Eidorian
Jul 14, 11:20 PM
Uhhhh Nero Burning ROM does , oops i forgot there is no Nero for Mac just plain TOAST..lol
I just love my Dual 16x NEC ND-3550A's :D ...burn baby burn.
Also if this is the Best Apple can do at these prices then they should have just went Conroe, These MacPros are going to get killed by $999 Mom and Pop's PC's from Gateway/HP/Dell.
512MB DDR2 on a $1799 PC in mid 2006 , you gotta be f**kin' kidding me. Jobs must really think you people are stupid.
man I guess I won't even have to OC my E6600 to cream that $2499 machine. This was a stupid move Apple. Pay more for Less.Yeah, I know that Nero Burning ROM can handle multiple drives. If you have enough CPU power I bet Finder can burn two data DVD's at once. I'm stuck on a lowly G4 800 MHz so I don't want to tax the poor girl.
I just love my Dual 16x NEC ND-3550A's :D ...burn baby burn.
Also if this is the Best Apple can do at these prices then they should have just went Conroe, These MacPros are going to get killed by $999 Mom and Pop's PC's from Gateway/HP/Dell.
512MB DDR2 on a $1799 PC in mid 2006 , you gotta be f**kin' kidding me. Jobs must really think you people are stupid.
man I guess I won't even have to OC my E6600 to cream that $2499 machine. This was a stupid move Apple. Pay more for Less.Yeah, I know that Nero Burning ROM can handle multiple drives. If you have enough CPU power I bet Finder can burn two data DVD's at once. I'm stuck on a lowly G4 800 MHz so I don't want to tax the poor girl.
avkills
Jul 14, 02:35 PM
Man if they put the power supply on the top that would just be insanely stupid. 2 Optical drives is fine by me, although I am good with just one. But the post above about a Blu-Ray drive would make having 2 logical, one is Blue-ray, other is DVD/CD +/- RW.
-mark
-mark
AlligatorBloodz
Apr 8, 02:30 AM
I heard galaxy tab is better than Ipad. Is it true??
Technically it is a safer product. No one is going to mug you for your galaxy tab.
Technically it is a safer product. No one is going to mug you for your galaxy tab.
twoodcc
Aug 12, 09:04 PM
I don't really care if you count the Prologues as full releases or not. The fact remains...
GT1 + GT2 + GT3 + GT4 = 46M
...not 57M like you originally, and incorrectly, said.
but you do care. you are pointing out that you care by what you just typed. if you count the prologues, you get over 57M sold.
You brought up sales, not me. And last I checked, objectively, 100 is more than 57, regardless of how you subjectively look at it.
i disagree. let's bring math into the equation, since you seem to have missed it.
100,000,000/15 = 6,666,667.
57,000,000/8 = 7,125,000.
so GT has sold more copies per game.
No, the only thing that adds to is a stat point on the back of the box. I mean, hooray, someone's 87 CRX is in a racing game. YAY!! :rolleyes:
That is the problem with GT these days. Too much fluff, and lacking in the racing. I mean, whatever, they can make whatever kind of game they want. If they want to fill the game with 1000 cars, 800 of which most people never touch, they can do that. To me, though, they are losing what made the series great years ago.
well again this is your opinion. we all have one. i personally think that if someone is into cars, they will care about their car. not everyone can afford the cars in the game, but it might be nice to see that car that you can afford and have in real life in the game. i mean, the game is meant for people into cars.
NO WAY!!! I never knew that. :rolleyes:
just pointing out the facts. are you doing any different?
Sure, but a "Guinness Record" for it? Again, to much fluff.
they have records for everything. like how much cheese you can eat, or whatever. that's what Guinness Records are
No, it is a concept car that Citro�n paraded around at car shows. Lots of concept cars get built with the fake intention of going into production. But you know what? Almost none of them do. This Citro�n is no different.
but the intention of the car was for the game. how do you not see that? specifically for the game. in fact, it's named GT after the game
My point is, he was trying to use GT's high sales as a quantifier of the series greatness. Then, when I showed 2 examples of other racing game series with higher sales, he said they were different types of racing games, and that they don't count. Which is understandable, because they are not the same type of game. But then, ultimately, as I said before, if you don't count those other types of racing games, you're really only comparing GT to Forza, since that is the only other similar game.
But what does that prove? A game series that has been out for almost 13 years has sold more than a similar type of game series that has only been out for a little over 5 years. Big shock there. I'll be the first to admit that Forza isn't even remotely close to as big of a sales hit as the GT series. But, like I've said before, liking a game is a subjective thing, and everyone is entitled to their own choices. But sales are an objective thing, that has no relevance to somethings greatness.
how does sales have no relevance if something is great? so iPhone sales show nothing to how good it is? or iPod sales mean nothing to how well it is? of course it does. you make games to sell. if they don't sell, you stop making games. and then there wouldn't be this thread, b/c there would be no GT5.
GT1 + GT2 + GT3 + GT4 = 46M
...not 57M like you originally, and incorrectly, said.
but you do care. you are pointing out that you care by what you just typed. if you count the prologues, you get over 57M sold.
You brought up sales, not me. And last I checked, objectively, 100 is more than 57, regardless of how you subjectively look at it.
i disagree. let's bring math into the equation, since you seem to have missed it.
100,000,000/15 = 6,666,667.
57,000,000/8 = 7,125,000.
so GT has sold more copies per game.
No, the only thing that adds to is a stat point on the back of the box. I mean, hooray, someone's 87 CRX is in a racing game. YAY!! :rolleyes:
That is the problem with GT these days. Too much fluff, and lacking in the racing. I mean, whatever, they can make whatever kind of game they want. If they want to fill the game with 1000 cars, 800 of which most people never touch, they can do that. To me, though, they are losing what made the series great years ago.
well again this is your opinion. we all have one. i personally think that if someone is into cars, they will care about their car. not everyone can afford the cars in the game, but it might be nice to see that car that you can afford and have in real life in the game. i mean, the game is meant for people into cars.
NO WAY!!! I never knew that. :rolleyes:
just pointing out the facts. are you doing any different?
Sure, but a "Guinness Record" for it? Again, to much fluff.
they have records for everything. like how much cheese you can eat, or whatever. that's what Guinness Records are
No, it is a concept car that Citro�n paraded around at car shows. Lots of concept cars get built with the fake intention of going into production. But you know what? Almost none of them do. This Citro�n is no different.
but the intention of the car was for the game. how do you not see that? specifically for the game. in fact, it's named GT after the game
My point is, he was trying to use GT's high sales as a quantifier of the series greatness. Then, when I showed 2 examples of other racing game series with higher sales, he said they were different types of racing games, and that they don't count. Which is understandable, because they are not the same type of game. But then, ultimately, as I said before, if you don't count those other types of racing games, you're really only comparing GT to Forza, since that is the only other similar game.
But what does that prove? A game series that has been out for almost 13 years has sold more than a similar type of game series that has only been out for a little over 5 years. Big shock there. I'll be the first to admit that Forza isn't even remotely close to as big of a sales hit as the GT series. But, like I've said before, liking a game is a subjective thing, and everyone is entitled to their own choices. But sales are an objective thing, that has no relevance to somethings greatness.
how does sales have no relevance if something is great? so iPhone sales show nothing to how good it is? or iPod sales mean nothing to how well it is? of course it does. you make games to sell. if they don't sell, you stop making games. and then there wouldn't be this thread, b/c there would be no GT5.
kas23
Apr 10, 07:23 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2 like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C134 Safari/6533.18.5)
Interesting news, but the bit about booting competitors is downright disgusting.
It's not like they threatened anyone. They likely went to the organizers and said "We'd like to make a really cool announcement at your event but we'd need most of your presentation and sponsorship space to do it." SuperMeet said sure, Apple paid, and here we are. It's not like the other sponsors didn't get their money back (I'm assuming.)
Yeah, I'm sure that's what happened...if they were dealing with the Apple of 5 years ago. But, no, we now see today's Apple in action. The same Apple that stole that hot chick's iAd app idea, the same that "asked" Toyota to remove the Scion ad from Cydia, the same that sent out their own ninja's to search some dude's house for the iPhone 4 prototype, etc.
Interesting news, but the bit about booting competitors is downright disgusting.
It's not like they threatened anyone. They likely went to the organizers and said "We'd like to make a really cool announcement at your event but we'd need most of your presentation and sponsorship space to do it." SuperMeet said sure, Apple paid, and here we are. It's not like the other sponsors didn't get their money back (I'm assuming.)
Yeah, I'm sure that's what happened...if they were dealing with the Apple of 5 years ago. But, no, we now see today's Apple in action. The same Apple that stole that hot chick's iAd app idea, the same that "asked" Toyota to remove the Scion ad from Cydia, the same that sent out their own ninja's to search some dude's house for the iPhone 4 prototype, etc.
Amazing Iceman
Apr 6, 04:40 PM
...but people (in general) don't want tablets. They want iPads.
I would compare it to Christmas for me. My mother-in-law asked my wife what I wanted for Christmas. "Video games," was my wife's answer. No, I didn't want video games, I wanted Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood and/or Mass Effect 2.
LOL... sometimes you gotta be specific. I started to notice that many people call "an iPad" to all tablets and not necessarily to a real iPads.
The reviews from people who actually bought the Xoom are mixed, but most of them claim that the quality of the Xoom is terrible when compared to the iPad and iPad2.
So far, I haven't seen any tablet that would gain my attention over the iPad.
I would compare it to Christmas for me. My mother-in-law asked my wife what I wanted for Christmas. "Video games," was my wife's answer. No, I didn't want video games, I wanted Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood and/or Mass Effect 2.
LOL... sometimes you gotta be specific. I started to notice that many people call "an iPad" to all tablets and not necessarily to a real iPads.
The reviews from people who actually bought the Xoom are mixed, but most of them claim that the quality of the Xoom is terrible when compared to the iPad and iPad2.
So far, I haven't seen any tablet that would gain my attention over the iPad.
guzhogi
Jul 14, 04:00 PM
According to Appleinsider, the Mac Pro would have 2 4x and 1 8x PCIe slots. I see two problems with this. (1) All higher-end PC mobos out now have at least 1 16x slot, some have 2 for SLI/Crossfire. Why would Apple shoot itself in the foot like this? The Mac Pro is supposed to be a lot better than all other PCs. (2) Why only 3 slots? PCs have 6 or so (as did the Power Mac 9500 & 9600) with a few regular PCI slots. Why would Apple shoot itself in the foot like this? The Mac Pro is supposed to be a lot better than all other PCs. It would be nice to have 2 16x lanes for SLI and a few PCI slots for older expansion cards and cards that don't need the bandwidth of PCIe. Besides, this is supposed to be a Pro Mac, which means professional people would want to add a bunch of cards, not just 3. I'd expect a person working in something like movie production would want to have dual graphics cards, a fiber channel card to connect to an xServe RAID and maybe an M-Audio sound card for audio input. Since I don't work in movie production, I wouldn't know, but it would make sense.
jeanlain
Apr 11, 08:46 AM
No kidding!
280734
Where's Picasso when you need him? :-)
Avid image was from here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYw4vvr7Aq4
OMG, these drop-down menus! It burns....:eek:
280734
Where's Picasso when you need him? :-)
Avid image was from here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYw4vvr7Aq4
OMG, these drop-down menus! It burns....:eek:
shamino
Jul 20, 09:37 AM
But as some already pointed out, many applications can't use multiple cores, therefore you won't get any performance improvements with multi cores.
A single application, if not multithreaded, won't see any performance boost.
But if you're running multiple applications at once, your overall system performance will definitely improve.
Also note that many of Apple's system facilities (like Core Image) are internally multithreaded. So apps that use these system services will see performance boosts even if the application developer didn't write any multithreading code into the app.
I am also certain that we'll see more and more developers using multithreading, now that all but the cheapest systems sold will have at least two cores. Especially with those apps that are CPU-intensive, and could therefore gain the most from multiprocessing.
(Gee, it seems like it was only a few short years ago that we were having this same discussion about AltiVec :) )
A single application, if not multithreaded, won't see any performance boost.
But if you're running multiple applications at once, your overall system performance will definitely improve.
Also note that many of Apple's system facilities (like Core Image) are internally multithreaded. So apps that use these system services will see performance boosts even if the application developer didn't write any multithreading code into the app.
I am also certain that we'll see more and more developers using multithreading, now that all but the cheapest systems sold will have at least two cores. Especially with those apps that are CPU-intensive, and could therefore gain the most from multiprocessing.
(Gee, it seems like it was only a few short years ago that we were having this same discussion about AltiVec :) )
HecubusPro
Aug 27, 12:08 PM
But that doesn't make Nintendo (or Microsoft or Sony) suck. Fanboys just make themselves suck by being fanboys. :)
You are correct, sir.:D
You are correct, sir.:D
Lailoken
Mar 31, 05:52 PM
I've really loved my experience with Android so far. I've had an iPhone and a iPhone 3G and I am an iPhone developer.... yet I use Android.
Android will always be "open source" and this is not inconsistent with Google applying more control to stem inoperable fragmentation. These two ideas are not at odds.
I cannot wait for Google to do what I think Amazon is currently trying to do with their new App. Store.
That said I really like the new iPad 2, but sadly my next purchase would prolly be a i7 MacBook Pro.
Android will always be "open source" and this is not inconsistent with Google applying more control to stem inoperable fragmentation. These two ideas are not at odds.
I cannot wait for Google to do what I think Amazon is currently trying to do with their new App. Store.
That said I really like the new iPad 2, but sadly my next purchase would prolly be a i7 MacBook Pro.
Machead III
Sep 19, 07:45 AM
The mermon G5s should be out before summer.
OMG wat about Santa Clause tabl3t apple Max? NEWTON FTW!!!!
OMG wat about Santa Clause tabl3t apple Max? NEWTON FTW!!!!
skunk
Apr 28, 09:32 AM
Sad, pathetic, misguided, and further proof that this forum has a distinct in ability to produce meaningful conversation without hate, vitriol, and meaninglessly misguided attacks. Enjoy.Are you leaving so soon? :(
tmofee
Mar 25, 10:44 PM
i wonder if apple will release a version in the app store???
epitaphic
Aug 18, 09:06 PM
Do you think a Conroe iMac will beat a Mac Pro due to lower memory latency alone? Do you have real experience or data regarding how horrendous a problem this is? Extra dual-core processor aside, the Mac Pro has a higher speed FSB, higher memory bus bandwidth, higher RAM capacity, and ability to set up internal RAID amongst other advantages over a Conroe iMac.
Obviously, inherently the iMac design is inferior to the Mac Pro/Powermac. But I think there's a bigger reason why Apple chose to go all quad with the Mac Pro: Apple chose all quad because a duo option would have had the same performance in professional apps (again, excluding handbrake and toast which are the only two examples touted about). A single processor Woodcrest or Conroe option will have the same obtainable CPU power for 90-95% of the professional market for another 6-12 months at the very least.
Here's some data regarding the Mac Pro's FSB:
the Mac Pro (...) actually takes longer to access main memory than the Core Duo processor in the MacBook Pro. This is much worse than it sounds once you take into account the fact that the MacBook Pro features a 667MHz FSB compared to the 1333MHz FSB (per chip) used in the Mac Pro.
What can we take from this? Because of the use of FB-DIMMs, the Mac Pro's effective FSB is that of ~640MHz DDR2 system.
And how does it fare in memory latency?
It's not Apple's fault, but FB-DIMMs absolutely kill memory latency; even running in quad channel mode, the FB-DIMM equipped Mac Pro takes 45% more time to access memory than our DDR2 equipped test bed at the same memory frequency.
As for bandwidth, although the Mac Pro has a load of theoretical bandwidth, the efficiency is an abysmal 20%. In real use a DDR2 system has 72% more usable bandwidth. (source here (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2816&p=11))
I don't know bout you, but if I were a heavy user of memory intensive apps such as Photoshop, I'd be worried. Worried in the sense that a Conroe would be noticeably faster.
Memory issues aside, Woodcrests are faster than Conroes, 2.4% on average (source here (http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2795&p=6))
Obviously, inherently the iMac design is inferior to the Mac Pro/Powermac. But I think there's a bigger reason why Apple chose to go all quad with the Mac Pro: Apple chose all quad because a duo option would have had the same performance in professional apps (again, excluding handbrake and toast which are the only two examples touted about). A single processor Woodcrest or Conroe option will have the same obtainable CPU power for 90-95% of the professional market for another 6-12 months at the very least.
Here's some data regarding the Mac Pro's FSB:
the Mac Pro (...) actually takes longer to access main memory than the Core Duo processor in the MacBook Pro. This is much worse than it sounds once you take into account the fact that the MacBook Pro features a 667MHz FSB compared to the 1333MHz FSB (per chip) used in the Mac Pro.
What can we take from this? Because of the use of FB-DIMMs, the Mac Pro's effective FSB is that of ~640MHz DDR2 system.
And how does it fare in memory latency?
It's not Apple's fault, but FB-DIMMs absolutely kill memory latency; even running in quad channel mode, the FB-DIMM equipped Mac Pro takes 45% more time to access memory than our DDR2 equipped test bed at the same memory frequency.
As for bandwidth, although the Mac Pro has a load of theoretical bandwidth, the efficiency is an abysmal 20%. In real use a DDR2 system has 72% more usable bandwidth. (source here (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2816&p=11))
I don't know bout you, but if I were a heavy user of memory intensive apps such as Photoshop, I'd be worried. Worried in the sense that a Conroe would be noticeably faster.
Memory issues aside, Woodcrests are faster than Conroes, 2.4% on average (source here (http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2795&p=6))
Dagless
Aug 5, 04:18 AM
i thought this game was vaporware
They finally announced the release date at E3 2010.
I don't think I'll be getting it. I bought GT PSP and its as if the developers actively tried to suck all the enjoyment out of the series.
They finally announced the release date at E3 2010.
I don't think I'll be getting it. I bought GT PSP and its as if the developers actively tried to suck all the enjoyment out of the series.
cmaier
Apr 19, 02:12 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.
That sort of misstates the test for likelihood of confusion. A consumer might, for example, believe that Apple licenses or otherwise blesses the Samsung products. That's probably good enough.
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.
That sort of misstates the test for likelihood of confusion. A consumer might, for example, believe that Apple licenses or otherwise blesses the Samsung products. That's probably good enough.
Rend It
Aug 5, 06:07 PM
snippet
Why is Front Row dependent on iSight ?
No good, clear reason. It's just that Front Row usually goes along with PhotoBooth, so.... Also, it seems that Apple might be really pushing iChat with Leopard, especially video chatting, and the iMac, MBP, and MB all have iSights. It doesn't seem too crazy to believe that perhaps Apple wants a built-in camera in all of their hardware. In the case of the Mac Pro, Xserve, and Mini, the natural place for such a device is a display.
Pure speculation, of course. :D
Why is Front Row dependent on iSight ?
No good, clear reason. It's just that Front Row usually goes along with PhotoBooth, so.... Also, it seems that Apple might be really pushing iChat with Leopard, especially video chatting, and the iMac, MBP, and MB all have iSights. It doesn't seem too crazy to believe that perhaps Apple wants a built-in camera in all of their hardware. In the case of the Mac Pro, Xserve, and Mini, the natural place for such a device is a display.
Pure speculation, of course. :D
inkswamp
Jul 28, 04:34 AM
gnasher729, thanks for taking the time to explain that. I had to read it twice, but I get it.
So it seems that in many ways we're getting the best of the G5 and the best of Intel with the Core 2 Duo chips. As these kinds of things unfold, Apple's decision to switch to Intel chips makes more and more sense. They probably knew where Intel was going. Interesting.
So it seems that in many ways we're getting the best of the G5 and the best of Intel with the Core 2 Duo chips. As these kinds of things unfold, Apple's decision to switch to Intel chips makes more and more sense. They probably knew where Intel was going. Interesting.
silverblue3
Aug 26, 07:49 PM
What's the GPU on the new mbp gonna be? Bring on the SLI GPU's ;) Will give alienwares a run for their money.
benthewraith
Nov 28, 08:07 PM
I agree with the people here who have said that if this happens they would pirate all of the Music that they wanted from universal. If this happens and I buy a new iPod after that I will just go and pirate the Music that I want since the record labels have already been paid.
You could have a subpoena on you the moment you do (and it would not be an effective defense if you had posts such as these in public forums. Did you know that bots go to forums?).
I just wouldn't buy anything more from Universal. There are plenty of bands in Jacksonville to fill my iPod up (and Yellowcard isn't contracted with Universal! :D).
You could have a subpoena on you the moment you do (and it would not be an effective defense if you had posts such as these in public forums. Did you know that bots go to forums?).
I just wouldn't buy anything more from Universal. There are plenty of bands in Jacksonville to fill my iPod up (and Yellowcard isn't contracted with Universal! :D).
aloshka
Apr 25, 03:03 PM
"a perfect storm", "overreaction", "typical for the us to sue.."
... sorry, but in what ways do I benefit by having apple track my whereabouts to the day and meter? why isn't there an opt-in (apart from the general 'eat **** or die' TOU) or at least an opt-out for this? why is it so easy to access the data?
... apple deserves to get a beating for this.
they're known for focussing on the user in terms of design and UI of theirdevices... they should also make the step to focus on their users best interest in terms of privacy and freedom, rather than their own greed.
You obviously missed the point that they do not track anything. It's just a log file on your iphone, it stays with your iphone. I GOT even more news!! I FOUND a file on the iphone that stores text messages. YES PEOPLE text messages. I can read your text messages from this file if I have your phone!! Oh ya, I know you can launch the SMS app, but WHY WOULD APPLE NEED TO STORE TEXT MESSAGES ON MY DEVICE?!?! I'm suing!!
... sorry, but in what ways do I benefit by having apple track my whereabouts to the day and meter? why isn't there an opt-in (apart from the general 'eat **** or die' TOU) or at least an opt-out for this? why is it so easy to access the data?
... apple deserves to get a beating for this.
they're known for focussing on the user in terms of design and UI of theirdevices... they should also make the step to focus on their users best interest in terms of privacy and freedom, rather than their own greed.
You obviously missed the point that they do not track anything. It's just a log file on your iphone, it stays with your iphone. I GOT even more news!! I FOUND a file on the iphone that stores text messages. YES PEOPLE text messages. I can read your text messages from this file if I have your phone!! Oh ya, I know you can launch the SMS app, but WHY WOULD APPLE NEED TO STORE TEXT MESSAGES ON MY DEVICE?!?! I'm suing!!
MacBoobsPro
Jul 20, 10:09 AM
you need to do your math better, extra core = 1.5x - 1.8x speed increase. but still the same power usage as a normal core!
Wow Im having to do a lot of explaining of my posts, im beginning to think im a bit retarded. :(
24Ghz is (in my head) an 8 core machine running at 3Ghz i.e. 8x3=24
Its just an example to make things easier for people to answer my OP. :)
DISCLAIMER: All information contained within my posts sounded right in my head at the time of writing. However I may have been A) Quickly typing because I should actually be working B) Trying to be funny but failing miserabley or C) Drunk. It is not my intention to confuse people but I seem to do it quite easily and without knowledge. Please address any complaints to the complaints dept. at Microsoft Corporation.
Wow Im having to do a lot of explaining of my posts, im beginning to think im a bit retarded. :(
24Ghz is (in my head) an 8 core machine running at 3Ghz i.e. 8x3=24
Its just an example to make things easier for people to answer my OP. :)
DISCLAIMER: All information contained within my posts sounded right in my head at the time of writing. However I may have been A) Quickly typing because I should actually be working B) Trying to be funny but failing miserabley or C) Drunk. It is not my intention to confuse people but I seem to do it quite easily and without knowledge. Please address any complaints to the complaints dept. at Microsoft Corporation.
NoSmokingBandit
Nov 24, 11:23 AM
I'm installing right now. I'd like to just jump in, but i'd rather get it all out of the way to begin with.
No comments:
Post a Comment