings and I/O speeds are the same as other larger capacity modules, they are only capable of sustaining 1/2 the full bandwidth load. OTOH, the latency is a bit lower with 256MB and 512MB modules as the modules' onboard memory controller only has to deal with a single channel buffer.
Anyway, If you can live with 2GB in a Mac Pro, then 4x512MB wouldn't be a bad deal. I'm not sure if you really could get by with only 2GB in one of these... If so, you probably don't need a Mac Pro and that's a whole different discussion.
But If you're going with 4GB or more, you definitely will want 1GB or 2GB modules to capitalize on the increased bandwidth abilities and I wouldn't recommend mixing half gate buffer and full gate buffer modules within the same system.
gugy
Sep 1, 12:47 PM
23" Imac is a great size. Add HD resolution then that's great.
I would love to see dual display support. But I highly doubt they will allow it. Apple wants to make sure there is a distinction between their consumer and pro line. It would be cool to have the Imac 23" with a 23" Cinema display next to it.
I would love to see dual display support. But I highly doubt they will allow it. Apple wants to make sure there is a distinction between their consumer and pro line. It would be cool to have the Imac 23" with a 23" Cinema display next to it.
gkarris
Mar 22, 11:27 PM
I would buy this if it was 220gb. Great mockup
oooh, an Aluminum Unibody iPod Classic - now that would be an INSTANT Classic!!! :eek:
:D
oooh, an Aluminum Unibody iPod Classic - now that would be an INSTANT Classic!!! :eek:
:D
notjustjay
Apr 21, 12:19 PM
Viruses collecting data on iOS?
... :confused:
It doesn't exist now, but that's not to say it might never happen in the future.
... :confused:
It doesn't exist now, but that's not to say it might never happen in the future.
FearNo1
Apr 23, 01:39 AM
Using your example, couldn't they do that with the GPS tech in most fones today simply by saving your location info in a server side database? I wouldn't put anything pass these companies and govt today.
If LTD wants an example other wise you can see companies start using these feature on the phones to track employees at all time and what they do. Or in court cases them being pulled it to use against one spouse in a mess divorce.
Spying on ones spouse is another example.
If LTD wants an example other wise you can see companies start using these feature on the phones to track employees at all time and what they do. Or in court cases them being pulled it to use against one spouse in a mess divorce.
Spying on ones spouse is another example.
No comments:
Post a Comment