radiohead14
Mar 22, 02:59 PM
We are still missing an 8" Galaxy Tab to complete the 7", 9", and 10" line of tablets.
7", 8.9", 10" :)
i'm looking forward to reviews of that 10" samsung galaxy tab. the hardware seems sleeker than the original design they previously introduced. i hope it still has dual stereo speakers on both sides. i'm guessing that they reduced down from 8mp to 3mp camera due to the price matching and not because it's thinner, since phones can easily fit 8mp cams in their slim forms. i also hope that they don't mess it up with that touchwiz interface, as far as updating the os. at this stage of honeycomb, you'd figure that google will be rolling quite a few updates to it. although, engadget reported that there will be versions that will come vanilla.
7", 8.9", 10" :)
i'm looking forward to reviews of that 10" samsung galaxy tab. the hardware seems sleeker than the original design they previously introduced. i hope it still has dual stereo speakers on both sides. i'm guessing that they reduced down from 8mp to 3mp camera due to the price matching and not because it's thinner, since phones can easily fit 8mp cams in their slim forms. i also hope that they don't mess it up with that touchwiz interface, as far as updating the os. at this stage of honeycomb, you'd figure that google will be rolling quite a few updates to it. although, engadget reported that there will be versions that will come vanilla.
shawnce
Jul 20, 11:56 AM
yes, its known as reverse hyper threading. AMD are working on it
http://www.dvhardware.net/article10901.html
Reverse hyperthreading? Um, no. (http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060713-7263.html)
(also note that the article you link even notes that it was a "hoax")
http://www.dvhardware.net/article10901.html
Reverse hyperthreading? Um, no. (http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060713-7263.html)
(also note that the article you link even notes that it was a "hoax")
Padraig
Aug 12, 04:13 AM
If there is a phone on the way i'm guessing that we can be sure of few things.
1) Can't see it being a clamshell. Perhaps a slider, but in all likelyhood it will be a candybar - fits in with apple designs aesthetic, simple, elegant design.
2) It will have to be GSM, UMTS being included as well. There is no way Apple is releasing a CDMA only phone, the market is tiny.
3) I'm sure Apple will release this by themselves, rather than partnering up with a specific carrier. This would allow people who are already tied into contracts to purchase the phone, without having to switch networks. Also couldn't invisage Apple agreeing to something like Vodafone's software.
1) Can't see it being a clamshell. Perhaps a slider, but in all likelyhood it will be a candybar - fits in with apple designs aesthetic, simple, elegant design.
2) It will have to be GSM, UMTS being included as well. There is no way Apple is releasing a CDMA only phone, the market is tiny.
3) I'm sure Apple will release this by themselves, rather than partnering up with a specific carrier. This would allow people who are already tied into contracts to purchase the phone, without having to switch networks. Also couldn't invisage Apple agreeing to something like Vodafone's software.
igator210
Apr 27, 09:04 AM
The principle of any and every cell phone is that if can connect to a cellular network signal, it knows where you are. Based upon every unique cellular ID, the networks know how to route incoming calls and texts to you, If it didn't how that. how the h#!! do you think you'd get any calls? Right now, sitting at my desk, Verizon knows exactly where I am (based upon triangulation of the nearest cell towers. They have my unique cell ID and my account information. My dumb phone even has a gps 911 locator on it. I dial 911, they know where I am.
Side story: the credit card companies know exactly where I am better then the cell companies. Every time I swipe my credit or debit card, they know where I am. When I travel for vacation, I am very likely to get a call from my credit card company (on my cell) asking where, when and how long I will be traveling. They know every store and every purchase I've ever made on a credit card.
Side story: the credit card companies know exactly where I am better then the cell companies. Every time I swipe my credit or debit card, they know where I am. When I travel for vacation, I am very likely to get a call from my credit card company (on my cell) asking where, when and how long I will be traveling. They know every store and every purchase I've ever made on a credit card.
Full of Win
Mar 31, 02:27 PM
Good. I hope they take one of the last strengths of the iPad ecosystem away from it.
dscuber9000
Mar 22, 10:52 PM
Oh yeah... and here's a fun little nugget for those who like to tout Obama's coalition:
Do you think the scale of our intervention is anywhere close to the scale of our intervention in Iraq? We don't even have any troops in Libya! We barely even need a coalition at all! I'm sorry that you're still sore about how the war in Iraq went, but trying to compare this to it is just stupid. Just stupid.
Do you think the scale of our intervention is anywhere close to the scale of our intervention in Iraq? We don't even have any troops in Libya! We barely even need a coalition at all! I'm sorry that you're still sore about how the war in Iraq went, but trying to compare this to it is just stupid. Just stupid.
kdarling
Mar 22, 07:38 PM
It runs Android. Pretty sure that's what he meant. So, Google, Android developers, Android marketplace.
Ah, I thought perhaps he knew something I didn't.
True, they don't have to spend a lot of time or money on core OS improvements.
Nor do they have to worry about maintaining an app market (or getting bad publicity because they approved baby-killer or gay-fixer apps). OTOH, they don't directly profit from app sales.
Samsung, HTC and others do have staff for third party developer relations, and all maintain R&D labs for their Android porting and customization.
That doesn't change the accounting. Cost is still the same, and they are pricing theirs very low. The first Tab came out at what, $800, and then dropped immediately on entrance to Costco and other retailers. Last I saw it was $400, I haven't been paying close attention, though.
It came out at $600, which many thought made some sense (http://www.engadget.com/2010/10/20/editorial-why-the-galaxy-tabs-price-makes-sense/) considering it had 3G and GPS. I bought one myself.
I think you're right, now it's as low as $400 on contract. (Heck, it's only $250 right now on T-Mobile (http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/galaxy-tab/SGH-T849ZKATMB).)
Ah, I thought perhaps he knew something I didn't.
True, they don't have to spend a lot of time or money on core OS improvements.
Nor do they have to worry about maintaining an app market (or getting bad publicity because they approved baby-killer or gay-fixer apps). OTOH, they don't directly profit from app sales.
Samsung, HTC and others do have staff for third party developer relations, and all maintain R&D labs for their Android porting and customization.
That doesn't change the accounting. Cost is still the same, and they are pricing theirs very low. The first Tab came out at what, $800, and then dropped immediately on entrance to Costco and other retailers. Last I saw it was $400, I haven't been paying close attention, though.
It came out at $600, which many thought made some sense (http://www.engadget.com/2010/10/20/editorial-why-the-galaxy-tabs-price-makes-sense/) considering it had 3G and GPS. I bought one myself.
I think you're right, now it's as low as $400 on contract. (Heck, it's only $250 right now on T-Mobile (http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/galaxy-tab/SGH-T849ZKATMB).)
opinioncircle
Mar 19, 03:38 PM
When will you people realize that Obama is not in charge? You're not in charge either. Corporate interest rules the USA, Libya has 2% of the world's oil supply and a lot of companies have interests there. No one intervened militarily in Rwanda or East Timor. You guys can continue to have your little left vs right, conservative vs. liberal distraction of a debate, meanwhile the real people running the show don't give a rat's ass about any of it.
I do agree with you to a certain extent. I still feel there is room to make things happen, but the trio money/power/interests is the big factor in decisions made.
I am openly disappointed with President Obama. It seems he's chasing something that he can't have, i.e. appreciation from each and every American (left and right included).
He's gone soft on several issues, and instead of taking advantage of the position the Dems were in DC, they tried to find a false consensus. Sad is the only word coming to my mind when talking about President Obama 1st term.
I do agree with you to a certain extent. I still feel there is room to make things happen, but the trio money/power/interests is the big factor in decisions made.
I am openly disappointed with President Obama. It seems he's chasing something that he can't have, i.e. appreciation from each and every American (left and right included).
He's gone soft on several issues, and instead of taking advantage of the position the Dems were in DC, they tried to find a false consensus. Sad is the only word coming to my mind when talking about President Obama 1st term.
Evangelion
Jul 15, 10:32 AM
Power Supply at the top is REALLY stupid.
Why?
Because PC's have the PSU at the top, so it MUST be bad.
Why?
Because PC's have the PSU at the top, so it MUST be bad.
MacsRgr8
Aug 6, 01:56 PM
why do you think so? Conroe chips showed up online a few weeks ago, and woodcrest has been shipping to manufacturers for some time now. Merom hasn't, Conroe is ahead of Merom in terms of shipping IIRC.
You're right.
I got it the wrong way round. somehow I believed the Merom's to be already shipping, and not the Conroe, But as others have stated too, it's the Conroe which already has seen some daylight!
Makes it difficult though.
Will the Mac Pro low(er) end get the Conroe?
And only the top end (presumably a Quad config) a Woodcrest?
Can't wait!!
You're right.
I got it the wrong way round. somehow I believed the Merom's to be already shipping, and not the Conroe, But as others have stated too, it's the Conroe which already has seen some daylight!
Makes it difficult though.
Will the Mac Pro low(er) end get the Conroe?
And only the top end (presumably a Quad config) a Woodcrest?
Can't wait!!
Macinbest
Aug 28, 01:50 AM
They are indeed having support problems...
I sent my iMac in for repairs at a service center on July 24th (they changed the power supply, HD, superdrive), and I didn't have the computer back until August 25th!!!! 32 days! :eek: :eek: :eek:
Called the store many times and they were waiting for apple to ship the parts... called Apple and I was forwarded to their Dispatch dept. and indeed nothing had been sent.. :mad:
I wonder... could I possibly complain enough to get my AppleCare reimbursed or something as a compensation.. I mean 32 days without my main computer... coding on a 12" ibook 600 has been rather aggravating.
I sent my iMac in for repairs at a service center on July 24th (they changed the power supply, HD, superdrive), and I didn't have the computer back until August 25th!!!! 32 days! :eek: :eek: :eek:
Called the store many times and they were waiting for apple to ship the parts... called Apple and I was forwarded to their Dispatch dept. and indeed nothing had been sent.. :mad:
I wonder... could I possibly complain enough to get my AppleCare reimbursed or something as a compensation.. I mean 32 days without my main computer... coding on a 12" ibook 600 has been rather aggravating.
Bakey
Aug 26, 06:05 PM
Im guessing hopefully by the years end for the G5.... :) :)
What by the years end? That we stop reading the same "PowerBook G5 next Tuesday!" non-starting done-to-death joke?? :rolleyes: :p
What by the years end? That we stop reading the same "PowerBook G5 next Tuesday!" non-starting done-to-death joke?? :rolleyes: :p
shartypants
Mar 25, 10:51 PM
Look forward to seeing what additional features where added since the last developer release.
other
Aug 7, 04:29 PM
*shrug* I don't think TM is a copy of System Restore. But I think how much that feature has caught on with Win users is also not unrelated to the presence of TM in Leopard. All's fair in love, war, and operating systems. :)
Well, do you think it's a copy of "Previous versions", which someone posted a link to in this thread?
(Here's the link again: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060730-7383.html)
Well, do you think it's a copy of "Previous versions", which someone posted a link to in this thread?
(Here's the link again: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060730-7383.html)
NJRonbo
Jun 15, 09:02 AM
Those of you still looking to order from the Shack...
The latest I am hearing this morning from at least
one store is that preorders start at 1pm.
...however they are not calling it preorders. They
take down your name, phone and email and check
the system. No deposit.
I am being told that you ARE guaranteed a phone
with this reservation.
The latest I am hearing this morning from at least
one store is that preorders start at 1pm.
...however they are not calling it preorders. They
take down your name, phone and email and check
the system. No deposit.
I am being told that you ARE guaranteed a phone
with this reservation.
Unspeaked
Nov 29, 11:10 AM
You posted a list of artist people will start to illegally copy if Universal starts to tax iPods....
Hey, what they do with the list is their business...
All I was doing was letting the thread know the breadth of Universal's stable!
;)
Hey, what they do with the list is their business...
All I was doing was letting the thread know the breadth of Universal's stable!
;)
gnasher729
Jul 27, 05:59 PM
but is still more productive because it handles more calculations per clock cycle
I'm no processor geek. I have a basic understanding of the terminology and how things work so correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't this one of the advantages that the PPC had over Intel chips? Does this mean Intel is moving toward shorter pipes? Are we talking more instructions per clock cycle or what? What does "calculations" mean in this context?
With most processors, especially the Intel/AMD processors, "instructions per cycle" is not a useful number. These processors have both simple instructions (add register number 3 to register number 6) and complex instructions (add register number 3 to the number whose address is in register number 6). A PowerPC has the simple instructions, but not the complex ones. Instead it would need three instructions "load the number whose address is in register number 6, and move it to register 7", "add register 3 to register 7", "store register 7 to the location whose address is in register 6". But the Intel processor doesn't magically do three times as much work. Instead, it splits the complex instruction into three so-called "macro-ops", and does exactly the same work. So in this case, the PowerPC would execute three times as many instructions per cycle (3 instead of 1), but because it doesn't do more actual work, that is pointless. Instead you would count the number of operations, and they are more or less the same.
Intel is indeed moving towards shorter pipelines. They have done that already with the Core Duo chips. Longer pipelines have the advantage that each pipeline step is a bit faster, so you can get higher clockspeed. Shorter pipelines have the advantage that they take much less energy (very important; at some point your chips just melt), they are much faster handling branches, and they are just much much easier to design. Pentium 4 needed absolutely heroic efforts to produce it, and would have needed twice the heroics to improve it. Instead, the Core Duo has a much simpler design, that is just as powerful, and because it was so simple, Core 2 Duo could improve it.
And Core 2 Duo can now execute up to four "micro-ops" per cycle, same as the G5, compared to three for Core Duo, Pentium 4 and G4. It also has some clever features that reduce the number of micro-ops needed up to 10 percent, and some other improvements.
I'm no processor geek. I have a basic understanding of the terminology and how things work so correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't this one of the advantages that the PPC had over Intel chips? Does this mean Intel is moving toward shorter pipes? Are we talking more instructions per clock cycle or what? What does "calculations" mean in this context?
With most processors, especially the Intel/AMD processors, "instructions per cycle" is not a useful number. These processors have both simple instructions (add register number 3 to register number 6) and complex instructions (add register number 3 to the number whose address is in register number 6). A PowerPC has the simple instructions, but not the complex ones. Instead it would need three instructions "load the number whose address is in register number 6, and move it to register 7", "add register 3 to register 7", "store register 7 to the location whose address is in register 6". But the Intel processor doesn't magically do three times as much work. Instead, it splits the complex instruction into three so-called "macro-ops", and does exactly the same work. So in this case, the PowerPC would execute three times as many instructions per cycle (3 instead of 1), but because it doesn't do more actual work, that is pointless. Instead you would count the number of operations, and they are more or less the same.
Intel is indeed moving towards shorter pipelines. They have done that already with the Core Duo chips. Longer pipelines have the advantage that each pipeline step is a bit faster, so you can get higher clockspeed. Shorter pipelines have the advantage that they take much less energy (very important; at some point your chips just melt), they are much faster handling branches, and they are just much much easier to design. Pentium 4 needed absolutely heroic efforts to produce it, and would have needed twice the heroics to improve it. Instead, the Core Duo has a much simpler design, that is just as powerful, and because it was so simple, Core 2 Duo could improve it.
And Core 2 Duo can now execute up to four "micro-ops" per cycle, same as the G5, compared to three for Core Duo, Pentium 4 and G4. It also has some clever features that reduce the number of micro-ops needed up to 10 percent, and some other improvements.
princealfie
Nov 29, 08:57 AM
2 - How are they compensated equitably? Do you compensate Jay-Z and a classical artist the same? Which ever you prefer, Jay-Z sells more.
3
Well, we should base it on quality then. Since Jay-Z sucks compared to Isaac Stern or Yo-Yo Ma, shouldn't Ma be a millionaire?
Hmm... we need an official rating system to compensate artists that way. So that Paris Hell-ton never signs another record deal.
3
Well, we should base it on quality then. Since Jay-Z sucks compared to Isaac Stern or Yo-Yo Ma, shouldn't Ma be a millionaire?
Hmm... we need an official rating system to compensate artists that way. So that Paris Hell-ton never signs another record deal.
rockthecasbah
Nov 28, 06:37 PM
There's a reason and i pay for my music and don't just steal off of P2P sites!!! I doubt this would ever happen since the iTunes Music Store / Apple is so powerful that having Universal not be hosted would hurt them more than Apple. Record labels are just sickening. Someone who buys an iPod isn't even necessarily going to buy music in general (or at least from Universal) anyway, so their idea that they are entitled to a cut of the profits is just unfounded.
nagromme
Aug 6, 01:44 PM
Assuming that is true, it sounds like Mac-Pro.com stands to gain some valuable publicity no matter how things turn out :)
I'm skeptical since Mac Pro sells Apple's Macs, and got THEIR name from that.
I'm skeptical since Mac Pro sells Apple's Macs, and got THEIR name from that.
mark28
Apr 20, 05:47 AM
Sure, but did Samsung patent it?
It's not about 'who copied who?', but 'who copied after who patented?'
All the corporations mentioned in this thread are dinosaurs and know what type of business they are in. If they fail to patent their (good) ideas than it's a given that someone else eventually will. Doesn't matter whether we or anyone thinks that's right or wrong. It's normal business practice. Any corporation thet develops products in a hot contested market like this and doesn't play this game will lose business or cash.
Samsung didn't stole it from Apple since they were first with the design, end of story.
Samsung can claim Apple stole their design and patent it. That's fraud right since it's not their own idea?
It's not about 'who copied who?', but 'who copied after who patented?'
All the corporations mentioned in this thread are dinosaurs and know what type of business they are in. If they fail to patent their (good) ideas than it's a given that someone else eventually will. Doesn't matter whether we or anyone thinks that's right or wrong. It's normal business practice. Any corporation thet develops products in a hot contested market like this and doesn't play this game will lose business or cash.
Samsung didn't stole it from Apple since they were first with the design, end of story.
Samsung can claim Apple stole their design and patent it. That's fraud right since it's not their own idea?
vand0576
Aug 11, 01:46 PM
...There's no way in the world Apple would make as much money off of this as if they got in with one of the big guys. Just ask Disney - ESPN mobile is bombing as is Disney mobile....
They are failing because they believe media content is what is important to people. Pumping their phones full of media and "services" which only are really advertisements that don't help anyone but Disney and ESPN. They are phones with superficial artificial sustainance.
Technology wouldn't be such a boom if people couldn't advertise with it some way. Apple will only succeed if it can avoid this and make a product that is functional and serves a true purpose in the consumer's life without the bullcrap content.
They are failing because they believe media content is what is important to people. Pumping their phones full of media and "services" which only are really advertisements that don't help anyone but Disney and ESPN. They are phones with superficial artificial sustainance.
Technology wouldn't be such a boom if people couldn't advertise with it some way. Apple will only succeed if it can avoid this and make a product that is functional and serves a true purpose in the consumer's life without the bullcrap content.
macaddiict
Apr 25, 01:38 PM
money grubbers
I agree, Apple is pretty ridiculous at times.
That must be who you meant, since you clearly haven't had time to read the lawsuit yet.
Or do you think all lawsuits are 'money grubbers'?
I agree, Apple is pretty ridiculous at times.
That must be who you meant, since you clearly haven't had time to read the lawsuit yet.
Or do you think all lawsuits are 'money grubbers'?
MattInOz
Apr 6, 11:30 PM
Although the only thing that will ultimately matter is what Apple releases on Tuesday, if you want to get an inkling as to why FCP development has been at loggerheads since do yourself a favour and read a couple articles from Philip Hodgett's blog on FCP, QTkit, Cocoa, and it's unfortunate collision with OSX's 64 bit platform development.
http://www.philiphodgetts.com/category/technology/apple-pro-apps/
Which has been in development longer FCP overhaul or iPhone?
AV foundation was overkill for iOS from the outset so that would suggest is was always intended for FCP.
His articles have a funny assumption that the OS team has the most secrecy.
Surely the more valuable projects Like FCP have greater access to information and the greater control over when the broader company gets to see their work. Sure they would have been trumped to iPhone team who would seem to have free reign. The CoreOS team would seem like they are the most open their job is to turn the private API's developed by the product teams into to a public developer platform. A lot of their work is even open source.
http://www.philiphodgetts.com/category/technology/apple-pro-apps/
Which has been in development longer FCP overhaul or iPhone?
AV foundation was overkill for iOS from the outset so that would suggest is was always intended for FCP.
His articles have a funny assumption that the OS team has the most secrecy.
Surely the more valuable projects Like FCP have greater access to information and the greater control over when the broader company gets to see their work. Sure they would have been trumped to iPhone team who would seem to have free reign. The CoreOS team would seem like they are the most open their job is to turn the private API's developed by the product teams into to a public developer platform. A lot of their work is even open source.
0 comments:
Post a Comment