jmbear
Nov 29, 12:39 PM
See, that's the catch-22 for new artists. The labels are the ones that get tunes played on the radio. In the 50's and 60's they would strong-arm their stuff in, but I'm sure even nowadays they provide incentives (read: bribes) to get new stuff on the air. Especially if they think the band is really good and will make it in the long run. And don't fool yourself into thinking a new band can get huge without radio.
The internet can become the new radio. I am quite fond of looking for pre-made playlists, I will get the songs on LimeWire, listen to them, the ones I like, I buy legally, the ones I don�t I delete them. You don�t get commercials, just music. I am not saying that radio is going to dissapear completely. TV didn�t kill it. But its importance will diminish.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend..
iTMS could potentially change this. There are some people that will do all the research for you (as in what is good music), then ratings will allow you to get the good songs! It�s similar (and somebody will flame me for saying this) to researching a product on Amazon or CNET, you usually look for a LCD screen, all the results pop, and you will go for the ones with the highest ratings, read the comments and eventually make up your mind. Some day you will look up for electronic music (which I love), all the DJ�s will pop, you will pick the highest rated songs or playlists (because most people like a song because other people like it), listen to their songs for free (yeah, just like radio), and then buy them if you want.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label..
I agree record labels + good music = superstars like Calpton, Floyd, U2 etc... But these bands became popular in a different time (before the internet). Internet is changing the record labels� business model, and that is what they afraid of. The new wait of creating bands and distributing their music is not as profitable for them as it used to.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
Internet is offering them exposure. Right now MTV and VH1 are still popular. But YouTube, Yahoo!, MSN could become the new MTV and VH1.
Not really relevant, but interesting to think about is that most of you have probably seen the video of the ruma ruma guy (I can�t link it because I am at work and the proxie does not allow me to visit YouTube). But how many have actually seen the video for the song? YouTube made that fat kid a star, and most people probably know his face better than the guys that sing the song. Exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
I agree, they won�t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
The internet can become the new radio. I am quite fond of looking for pre-made playlists, I will get the songs on LimeWire, listen to them, the ones I like, I buy legally, the ones I don�t I delete them. You don�t get commercials, just music. I am not saying that radio is going to dissapear completely. TV didn�t kill it. But its importance will diminish.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend..
iTMS could potentially change this. There are some people that will do all the research for you (as in what is good music), then ratings will allow you to get the good songs! It�s similar (and somebody will flame me for saying this) to researching a product on Amazon or CNET, you usually look for a LCD screen, all the results pop, and you will go for the ones with the highest ratings, read the comments and eventually make up your mind. Some day you will look up for electronic music (which I love), all the DJ�s will pop, you will pick the highest rated songs or playlists (because most people like a song because other people like it), listen to their songs for free (yeah, just like radio), and then buy them if you want.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label..
I agree record labels + good music = superstars like Calpton, Floyd, U2 etc... But these bands became popular in a different time (before the internet). Internet is changing the record labels� business model, and that is what they afraid of. The new wait of creating bands and distributing their music is not as profitable for them as it used to.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
Internet is offering them exposure. Right now MTV and VH1 are still popular. But YouTube, Yahoo!, MSN could become the new MTV and VH1.
Not really relevant, but interesting to think about is that most of you have probably seen the video of the ruma ruma guy (I can�t link it because I am at work and the proxie does not allow me to visit YouTube). But how many have actually seen the video for the song? YouTube made that fat kid a star, and most people probably know his face better than the guys that sing the song. Exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
I agree, they won�t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
poppe
Jul 14, 02:37 PM
Maybe one of the drives will be Blu-Ray.
Appleinsider is saying that it can be used for both at your choice, but you have to go buy it and put it in. Not a add on to ordering.
So excited... How come no FW800 infront? thats a little crazy no?
Just think if this was apple leaking out information when really its a completely different design. Since they're was that leaking lawsuit and all. Wouldn't it be great if the figured out the sources leaking internaly and made those sources give Appleinsider false information.
Come August 7th, It's completely different... (oh just woke up from my dream.)
Appleinsider is saying that it can be used for both at your choice, but you have to go buy it and put it in. Not a add on to ordering.
So excited... How come no FW800 infront? thats a little crazy no?
Just think if this was apple leaking out information when really its a completely different design. Since they're was that leaking lawsuit and all. Wouldn't it be great if the figured out the sources leaking internaly and made those sources give Appleinsider false information.
Come August 7th, It's completely different... (oh just woke up from my dream.)
bjdku
Sep 18, 11:05 PM
It would be cool but how is Apple going to keep up with this feverous pace of Intel chip releases? In a couple months there will be another chip upgrade in the whole line...what is the next chip after Merom?
mkruck
Apr 6, 04:43 PM
You both ignored HOT DOGS! Sheesh, hot dogs rule. The only problem is kids under 6 choking on them unless you cut them right. But that will be fixed in the v3.0 hot dog, they will come pre-sliced.
Hot dogs?
Hot dogs?
Those are the Hyundai of...oh, wait, that analogy has been used already. Uhhhmmmm, Hot Dogs are the Yugo...oh, man, did it again.
OK, I've got it: Hot Dogs are the Hot Dogs of food.
Hot dogs?
Hot dogs?
Those are the Hyundai of...oh, wait, that analogy has been used already. Uhhhmmmm, Hot Dogs are the Yugo...oh, man, did it again.
OK, I've got it: Hot Dogs are the Hot Dogs of food.
WhySoSerious
Mar 22, 03:47 PM
"The first iteration of Galaxy Tab 10.1 measured in at 246.2 x 170.4 x 10.9 mm and weighed 599g; this new, slimmer version is 256.6 x 172.9 x 8.6 mm and 595g."
We lost 4 grams WAHAHAHAHA !
i could laugh at the same thing concerning the ipad 1 vs ipad 2.
the ipad 2 really isn't much thinner or lighter than the first version.
We lost 4 grams WAHAHAHAHA !
i could laugh at the same thing concerning the ipad 1 vs ipad 2.
the ipad 2 really isn't much thinner or lighter than the first version.
Soura2112
Apr 6, 03:09 PM
First off I'm not a full time pro, I do about 30% pro work the rest is for family and friends who I don't charge cause it's usually simple. That being said I want to get more pro work. I'm in the process if buying a new HD Cam so I want Blu Ray ability. With buying a new video camera and hopefully the new FCP if it meets my standards will be an expensive month since I don't have an internal or external Blu Ray drive yet and I want full use of Blu Ray, even if we must go with LaCie or whatever Blu Ray drive you like.
Even for my non pro videos of my dogs I want Blu Ray use it's that simple, 1080p, not 720 files to run through iTunes then to my Apple TV, only way to stream videos at my house at the moment outside of iPad and iPhone. I could pay to connect my 360 and sadly no PS3 to Mac stream. (I may be wrong on my home streaming so be nice please).
Most of my pro video is sports and some weddings. They all want a disc, not all want Blu Ray but I want the option for my clients.
image of Womens Nike SB Dunk
Nike SB dunk heels
Here#39;s a new Nike SB Dunk High
Iowa Yellow Heels Dunk High
Nike SB Dunk High Heels
Nike SB Dunk High Heel Red
Nike SB Dunk High-Heel Red
Nike SB Dunk High Heel Yellow
Womens Nike Dunk SB Heels Low
Womens Nike SB Dunk High Heel
jordan heels 7 for women black
Nike sb Dunk Low Year Of The
sb,nike heels,nike dunk
Even for my non pro videos of my dogs I want Blu Ray use it's that simple, 1080p, not 720 files to run through iTunes then to my Apple TV, only way to stream videos at my house at the moment outside of iPad and iPhone. I could pay to connect my 360 and sadly no PS3 to Mac stream. (I may be wrong on my home streaming so be nice please).
Most of my pro video is sports and some weddings. They all want a disc, not all want Blu Ray but I want the option for my clients.
Gurutech
Aug 7, 08:16 PM
Yes, absolutely:
Enhanced 64-bit Support
Leopard delivers 64-bit power in one, universal OS. Now Cocoa and Carbon application frameworks, as well as graphics, scripting, and the rest of the system are all 64-bit. Leopard delivers 64-bit power to both Intel- and PowerPC-based Macs, so you don�t have to install separate applications for different machines. There�s only one version of Mac OS X, so you don�t need to maintain separate operating systems for different uses.
Bridge the Generation Gap
Now that the entire operating system is 64-bit, you can take full advantage of the Xeon chip in Mac Pro and Xserve. You get more processing power at up to 3.0GHz, without limiting your programs to command-line applications, servers, and computation engines. From G3 to Xeon, from MacBook to Xserve, there is just one Leopard.
Wait. Does this mean that the Leopard doesn't support current MBP or MB? the ones that use 32 bit Yonah based Core Duo CPU.
Enhanced 64-bit Support
Leopard delivers 64-bit power in one, universal OS. Now Cocoa and Carbon application frameworks, as well as graphics, scripting, and the rest of the system are all 64-bit. Leopard delivers 64-bit power to both Intel- and PowerPC-based Macs, so you don�t have to install separate applications for different machines. There�s only one version of Mac OS X, so you don�t need to maintain separate operating systems for different uses.
Bridge the Generation Gap
Now that the entire operating system is 64-bit, you can take full advantage of the Xeon chip in Mac Pro and Xserve. You get more processing power at up to 3.0GHz, without limiting your programs to command-line applications, servers, and computation engines. From G3 to Xeon, from MacBook to Xserve, there is just one Leopard.
Wait. Does this mean that the Leopard doesn't support current MBP or MB? the ones that use 32 bit Yonah based Core Duo CPU.
infidel69
Apr 11, 11:33 AM
Big mistake if true.
thisisahughes
Apr 6, 04:26 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8G4)
I don't really watch television at all, so I was just wondering if there are many commercials for tablets besides the iPad?
I can't recall ever seeing a Xoom commercial even in passing, although I have seen an iPad commercial.
I see the same Xoom commercial 100 times a day.
I don't really watch television at all, so I was just wondering if there are many commercials for tablets besides the iPad?
I can't recall ever seeing a Xoom commercial even in passing, although I have seen an iPad commercial.
I see the same Xoom commercial 100 times a day.
pubwvj
Aug 25, 05:19 PM
I'm having a problem. Last year I bought an iBook that was supposed to come with a free iPod. I got the iPod, called in and registered, did the paper work for the rebate and sent that in right away. Never got a check. I called up to find out where my rebate was and they are telling me that they aren't responsible for rebates lost in the mail - tough luck. I've been through many phone calls with many people at Apple on this. It's going nowhere. It is absurd that this happened. I bought the iPod and iBook directly from them through the Apple Store. They have all the information, which they have verified they have. But they won't send me my $179. Beware, Apple is not standing behind their rebate offers.
2nd Problem, Apple sent a repair guy out to fix a iMac. He did but when he put the case back together he didn't do it right. Now the case is partially open. Minor but annoying.
3rd Problem, I have an Apple product, which I won't name as I'm trying to get it taken care of right now, and it keeps failing, the replacement fails, etc. What happened to quality manufacturing? Apple's losing it.
2nd Problem, Apple sent a repair guy out to fix a iMac. He did but when he put the case back together he didn't do it right. Now the case is partially open. Minor but annoying.
3rd Problem, I have an Apple product, which I won't name as I'm trying to get it taken care of right now, and it keeps failing, the replacement fails, etc. What happened to quality manufacturing? Apple's losing it.
Max on Macs
Aug 5, 05:27 PM
Well iSight or no, there needs to be an update anyway. The Mac Pro will have Front Row, and how will you control it by remote if you're meant to keep it under your desk? The new Cinema Displays need an IR "extender".
Besides, I still think Apple WOULD love to include an iSight in their displays.
Are you "meant" to keep it under your desk? Who says? I had my PowerMac on the desk until I sold it (I will be getting a Mac Pro and I hate to put it on my desk if it's meant to go under it!)
Besides, I still think Apple WOULD love to include an iSight in their displays.
Are you "meant" to keep it under your desk? Who says? I had my PowerMac on the desk until I sold it (I will be getting a Mac Pro and I hate to put it on my desk if it's meant to go under it!)
KnightWRX
Apr 12, 07:02 PM
The coverage and cost obviously.
Because if Apple release an iPhone 5 with LTE, it will cost more and won't be backwards compatible... right... :rolleyes:
Obviously not a factor.
Because if Apple release an iPhone 5 with LTE, it will cost more and won't be backwards compatible... right... :rolleyes:
Obviously not a factor.
milo
Aug 17, 09:21 AM
You're right. I'm extremely unimpressed that the fastest xeon only days old is actually slower mhz for mhz than a G5 that is pushing 4 year old technology. Really sad.
But overall it's not. Whenever you change chips, you'll probably always find a benchmark that favors the old one. Just because one app isn't faster doesn't mean the new chip is slower.
But it's not faster. Slower actually than the G5 at some apps. What's everyone looking at anyway? I'm pretty unimpressed. Other than Adobe's usage of cache (AE is a cache lover and will use all of it, hence the faster performance).
But the actual xeon processors are only as fast as the G5 processors. Look at the average specs... the 2.66 machines are only a teeny bit faster than the G5s except in a few apps like filemaker. But not in the biggies like Final Cut Pro where it actually appears that mhz for mhz the G5 is a faster machine hands down!
What are you talking about? The xeon is faster in every native benchmark, the only exception is one render where the slower xeon tied the G5. If you do indeed look at the average specs, the xeons blow away the G5.
Looks like the Xeons got killed by the G5 in Word in their tests.
Because it's running under rosetta, ram has nothing to do with it.
It's odd, seeing as Mac's are still the choice for many musicians that some kind of specs are never given that would be of interest to musicians. The released figures don't do much for me. I'd like to know the polyphony improvements say for Kontakt under both systems in Digital Performer 5.
There have been Logic benchmarks elsewhere, and they're pretty impressive. 1.4-1.5x improvements, pretty nice considering how fast the quad is already for audio plugins.
But overall it's not. Whenever you change chips, you'll probably always find a benchmark that favors the old one. Just because one app isn't faster doesn't mean the new chip is slower.
But it's not faster. Slower actually than the G5 at some apps. What's everyone looking at anyway? I'm pretty unimpressed. Other than Adobe's usage of cache (AE is a cache lover and will use all of it, hence the faster performance).
But the actual xeon processors are only as fast as the G5 processors. Look at the average specs... the 2.66 machines are only a teeny bit faster than the G5s except in a few apps like filemaker. But not in the biggies like Final Cut Pro where it actually appears that mhz for mhz the G5 is a faster machine hands down!
What are you talking about? The xeon is faster in every native benchmark, the only exception is one render where the slower xeon tied the G5. If you do indeed look at the average specs, the xeons blow away the G5.
Looks like the Xeons got killed by the G5 in Word in their tests.
Because it's running under rosetta, ram has nothing to do with it.
It's odd, seeing as Mac's are still the choice for many musicians that some kind of specs are never given that would be of interest to musicians. The released figures don't do much for me. I'd like to know the polyphony improvements say for Kontakt under both systems in Digital Performer 5.
There have been Logic benchmarks elsewhere, and they're pretty impressive. 1.4-1.5x improvements, pretty nice considering how fast the quad is already for audio plugins.
kdarling
Apr 19, 07:05 PM
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.
A primary test is if a casual buyer would mistakenly believe both products came from the same source. If they know it's a copy, no problem.
After reading some of the lawsuit, I had to post this...
Showing a bookshelf picture is nothing new. Heck, there was a bookshelf homescreen theme for old Windows Mobile phones.
For that matter, people say that Apple ripped off their bookshelf from Delicious Library. Which itself took it from who knows where.
A primary test is if a casual buyer would mistakenly believe both products came from the same source. If they know it's a copy, no problem.
After reading some of the lawsuit, I had to post this...
Showing a bookshelf picture is nothing new. Heck, there was a bookshelf homescreen theme for old Windows Mobile phones.
For that matter, people say that Apple ripped off their bookshelf from Delicious Library. Which itself took it from who knows where.
intlplby
Nov 28, 07:51 PM
i agree with this on one condition:
Universal agrees to give up its right to prosecute anyone who owns an iPod for piracy.
i.e. if I buy an iPod, then I can pirate Universal's catalogue all I want because I have effectively already paid for their content.
a few bucks is a small price to pay to get access to everything they got
Universal agrees to give up its right to prosecute anyone who owns an iPod for piracy.
i.e. if I buy an iPod, then I can pirate Universal's catalogue all I want because I have effectively already paid for their content.
a few bucks is a small price to pay to get access to everything they got
wpotere
Apr 27, 12:05 PM
I lost mine a few years ago and it was re-issued so it isn't worn and faded. Does that mean I can't run for president? :eek::p
TangoCharlie
Jul 20, 08:38 AM
Anyone else think this is getting out of hand? Two cores, great improvement. Four cores, ehh it's faster but Joe can't tell. Eight cores, now thats just stupid.
Let me guess it will only come with 512mb of Ram :p (ok it will be at least a GB).
The riduculous speculation is certainly getting out of control! A quad core iMac... I don't think so! Not for a long while. 8 Cores (ie dual-quads) will only become available in the top-end of the MacPro (assuming the MacPro does indeed go with the Xeon CPU), and the top-end XServes.
If you want wild speculation, here goes....
Apple might use the Conroe and ConroeXE in the first Mac Pros and then add in support for Kentsfield (quad) when it becomes available. This could well be the reason why Intel has brought forward the release of Kentsfield.
Back to reality: Apple wil use Xeon 51xx (5150 and 5160) in the MacPro, and Core 2 Duo (Merom) in the iMac and MBP to be announced at the WWDC. The top iMac config will get a boost to 2.33GHz. In addition, Apple will use the price-drops for the Yonah to upgrade the Core Solo mini to Core Duo.
Any further speculation is just farcical! :eek:
Let me guess it will only come with 512mb of Ram :p (ok it will be at least a GB).
The riduculous speculation is certainly getting out of control! A quad core iMac... I don't think so! Not for a long while. 8 Cores (ie dual-quads) will only become available in the top-end of the MacPro (assuming the MacPro does indeed go with the Xeon CPU), and the top-end XServes.
If you want wild speculation, here goes....
Apple might use the Conroe and ConroeXE in the first Mac Pros and then add in support for Kentsfield (quad) when it becomes available. This could well be the reason why Intel has brought forward the release of Kentsfield.
Back to reality: Apple wil use Xeon 51xx (5150 and 5160) in the MacPro, and Core 2 Duo (Merom) in the iMac and MBP to be announced at the WWDC. The top iMac config will get a boost to 2.33GHz. In addition, Apple will use the price-drops for the Yonah to upgrade the Core Solo mini to Core Duo.
Any further speculation is just farcical! :eek:
janstett
Oct 23, 11:44 AM
Unfortunately not many multithreaded apps - yet. For a long time most of the multi-threaded apps were just a select few pro level things. 3D/Visualization software, CAD, database systems, etc.. Those of us who had multiprocessor systems bought them because we had a specific software in mind or group of software applications that could take advantage of multiple processors. As current CPU manufacturing processes started hitting a wall right around the 3GHz mark, chip makers started to transition to multiple CPU cores to boost power - makes sense. Software developers have been lazy for years, just riding the wave of ever-increasing MHz. Now the multi-core CPUs are here and the software is behind as many applications need to have serious re-writes done in order to take advantage of multiple processors. Intel tried to get a jump on this with their HT (Hyper Threading) implementation that essentially simulated dual-cores on a CPU by way of two virtual CPUs. Software developers didn't exactly jump on this and warm up to it. But I also don't think the software industry truly believed that CPUs would go multi-core on a mass scale so fast... Intel and AMD both said they would, don't know why the software industry doubted. Intel and AMD are uncommonly good about telling the truth about upcoming products. Both will be shipping quad-core CPU offerings by year's end.
What you're saying isn't entirely true and may give some people the wrong idea.
First, a multicore system is helpful when running multiple CPU-intensive single-threaded applications on a proper multitasking operating system. For example, right now I'm ripping CDs on iTunes. One processor gets used a lot and the other three are idle. I could be using this CPU power for another app.
The reality is that to take advantage of multiple cores, you had to take advantage of threads. Now, I was doing this in my programs with OS/2 back in 1992. I've been writing multithreaded apps my entire career. But writing a threaded application requires thought and work, so naturally many programmers are lazy and avoid threads. Plus it is harder to debug and synchronize a multithreaded application. Windows and Linux people have been doing this since the stone age, and Windows/Linux have had usable multiprocessor systems for more than a decade (it didn't start with Hyperthreading). I had a dual-processor 486 running NT 3.5 circa 1995. It's just been more of an optional "cool trick" to write threaded applications that the timid programmer avoids. Also it's worth noting that it's possible to go overboard with excessive threading and that leads to problems (context switching, thrashing, synchronization, etc).
Now, on the Mac side, OS 9 and below couldn't properly support SMP and it required a hacked version of the OS and a special version of the application. So the history of the Mac world has been, until recently with OSX, to avoid threading and multiprocessing unless specially called for and then at great pain to do so.
So it goes back to getting developers to write threaded applications. Now that we're getting to 4 and 8 core systems, it also presents a problem.
The classic reason to create a thread is to prevent the GUI from locking up while processing. Let's say I write a GUI program that has a calculation that takes 20 seconds. If I do it the lazy way, the GUI will lock up for 20 seconds because it can't process window messages during that time. If I write a thread, the calculation can take place there and leave the GUI thread able to process messages and keep the application alive, and then signal the other thread when it's done.
But now with more than 4 or 8 cores, the problem is how do you break up the work? 9 women can't have a baby in a month. So if your process is still serialized, you still have to wait with 1 processor doing all the work and the others sitting idle. For example, if you encode a video, it is a very serialized process. I hear some work has been done to simultaneously encode macroblocks in parallel, but getting 8 processors to chew on a single video is an interesting problem.
What you're saying isn't entirely true and may give some people the wrong idea.
First, a multicore system is helpful when running multiple CPU-intensive single-threaded applications on a proper multitasking operating system. For example, right now I'm ripping CDs on iTunes. One processor gets used a lot and the other three are idle. I could be using this CPU power for another app.
The reality is that to take advantage of multiple cores, you had to take advantage of threads. Now, I was doing this in my programs with OS/2 back in 1992. I've been writing multithreaded apps my entire career. But writing a threaded application requires thought and work, so naturally many programmers are lazy and avoid threads. Plus it is harder to debug and synchronize a multithreaded application. Windows and Linux people have been doing this since the stone age, and Windows/Linux have had usable multiprocessor systems for more than a decade (it didn't start with Hyperthreading). I had a dual-processor 486 running NT 3.5 circa 1995. It's just been more of an optional "cool trick" to write threaded applications that the timid programmer avoids. Also it's worth noting that it's possible to go overboard with excessive threading and that leads to problems (context switching, thrashing, synchronization, etc).
Now, on the Mac side, OS 9 and below couldn't properly support SMP and it required a hacked version of the OS and a special version of the application. So the history of the Mac world has been, until recently with OSX, to avoid threading and multiprocessing unless specially called for and then at great pain to do so.
So it goes back to getting developers to write threaded applications. Now that we're getting to 4 and 8 core systems, it also presents a problem.
The classic reason to create a thread is to prevent the GUI from locking up while processing. Let's say I write a GUI program that has a calculation that takes 20 seconds. If I do it the lazy way, the GUI will lock up for 20 seconds because it can't process window messages during that time. If I write a thread, the calculation can take place there and leave the GUI thread able to process messages and keep the application alive, and then signal the other thread when it's done.
But now with more than 4 or 8 cores, the problem is how do you break up the work? 9 women can't have a baby in a month. So if your process is still serialized, you still have to wait with 1 processor doing all the work and the others sitting idle. For example, if you encode a video, it is a very serialized process. I hear some work has been done to simultaneously encode macroblocks in parallel, but getting 8 processors to chew on a single video is an interesting problem.
Bill McEnaney
Mar 3, 11:06 AM
Don't compare them either. There is a huge difference between what homosexuals do and what pedophiles do. You're the one getting on people for not comprehending language. I suggest you take your own advice.
I goofed. I misinterpreted what Lee said about sodomy. He said that not all homosexuals engage in sodomy. I thought he thought homosexual sex was not sodomy. Unfortunately, too often, when I'm impulsive, I misinterpret what others write.
I don't look down on anyone here. I didn't look down on anyone here. I'm sorry I gave the impression that I did that. I'm sorry I've written insultingly, too. I didn't mean to do that.
Sadly, I sometimes do react emotionally when I should react rationally instead. And I do need to try harder to comprehend what others say.
I goofed. I misinterpreted what Lee said about sodomy. He said that not all homosexuals engage in sodomy. I thought he thought homosexual sex was not sodomy. Unfortunately, too often, when I'm impulsive, I misinterpret what others write.
I don't look down on anyone here. I didn't look down on anyone here. I'm sorry I gave the impression that I did that. I'm sorry I've written insultingly, too. I didn't mean to do that.
Sadly, I sometimes do react emotionally when I should react rationally instead. And I do need to try harder to comprehend what others say.
Vulpinemac
Apr 6, 02:51 PM
I've been going to my local Costco for the last month and they have a display kiosk on the floor with cards for sales and pick-up of the Xoom. During that time, the number of cards on the display have not dropped significantly and the majority of customers simply walk past it without looking. In fact, during my visits I've only seen one person (other than myself) take a serious look at the display's information. He walked away without taking a card.
This is why I'm far more interested in real sales numbers and not just units shipped into the market. The display holds some 100 cards and I'm willing to bet they haven't sold ten in a month.
This is why I'm far more interested in real sales numbers and not just units shipped into the market. The display holds some 100 cards and I'm willing to bet they haven't sold ten in a month.
Eidorian
Jul 15, 05:18 AM
We have that already on the Refurbished page. :) Dual Core 2GHz G5 is only $1699 there. Quad only $2799. So your dream of $1499 will come when the 2GHz Core 2 Duo Mac Pro hits the refurb page - which, according to recent history, should happen before Christmas.I believe that the MacBook was on the refurb page in around 3-4 weeks. The iMac Core Duo took AGES though.
Amazing Iceman
Mar 31, 05:05 PM
Well, I guess the Open Source concept backfired at Google and everyone else doing Android. Open Source is a great concept, but when handled the wrong way, it does lead to fragmentation.
The problem is that all the happiness about Android being an open system will now turn into disappointment to many hobbyists and tweakers, and also to developers.
The fact that Apple keeps iOS closed is for a good reason, but at least it created a system to be able to advertise and sell apps. The quality control may not be perfect, but at least so far we haven't heard of an iOS viral app. iOS devices are very tight, protecting their own integrity.
Well, let's see what happens. We need Android to keep poking on Apple's creativity to make better products.
I'm not against Android; I may get an Android phone when I see one worth my money.
The problem is that all the happiness about Android being an open system will now turn into disappointment to many hobbyists and tweakers, and also to developers.
The fact that Apple keeps iOS closed is for a good reason, but at least it created a system to be able to advertise and sell apps. The quality control may not be perfect, but at least so far we haven't heard of an iOS viral app. iOS devices are very tight, protecting their own integrity.
Well, let's see what happens. We need Android to keep poking on Apple's creativity to make better products.
I'm not against Android; I may get an Android phone when I see one worth my money.
maelstromr
Apr 25, 02:33 PM
Honestly If this does not bug you it should Apple along with Law enforcement have know about this they have been using devices to read this info and use it against the Phones owners if the info proves useful. Good I totally support a lawsuit Apple should be embarrassed and ashamed this is a big deal. Nothing should trace where your going and keep a record. This info can also be used by criminals but the true criminal here is Law Enforcement since they knew about this info and used it against suspects.
Please take note suspects are not criminals they are you and me and getting pulled over or involved with the Police. It can happen to anyone for many reasons other than causing a crime.
Apple has just brought us the closest we have EVER been to 1984.
Protect our Freedoms
Rants are harder to read without punctuation.
Where'd you get the info on Apple and law enforcement? Little green men? Perhaps you tuned it in through your tinfoil cap?
Please take note suspects are not criminals they are you and me and getting pulled over or involved with the Police. It can happen to anyone for many reasons other than causing a crime.
Apple has just brought us the closest we have EVER been to 1984.
Protect our Freedoms
Rants are harder to read without punctuation.
Where'd you get the info on Apple and law enforcement? Little green men? Perhaps you tuned it in through your tinfoil cap?
nagromme
Aug 7, 04:16 PM
Will Time Machine mean that you can't permanently delete any file? What about something confidential which you want to "e-shred"?
Never fear: it says you can exclude any data from Time Machine that you wish.
(Plus, if you change your mind about a file, you have OS X's Secure Empty Trash--which might also purge your backup, if it's connected. But whatever the implementation, I'm sure Apple has thought about this--we just don't have 100% off the details yet.)
My main concern overall about Leopard is that feature creep is going to cut into ease of use.
Only if you are FORCED to use Spaces. But like Expos�, Dashboard, and even the right mouse button, it will be optional. Apple is sensitive about beginner simplicity.
Never fear: it says you can exclude any data from Time Machine that you wish.
(Plus, if you change your mind about a file, you have OS X's Secure Empty Trash--which might also purge your backup, if it's connected. But whatever the implementation, I'm sure Apple has thought about this--we just don't have 100% off the details yet.)
My main concern overall about Leopard is that feature creep is going to cut into ease of use.
Only if you are FORCED to use Spaces. But like Expos�, Dashboard, and even the right mouse button, it will be optional. Apple is sensitive about beginner simplicity.
