littleman23408
Dec 2, 08:43 AM
I hate to link to IGN, but here goes:
GT5 damage explained (http://ps3.ign.com/articles/113/1137446p1.html)
Confusion seems to have stemmed from its differing implementation across the game's extensive garage, a point that Sony further clarified. "Standard models have minor deformation and scratches," said Sony, "Premium cars have greater visible level of damage, and Premium racing models have the highest level of damage."
I can't open the links due to work internet, but they should have done equal damage to all cars. Besides, every real car dents and scratches pretty easily.
GT5 damage explained (http://ps3.ign.com/articles/113/1137446p1.html)
Confusion seems to have stemmed from its differing implementation across the game's extensive garage, a point that Sony further clarified. "Standard models have minor deformation and scratches," said Sony, "Premium cars have greater visible level of damage, and Premium racing models have the highest level of damage."
I can't open the links due to work internet, but they should have done equal damage to all cars. Besides, every real car dents and scratches pretty easily.
shamino
Jul 20, 05:41 PM
I hate to burst everyone's bubble, but Kentsfield will not be appearing in any of the Pro machines for some time.
Apple will be using them exclusively in the Xserves, at for the most part of 2007. This will finally give Apple another way to distinguish their server line from their pro line.
Do you have any evidence to back this up?
Historically, Apple has always sold a dual-processor model of the Pro systems. When dual-core PPCs became available, they shipped a G5 system with two of these.
In the absence of any other information, it seems pretty darn obvious that the high-end Mac Pro will have two processors, regardless of how many cores are in it. Which means it will have to be something from the Xeon line.
Apple doesn't need to cripple the Mac Pro in order to promote the Xserve. The two products are designed for completely different applications and are not interchangeable for any serious applications. Nobody will ever want to use an Xserve on their desktop, and nobody setting up a compute cluster will want to build it from desktop boxes.
Apple will be using them exclusively in the Xserves, at for the most part of 2007. This will finally give Apple another way to distinguish their server line from their pro line.
Do you have any evidence to back this up?
Historically, Apple has always sold a dual-processor model of the Pro systems. When dual-core PPCs became available, they shipped a G5 system with two of these.
In the absence of any other information, it seems pretty darn obvious that the high-end Mac Pro will have two processors, regardless of how many cores are in it. Which means it will have to be something from the Xeon line.
Apple doesn't need to cripple the Mac Pro in order to promote the Xserve. The two products are designed for completely different applications and are not interchangeable for any serious applications. Nobody will ever want to use an Xserve on their desktop, and nobody setting up a compute cluster will want to build it from desktop boxes.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 19, 05:04 PM
One of the three basics that must be proven in order to win a trade dress case, is the likelihood of confusion.
In other words, would someone think they're buying one thing but really getting another, such as might happen with shoes or pills or whatever.
Does anyone think that a normal person would actually confuse a Samsung Galaxy (especially with that huge "Samsung" on it) with an Apple iPhone when they're buying it?
I mean, is Apple going to claim that they're losing sales because the Galaxy is so close to the iPhone that people can't tell the difference? If so, that sure doesn't say much for the iPhone. Or it says a lot for the Galaxy.
That is not the case. The user can know they are buying a product that is a rip off of another and it is still wrong.
In other words, would someone think they're buying one thing but really getting another, such as might happen with shoes or pills or whatever.
Does anyone think that a normal person would actually confuse a Samsung Galaxy (especially with that huge "Samsung" on it) with an Apple iPhone when they're buying it?
I mean, is Apple going to claim that they're losing sales because the Galaxy is so close to the iPhone that people can't tell the difference? If so, that sure doesn't say much for the iPhone. Or it says a lot for the Galaxy.
That is not the case. The user can know they are buying a product that is a rip off of another and it is still wrong.
paul4339
Apr 20, 10:48 AM
You mean it's not an Apple? :eek: But it's ok for Apple to sue and Australian grocery store because they think the letter W looks like their logo? LMAO. Please.
I think this was because Woolworth (Australian supermarket giant) applied for a blanket trademark that allows it to apply it's logo on anything - especially competing electronic goods, computers, music players, and branded phones. (I'm not saying it's right, just surfacing some more details)
P.
I think this was because Woolworth (Australian supermarket giant) applied for a blanket trademark that allows it to apply it's logo on anything - especially competing electronic goods, computers, music players, and branded phones. (I'm not saying it's right, just surfacing some more details)
P.
Denarius
Mar 22, 07:24 PM
No he hasn't, the stage management has been quite subtle, actually, for once.
I had considered that theory, but when Cameron first broached a no-fly zone in parliament, Clinton's reaction seemed to be very put out when she initially put the dampers on the no-fly zone suggestion. If what you suggest is the case then, frankly, it's been done beautifully.
I think there's an argument for letting one of the partaking Arab nations run the show.
I had considered that theory, but when Cameron first broached a no-fly zone in parliament, Clinton's reaction seemed to be very put out when she initially put the dampers on the no-fly zone suggestion. If what you suggest is the case then, frankly, it's been done beautifully.
I think there's an argument for letting one of the partaking Arab nations run the show.
Silentwave
Aug 20, 12:54 AM
That's okay. No worries. I just get a little defensive when I spend $5000 on a new system, and then see you posting about how it'll be better with Clovertown. But that's my problem I guess. :rolleyes:
Anyway, it's all cool.
but it might not! First the programs have to be made to use all 8 cores, then you have to combat the slower FSB and RAM (533 FBD instead of 667)
Tigerton is a totally different story of course ;) :D
Anyway, it's all cool.
but it might not! First the programs have to be made to use all 8 cores, then you have to combat the slower FSB and RAM (533 FBD instead of 667)
Tigerton is a totally different story of course ;) :D
Rt&Dzine
Apr 28, 06:33 PM
That is a good point... I was "lumped" in as a liberal and I don't consider myself one. I am more moderate. Live and let live kind of guy...
I'm a mixture. Liberal, moderate, and conservative.
I'm a mixture. Liberal, moderate, and conservative.
mBox
Apr 8, 11:19 PM
Careful, some trolls will insist that your opinion is only relevant to your narrow world view and that you need itemized spreadsheets to prove that you know what you're talking about.The positive is that all the other mentioned apps are Apple capable :)
roadbloc
Apr 27, 10:58 AM
Damn. some of you guys are *really* reaching here.
It clearly is an issue if they have a federal lawsuit on it. The fact that Apple are rolling out an update that changes the way it works alone shows that there is clearly a problem. Apple vary rarely roll out updates that change things, even if consumers are screaming for it (mouse acceleration in OS X for example).
You refuse to accept there is a problem. You refuse to see the breech of privacy. Why? The government and Apple have clearly accepted it.
It clearly is an issue if they have a federal lawsuit on it. The fact that Apple are rolling out an update that changes the way it works alone shows that there is clearly a problem. Apple vary rarely roll out updates that change things, even if consumers are screaming for it (mouse acceleration in OS X for example).
You refuse to accept there is a problem. You refuse to see the breech of privacy. Why? The government and Apple have clearly accepted it.
ctdonath
Mar 22, 12:48 PM
The models we saw weren't final -- in fact, they didn't even power on
'nuff said (http://www.engadget.com/2011/03/22/samsung-galaxy-tab-8-9-and-new-galaxy-tab-10-1-thinner-than-the/).
'nuff said (http://www.engadget.com/2011/03/22/samsung-galaxy-tab-8-9-and-new-galaxy-tab-10-1-thinner-than-the/).
scottlinux
Sep 13, 11:41 AM
Blender http://www.blender.org/ can uses 8 cores.
ZoomZoomZoom
Sep 19, 02:24 AM
Does it even MATTER if Apple keeps up? Do we actually WANT Apple to release a new computer every month when Intel bumps up their chips a few megahertz
Why yes we do.
If you can get more speed, and if the competition is doing it, why not? If you're spending a ton of money on a computer, wouldn't you want to most recent one available? Am I being too greedy when I see competitors using a newer, faster chip at the same price as the old chip (easily swappable too) and demand that I want that in my "pro" laptop from Apple?
As for constant revisions, you're probably thinking a bit about resale values. In the long run, constant speed bumps won't affect your resale value at all. (Think about it. You compare old laptop speed to current generation speed. It doesn't matter whatever happened in the middle.)
Why yes we do.
If you can get more speed, and if the competition is doing it, why not? If you're spending a ton of money on a computer, wouldn't you want to most recent one available? Am I being too greedy when I see competitors using a newer, faster chip at the same price as the old chip (easily swappable too) and demand that I want that in my "pro" laptop from Apple?
As for constant revisions, you're probably thinking a bit about resale values. In the long run, constant speed bumps won't affect your resale value at all. (Think about it. You compare old laptop speed to current generation speed. It doesn't matter whatever happened in the middle.)
ergle2
Sep 13, 03:02 PM
You totally missed my point. Even if an application uses only one thread at all times, that application is still a separate process from all of the other processes you have running. At any given time you'll have at least 30 something processes, even when no user-land applications are running. OS X will spread out those processes to try to utilize all the cores as much as possible.
In reality, there are probably not too many non-Apple applications which routinely use 8 threads or more. In the near future I expect all applications to use at least 2-3 threads, even the most simple ones.
Sure, but all those background processes take next to no time to execute -- the extra latency of having more processors will probably slow things down far more than you gain from having up to 8 of those 30 be able to run at any one time.
I'm not saying there's no need for 8 cores -- markets such as databases, media production, rendering, etc. can already make use of that kind of power.
Regular desktops, not so much.
Many simple apps are already mutithreadedto some dgree, but it's to make them non-blocking rather than to spread processor load. If you look at Windows, you'll find a very high number of threads in even just a media player, but some of it's just there to repaint the GUI etc.
In reality, there are probably not too many non-Apple applications which routinely use 8 threads or more. In the near future I expect all applications to use at least 2-3 threads, even the most simple ones.
Sure, but all those background processes take next to no time to execute -- the extra latency of having more processors will probably slow things down far more than you gain from having up to 8 of those 30 be able to run at any one time.
I'm not saying there's no need for 8 cores -- markets such as databases, media production, rendering, etc. can already make use of that kind of power.
Regular desktops, not so much.
Many simple apps are already mutithreadedto some dgree, but it's to make them non-blocking rather than to spread processor load. If you look at Windows, you'll find a very high number of threads in even just a media player, but some of it's just there to repaint the GUI etc.
VanNess
Aug 6, 05:46 PM
So to post my top bets for WWDC...
1) A much clearer roadmap for 64 bit support in Mac OS X. I believe they will outline full 64 bit support across all non-10.4 deprecated frameworks (I believe in the initial release of 10.5). Of course it will also fully support 32 bit applications run side by side with 64 bit applications.
Check
2) Resolution Independent UI will be ready for main stream use with display products possible with in the next year or two (would love to be surprised with 150-200 DPI or so display of course).
Check. They've had a lot of time to work this one out.
3) Quartz 2D Extreme will be ready for main stream use along with some good news on the OpenGL front.
Check
4) Full roll out of the unified user interface look and fell across all frameworks and Apple applications (at least most).
Check, but I'm not one of the bozo militant unified interface nazis that apply the uno concept without exception across the board. In my mind, an OS should be an OS, not a unique application in and of itself. (Yeah, you Microsoft) The main thing an OS should do as far as the user is concerned should be relatively simple: assist you in finding and organizing your stuff in the easiest, most efficient manner possible. Other than that it should stay out of the way. All apps (regardless of whether they are Apple apps provided with the OS or any others) should honor the basic global UI elements of the OS, i.e., the three buttons at the top left of a window and general menu commands for opening, saving, etc.), but the appearance the application window should be left open to the application's author should it add some sort of benefit in using the application.
In other words, I like how Garageband has the faux studio mixing board wood paneling as part of it's window. It's not a matter of life and death, but it's pleasant and makes Garageband stand out from other apps for what it's intended purpose is. The unified interface nazis may disagree with this approach, but most of the GUI guidelines they cite about this stuff where valid back in the day of the original Mac OS, the original GUI. Times have changed and those guidelines never foresaw today's modern graphic abilities to approach the GUI in new innovative ways such as Expose, or Dashboard, or other uses of 3d as a an effective way of presenting a GUI to the user. So the uno concept is ok provided that it doesn't reverse course and head backward instead of forward.
5) Improved Quartz API to allow for more advanced window styles and effects.
Check, and see above.
6) PowerMac replacement with Quad core model... a true workstation class system (likely similar enclosure to what we have now in the PMG5).
Check. Sure, why not?
1) A much clearer roadmap for 64 bit support in Mac OS X. I believe they will outline full 64 bit support across all non-10.4 deprecated frameworks (I believe in the initial release of 10.5). Of course it will also fully support 32 bit applications run side by side with 64 bit applications.
Check
2) Resolution Independent UI will be ready for main stream use with display products possible with in the next year or two (would love to be surprised with 150-200 DPI or so display of course).
Check. They've had a lot of time to work this one out.
3) Quartz 2D Extreme will be ready for main stream use along with some good news on the OpenGL front.
Check
4) Full roll out of the unified user interface look and fell across all frameworks and Apple applications (at least most).
Check, but I'm not one of the bozo militant unified interface nazis that apply the uno concept without exception across the board. In my mind, an OS should be an OS, not a unique application in and of itself. (Yeah, you Microsoft) The main thing an OS should do as far as the user is concerned should be relatively simple: assist you in finding and organizing your stuff in the easiest, most efficient manner possible. Other than that it should stay out of the way. All apps (regardless of whether they are Apple apps provided with the OS or any others) should honor the basic global UI elements of the OS, i.e., the three buttons at the top left of a window and general menu commands for opening, saving, etc.), but the appearance the application window should be left open to the application's author should it add some sort of benefit in using the application.
In other words, I like how Garageband has the faux studio mixing board wood paneling as part of it's window. It's not a matter of life and death, but it's pleasant and makes Garageband stand out from other apps for what it's intended purpose is. The unified interface nazis may disagree with this approach, but most of the GUI guidelines they cite about this stuff where valid back in the day of the original Mac OS, the original GUI. Times have changed and those guidelines never foresaw today's modern graphic abilities to approach the GUI in new innovative ways such as Expose, or Dashboard, or other uses of 3d as a an effective way of presenting a GUI to the user. So the uno concept is ok provided that it doesn't reverse course and head backward instead of forward.
5) Improved Quartz API to allow for more advanced window styles and effects.
Check, and see above.
6) PowerMac replacement with Quad core model... a true workstation class system (likely similar enclosure to what we have now in the PMG5).
Check. Sure, why not?
Yvan256
Apr 19, 02:01 PM
why? iphones outselling itouches by so much makes sense to me.
But it doesn't make sense to a lot of us. The monthly fees on an iPhone are just too much for a lot of budgets. You pay your iPod touch once and that's it. No more to pay every month after that.
But it doesn't make sense to a lot of us. The monthly fees on an iPhone are just too much for a lot of budgets. You pay your iPod touch once and that's it. No more to pay every month after that.
FFTT
Aug 6, 02:47 AM
I think we'll see at least some attention given to Pro Apps beings
that this is a developers conference.
It's high time for a new MacPro Workstation along with applications that take full advantage of the hardware's improved capabilities.
If wishes were horses, I'd hope for a new more user friendly
Logic Pro 8 with greater attention to ease of use for live recording. Hopefully Apple will release a UB version so us PPC
users can enjoy all the same improvements to some degree.
I'm not sure what to expect on the video side Final Cut Extreme?
Shake, Motion, Soundtrack?
Anyway, I think the focus of this event will be for the Pro's
that this is a developers conference.
It's high time for a new MacPro Workstation along with applications that take full advantage of the hardware's improved capabilities.
If wishes were horses, I'd hope for a new more user friendly
Logic Pro 8 with greater attention to ease of use for live recording. Hopefully Apple will release a UB version so us PPC
users can enjoy all the same improvements to some degree.
I'm not sure what to expect on the video side Final Cut Extreme?
Shake, Motion, Soundtrack?
Anyway, I think the focus of this event will be for the Pro's
azentropy
Apr 5, 04:46 PM
Hopefully there will be new iMacs to go with it. Refresh please!
and Mac Pros!
and entry level MacBook!
and Mac minis!
and ...
and Mac Pros!
and entry level MacBook!
and Mac minis!
and ...
likemyorbs
Mar 1, 08:15 PM
I think that if same-sex attracted people are going to live together, they need to do that as though they were siblings, not as sex partners. In my opinion, they should have purely platonic, nonsexual relationships with one another.
Lmfao!!!! That is the DUMBEST thing I've ever heard in my entire life. Yeah, gay people can live together but no sex! Hmm, doesn't that kind of go against the whole point of being gay? I'm sorry that's the only response I can come up with, it's just that the ignorance in your post is too overwhelming for the average person to comprehend.
Lmfao!!!! That is the DUMBEST thing I've ever heard in my entire life. Yeah, gay people can live together but no sex! Hmm, doesn't that kind of go against the whole point of being gay? I'm sorry that's the only response I can come up with, it's just that the ignorance in your post is too overwhelming for the average person to comprehend.
BlizzardBomb
Jul 27, 02:00 PM
Well it's back to the future for all of us. Remember when the Mac was going 64-bit with the introduction of the G5 PowerMac on June 23, 2003? :rolleyes: Only more thanthree years later and we're doing it all over again thanks to Yonah's 7 month retrograde.
What difference does it make if virtually no consumer software is effected by 64-bit processors, even now?
What difference does it make if virtually no consumer software is effected by 64-bit processors, even now?
OutThere
Apr 27, 09:22 AM
Can you really blame them? They won't have a purpose in life without Birtherism.
Si Dieu n'existait pas, il faudrait l'inventer.
Si Dieu n'existait pas, il faudrait l'inventer.
mc68k
Dec 6, 01:20 PM
I have only done one. But I didn't feel as if I could start the race, leave, come back and have won. The race I did, I watched. My guy was in 1st the up until the last lap, and the person in 2nd over took him. I am sure if I was not there to instruct him to "over take" he would not have done it and I would have gotten 2nd.
Maybe I just need to level up?yeah your bspec driver will really suck until he's leveled up a bit. still havent figured out why you would want more than one bspec driver, prob for the later enduro races? got my bspec up to 12, he's racing and overtaking much better now. the amount the bspec driver levels up every time is small, so it's very grind-y but at least you don't have to watch it, and you get some diff gift cars than the same race in a-spec
Maybe I just need to level up?yeah your bspec driver will really suck until he's leveled up a bit. still havent figured out why you would want more than one bspec driver, prob for the later enduro races? got my bspec up to 12, he's racing and overtaking much better now. the amount the bspec driver levels up every time is small, so it's very grind-y but at least you don't have to watch it, and you get some diff gift cars than the same race in a-spec
Horst
Aug 28, 10:49 AM
Just my 0.02 regarding Apple's customer service :
I buy Apple computers in the hope never to need any support by the manufacturer. Two times I had issues ( broken hinge on TiBook, 1st. gen. ACD 23" with severe color tint ) and Apple wouldn't even acknowledge such a problem exists. Needless to say, those faults are well documented as inherent design flaws of the products mentioned.
That's Apple Germany, mind you - I would never even try to contact Apple US for possible issues with the computers I bought and use over there, as customer protection in the US is virtually non-existent.
I'm a professional user, and received exceptional online and phone support by other companies for 300$ products, but no service whatsoever for 20k+ of Apple products.
I know Apple is not catering to pros, but still ....
I buy Apple computers in the hope never to need any support by the manufacturer. Two times I had issues ( broken hinge on TiBook, 1st. gen. ACD 23" with severe color tint ) and Apple wouldn't even acknowledge such a problem exists. Needless to say, those faults are well documented as inherent design flaws of the products mentioned.
That's Apple Germany, mind you - I would never even try to contact Apple US for possible issues with the computers I bought and use over there, as customer protection in the US is virtually non-existent.
I'm a professional user, and received exceptional online and phone support by other companies for 300$ products, but no service whatsoever for 20k+ of Apple products.
I know Apple is not catering to pros, but still ....
NebulaClash
Apr 27, 10:19 AM
Maybe that's what you heard.
I heard that the database couldn't be user purged (easily)
The the database kept data from Day one
and that Location services being turned off didn't change the recording of the data.
Apple fans were "more correct". Wow. Ok - if you say so.... and if it helps you sleep at night
I'm talking about the hyperbole, not the sensible discussion that was going on too. You are capable of such discussions, and so am I. We do not represent the majority of the comments in these threads which contained lots of hair-on-fire paranoia. The Apple fans trying to talk such folks down off the roof were right.
I heard that the database couldn't be user purged (easily)
The the database kept data from Day one
and that Location services being turned off didn't change the recording of the data.
Apple fans were "more correct". Wow. Ok - if you say so.... and if it helps you sleep at night
I'm talking about the hyperbole, not the sensible discussion that was going on too. You are capable of such discussions, and so am I. We do not represent the majority of the comments in these threads which contained lots of hair-on-fire paranoia. The Apple fans trying to talk such folks down off the roof were right.
ergle2
Sep 13, 03:02 PM
You totally missed my point. Even if an application uses only one thread at all times, that application is still a separate process from all of the other processes you have running. At any given time you'll have at least 30 something processes, even when no user-land applications are running. OS X will spread out those processes to try to utilize all the cores as much as possible.
In reality, there are probably not too many non-Apple applications which routinely use 8 threads or more. In the near future I expect all applications to use at least 2-3 threads, even the most simple ones.
Sure, but all those background processes take next to no time to execute -- the extra latency of having more processors will probably slow things down far more than you gain from having up to 8 of those 30 be able to run at any one time.
I'm not saying there's no need for 8 cores -- markets such as databases, media production, rendering, etc. can already make use of that kind of power.
Regular desktops, not so much.
Many simple apps are already mutithreadedto some dgree, but it's to make them non-blocking rather than to spread processor load. If you look at Windows, you'll find a very high number of threads in even just a media player, but some of it's just there to repaint the GUI etc.
In reality, there are probably not too many non-Apple applications which routinely use 8 threads or more. In the near future I expect all applications to use at least 2-3 threads, even the most simple ones.
Sure, but all those background processes take next to no time to execute -- the extra latency of having more processors will probably slow things down far more than you gain from having up to 8 of those 30 be able to run at any one time.
I'm not saying there's no need for 8 cores -- markets such as databases, media production, rendering, etc. can already make use of that kind of power.
Regular desktops, not so much.
Many simple apps are already mutithreadedto some dgree, but it's to make them non-blocking rather than to spread processor load. If you look at Windows, you'll find a very high number of threads in even just a media player, but some of it's just there to repaint the GUI etc.
No comments:
Post a Comment