LagunaSol
Apr 12, 11:33 PM
I personally wouldn't recommend people buy a subsidized phone, but people are price sensitive. YMMV. :(
You're going to be paying for a data plan anyway, so why not make some of that money back in a subsidy?
You're going to be paying for a data plan anyway, so why not make some of that money back in a subsidy?
tundrabuggy
Apr 19, 03:35 PM
So True...
Poor lost souls rely on Steve to think for them, bring them courage, and guide them in worship.
Anyone who fails to fall in line, is immediately a threat to them.
It's this weakness is laughable.
Funny, I'm a Dallas Cowboy fan, the fans are fanatics and everyone who is not a Dallas fan HATES the Cowboys. I feel the same heat being an Apple fanatic. The fans are loyal and defending of the brand while every other tech fan hates us. I need a big white Apple logo with a blue Dallas Cowboy star in it. I might be shot!!!! lol
Poor lost souls rely on Steve to think for them, bring them courage, and guide them in worship.
Anyone who fails to fall in line, is immediately a threat to them.
It's this weakness is laughable.
Funny, I'm a Dallas Cowboy fan, the fans are fanatics and everyone who is not a Dallas fan HATES the Cowboys. I feel the same heat being an Apple fanatic. The fans are loyal and defending of the brand while every other tech fan hates us. I need a big white Apple logo with a blue Dallas Cowboy star in it. I might be shot!!!! lol
marksman
Mar 22, 01:31 PM
Blackberry playbook = The IPad 2 killer - you heard it here first.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Yeah a 50% smaller screen for the same price and less battery life is certainly going to crush the iPad2.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Yeah a 50% smaller screen for the same price and less battery life is certainly going to crush the iPad2.
law guy
Aug 5, 10:20 PM
EVERYONE is missing something that MUST be updated A.S.A.P.!
AirPort Base Stations!
Express and especially the Extreme. The Extreme is YEARS old!!
:eek: :eek:
Good point - CNET just did a round up of "pre-n" series routers http://reviews.cnet.com/4321-3319_7-6544166-1.html - the extreme hasn't entered that area yet - although it was ahead of the curve a bit with the "g" standard.
AirPort Base Stations!
Express and especially the Extreme. The Extreme is YEARS old!!
:eek: :eek:
Good point - CNET just did a round up of "pre-n" series routers http://reviews.cnet.com/4321-3319_7-6544166-1.html - the extreme hasn't entered that area yet - although it was ahead of the curve a bit with the "g" standard.
Dorkington
Apr 27, 09:54 AM
It baffles me that someone who has a US Passport, security clearance, was a Senator and is now the President, would somehow avoid all background investigations by various departments in the US Government. He must have a lot of connections.
zin
Mar 22, 12:52 PM
A 5 gram drop in weight? And people said Apple's effort at reducing weight was bad. :rolleyes:
SevenInchScrew
Nov 29, 12:38 PM
Play it over the weekend - My biggest problem is theres nothing ground breaking about it. Kind of "more of the same" but with updated graphics (VERY good graphics mind you).
That is, sadly, pretty much how I feel as well. It sure is pretty. I mean, DAMN does it look amazing at times. I really enjoyed Photo Mode as well. But beyond that, I just didn't find the rest of it very compelling. I've said this before, but it just seems that the product that Kaz and PD want to make just doesn't appeal to me any more. Which is a bummer, because I REALLY enjoyed the first few GT games.
That is, sadly, pretty much how I feel as well. It sure is pretty. I mean, DAMN does it look amazing at times. I really enjoyed Photo Mode as well. But beyond that, I just didn't find the rest of it very compelling. I've said this before, but it just seems that the product that Kaz and PD want to make just doesn't appeal to me any more. Which is a bummer, because I REALLY enjoyed the first few GT games.
mkrishnan
Aug 7, 04:35 PM
Well, do you think it's a copy of "Previous versions", which someone posted a link to in this thread?
It's very similar. I'm saying, who cares? It's a simple basic concept and Apple has a nice implementation going. :) And I actually believe that Apple's version will not have glaring security holes. :eek: :p Ahem...I installed Trillian on managed Win2k and XP machines as a standard user, and other users had access to my IM accounts without logging in!!!! :rolleyes:
Anyway, though, a Wiki Server in Leopard Server...mmmm... If only we lived in an Apple world. :D
That guy who made the angry video said it best... using a Mac is not so much using a computer but participating in the Apple experience. :D
It's very similar. I'm saying, who cares? It's a simple basic concept and Apple has a nice implementation going. :) And I actually believe that Apple's version will not have glaring security holes. :eek: :p Ahem...I installed Trillian on managed Win2k and XP machines as a standard user, and other users had access to my IM accounts without logging in!!!! :rolleyes:
Anyway, though, a Wiki Server in Leopard Server...mmmm... If only we lived in an Apple world. :D
That guy who made the angry video said it best... using a Mac is not so much using a computer but participating in the Apple experience. :D
dhollister
Sep 19, 12:49 AM
Does it even MATTER if Apple keeps up? Do we actually WANT Apple to release a new computer every month when Intel bumps up their chips a few megahertz?
See, it's easy to get lost in the specs war. The Mac Pros came out and I was salivating, even though I have a dual 2.0GHz G5 sitting at home. And then one day, as I was editing some HD footage, it occurred ot me that my G5 here - my now outdated G5 - was editing 1080p high-def footage without so much as a flinch. It was SO fast it was not even necessary at all.
So I really have to ask - does Apple really need to get into that stupid-ass PC specs war? Is it really hurting you guys that Apple has been slow to update? Are you really doing tasks that the current computer lineup cannot do?
See, it's easy to get lost in the specs war. The Mac Pros came out and I was salivating, even though I have a dual 2.0GHz G5 sitting at home. And then one day, as I was editing some HD footage, it occurred ot me that my G5 here - my now outdated G5 - was editing 1080p high-def footage without so much as a flinch. It was SO fast it was not even necessary at all.
So I really have to ask - does Apple really need to get into that stupid-ass PC specs war? Is it really hurting you guys that Apple has been slow to update? Are you really doing tasks that the current computer lineup cannot do?
twoodcc
Aug 11, 09:35 PM
My point is, earlier you were saying that they only have 4 games and they sold 57M copies. If you look at that link, which is right from Polyphony themselves, you will see that if you only count the 4 main games, as you were eluding to, that only totals 46M.
let's see, my original post:
yes it has been out for awhile, but they still haven't released the 5th game yet (not including demos). so either way, there's only 4 versions of the game out. at over 57 million copies sold, i'd say they sold a fair few...
noticed i said, "not including demos". which all other versions are, except for the psp game. granted, the last demo, or prologue, is a PS3 greatest hits.
So, you don't count NFS? Ok then. If I'm understanding you correctly, you are really only comparing GT to 1 other console game; Forza. It is the only other console game of any similar type. But, using your own logic, is it fair to compare GT to Forza, since GT has been out much longer and has many more games in the series? I mean, if we don't get to compare GT to NFS because of that, then surely you shouldn't compare GT to Forza for the same reason.
well let's compare it to NFS then, shall we? NFS debuted in 1994, and has their 16th release scheduled for release about the same time as GT5. so almost double the amount of games, if you include the prologues, or demos. and on top of that, NFS isn't just PS3. and it's available on a pc as well.
is it still a fair comparison? even though they are different games, they are both racing games. but if we go off number of sales (since you seem to think b/c i mentioned it, it's the only thing i take into consideration) NFS: 15 games, available on some 10 platforms, if not more. and over 100 millon.
GT5: 8 titles, 3 of which are prologues (demos). debuted in 1997. only playstation. over 57 million.
i'd say GT5 stacks up very well with NFS, considering everything. again, just looking at sales here
I really like you're choice of quoting.
hey, nothing wrong with wikipedia. they have links there for reference. i mean, all anyone else is gonna do is google stuff. how is that better?
...of which about 1/3 of them are various Civics, Skylines and Imprezas.
that's still not the point. having that many cars adds to the game, and adds up in data on that one disk. i'm sure many players drive those same cars in real life
...ok, that one is good. That says something.
yes it does. GT5 is only on playstation. it has been on every version now, including the psp.
...that no one ever drove, because it couldn't even get up the hilly parts of some tracks. Total waste.
again, that's your opinion. there might be some that liked those things. i personally didn't see much use either though
...really? Oldest car and Largest guide?? REALLY?? Yikes.
with so many cars, and so many races, some need a guide. some races are very difficult.
Um, according to your OWN link, the car was cancelled. And really, that isn't surprising. It is a concept car, plain and simple. So again I ask, what REAL cars have ever ACTUALLY been made just to be in this game??
nice catch. i'd say that's a pretty recent cancellation. but i did see a video of one somewhere, so i believe they made one somewhere.
but again, it still is a real car. and the intention of producing 6 of these cars was for this game. that is clear.
let's see, my original post:
yes it has been out for awhile, but they still haven't released the 5th game yet (not including demos). so either way, there's only 4 versions of the game out. at over 57 million copies sold, i'd say they sold a fair few...
noticed i said, "not including demos". which all other versions are, except for the psp game. granted, the last demo, or prologue, is a PS3 greatest hits.
So, you don't count NFS? Ok then. If I'm understanding you correctly, you are really only comparing GT to 1 other console game; Forza. It is the only other console game of any similar type. But, using your own logic, is it fair to compare GT to Forza, since GT has been out much longer and has many more games in the series? I mean, if we don't get to compare GT to NFS because of that, then surely you shouldn't compare GT to Forza for the same reason.
well let's compare it to NFS then, shall we? NFS debuted in 1994, and has their 16th release scheduled for release about the same time as GT5. so almost double the amount of games, if you include the prologues, or demos. and on top of that, NFS isn't just PS3. and it's available on a pc as well.
is it still a fair comparison? even though they are different games, they are both racing games. but if we go off number of sales (since you seem to think b/c i mentioned it, it's the only thing i take into consideration) NFS: 15 games, available on some 10 platforms, if not more. and over 100 millon.
GT5: 8 titles, 3 of which are prologues (demos). debuted in 1997. only playstation. over 57 million.
i'd say GT5 stacks up very well with NFS, considering everything. again, just looking at sales here
I really like you're choice of quoting.
hey, nothing wrong with wikipedia. they have links there for reference. i mean, all anyone else is gonna do is google stuff. how is that better?
...of which about 1/3 of them are various Civics, Skylines and Imprezas.
that's still not the point. having that many cars adds to the game, and adds up in data on that one disk. i'm sure many players drive those same cars in real life
...ok, that one is good. That says something.
yes it does. GT5 is only on playstation. it has been on every version now, including the psp.
...that no one ever drove, because it couldn't even get up the hilly parts of some tracks. Total waste.
again, that's your opinion. there might be some that liked those things. i personally didn't see much use either though
...really? Oldest car and Largest guide?? REALLY?? Yikes.
with so many cars, and so many races, some need a guide. some races are very difficult.
Um, according to your OWN link, the car was cancelled. And really, that isn't surprising. It is a concept car, plain and simple. So again I ask, what REAL cars have ever ACTUALLY been made just to be in this game??
nice catch. i'd say that's a pretty recent cancellation. but i did see a video of one somewhere, so i believe they made one somewhere.
but again, it still is a real car. and the intention of producing 6 of these cars was for this game. that is clear.
shawnce
Jul 14, 11:20 PM
AARGH MY EARS!
Whoever came up with that abomination should be SHOT! UGH! they could have put together a nice little slideshow or whatever...but no, they had to make some stupid video with a horrible song i'll NEVER be able to get out of my head!
School House Rock - "Oh, I'm just a bill, a lonely old bill, sitting here on Capitol Hill" (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1569494088/002-8458341-9463244?redirect=true)
Whoever came up with that abomination should be SHOT! UGH! they could have put together a nice little slideshow or whatever...but no, they had to make some stupid video with a horrible song i'll NEVER be able to get out of my head!
School House Rock - "Oh, I'm just a bill, a lonely old bill, sitting here on Capitol Hill" (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1569494088/002-8458341-9463244?redirect=true)
wescravn
Apr 10, 01:49 PM
Hoping for some better multi-core support(although probably going to have to wait for Lion for the newer QuickTime engine) and a UI that isn't from the 90's:
http://www.candlerblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/03_ambit_fullscreen-300x232.jpg
^ Final Cut on Mac OS 9
Final Cut on Tiger/Leopard/Snow Leopard:
http://adobe-discount.com/product_images/o/apple_final_cut_express_hd_4__90390.jpg
Only thing that's changed is the scroll bars.
LOL, if you think final cut is from the 90's then Avid Media Composer is from the 50's. It's horrible GUI. I wouldn't learn it, if they paid me big bucks. Well I take that back, I would, but I would hate it. Avid Looks like a POS, the graphics designers at Avid have always been behind though. Look at Protools.
http://www.candlerblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/03_ambit_fullscreen-300x232.jpg
^ Final Cut on Mac OS 9
Final Cut on Tiger/Leopard/Snow Leopard:
http://adobe-discount.com/product_images/o/apple_final_cut_express_hd_4__90390.jpg
Only thing that's changed is the scroll bars.
LOL, if you think final cut is from the 90's then Avid Media Composer is from the 50's. It's horrible GUI. I wouldn't learn it, if they paid me big bucks. Well I take that back, I would, but I would hate it. Avid Looks like a POS, the graphics designers at Avid have always been behind though. Look at Protools.
THX1139
Sep 20, 02:39 AM
Ah, a mature, intelligent, well reasoned reply.
What did you expect? Didn't you look at his avatar? Cool, Homer is a member of Macrumors. :D
What did you expect? Didn't you look at his avatar? Cool, Homer is a member of Macrumors. :D
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'?
Hugh
Mar 2, 08:27 PM
I believe that people with same-sex attractions are endangering themselves at least physically when they have sex with each other. So I'll post a link to some evidence for my opinion (http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/homosexuality/ho0075.html). Notice, the document's author is a medical doctor.
Why is most straight people assume that gay people do all those? I'm gay and I don't do a thing in that article. I know.. I'm boring but hey that's not the point.
Photos. Justin Bieber 2011
did justin bieber photos
justin bieber 2011
Located on x justin photos
Why is most straight people assume that gay people do all those? I'm gay and I don't do a thing in that article. I know.. I'm boring but hey that's not the point.
ABernardoJr
Apr 8, 12:39 AM
When you are as HUGE as best buy, and you are selling a product as huge as the iPad, it makes sense to create a demand. People do this all the time. You can't get it now, so the second it becomes available to you, you buy it in fear that you might have to wait another month. This happens all the time with a lot of products.
How does that create demand? Instead of actually getting the sale, you deny a sale and hope it "creates demand" so that they'll come back and buy it in fear? Especially considering that they could have just purchased it in the first place and avoided the whole issue. Actually selling out the product and then having no more available in stock would create demand AND generate revenue. Doing what they did would generate SOME revenue and likely cause customers to look elsewhere for iPads.
Edit: This isn't to say that I don't recognize the concept of reaching quotas for the day and saving products for the next day's quota. That's a different argument. What I'm referring to is that this is likely not about demand but about selfishly wanting to meet quotas and turning away customers in the process. Not creating demand. It's immoral, but business/retail and morality don't always work so well together.
How does that create demand? Instead of actually getting the sale, you deny a sale and hope it "creates demand" so that they'll come back and buy it in fear? Especially considering that they could have just purchased it in the first place and avoided the whole issue. Actually selling out the product and then having no more available in stock would create demand AND generate revenue. Doing what they did would generate SOME revenue and likely cause customers to look elsewhere for iPads.
Edit: This isn't to say that I don't recognize the concept of reaching quotas for the day and saving products for the next day's quota. That's a different argument. What I'm referring to is that this is likely not about demand but about selfishly wanting to meet quotas and turning away customers in the process. Not creating demand. It's immoral, but business/retail and morality don't always work so well together.
11thIndian
Apr 9, 02:32 PM
11thindian, do you still think it's only professionals that I know?
Of course not. The proliferation of people who say that they have migrated to another platform indicates that for varying reasons, be they technical, workflow, or otherwise... some have left FCP. There are reasons to do that. I would just rather people state personal experience for what it is; rather than paint broad, unsubstantiated remarks like, "Apple is bleeding market share to Premier!". State what's happening for you in your neck of the woods. That's educational for everyone, rather than being combative.
Heck, my first 4 years in NLE was on AVID. Why did I switch? Primarily because that's where my market was going. I couldn't stick with FCP if all my clients decided they were going to make a switch to another platform now.
My biggest confustion is with people already labelling this iMovePro. There's no solid evidence of this. Apple hasn't let the product lay fallow, they've recovered from an internal crossed wires as to platform direction in which resulted in a modest update with FCS3, but have been working on a complete rewrite.
If Apple were just delivering a reheated 64bit FCP7 that could play DSLR footage natively, THEN I'd be worried! But by all accounts they've rewritten from scratch, and completely rethought the product, the goals, the interface. That takes a lot more time and effort.
Until the cat is out of the bag, I prefer to be more interested than worried.
Of course not. The proliferation of people who say that they have migrated to another platform indicates that for varying reasons, be they technical, workflow, or otherwise... some have left FCP. There are reasons to do that. I would just rather people state personal experience for what it is; rather than paint broad, unsubstantiated remarks like, "Apple is bleeding market share to Premier!". State what's happening for you in your neck of the woods. That's educational for everyone, rather than being combative.
Heck, my first 4 years in NLE was on AVID. Why did I switch? Primarily because that's where my market was going. I couldn't stick with FCP if all my clients decided they were going to make a switch to another platform now.
My biggest confustion is with people already labelling this iMovePro. There's no solid evidence of this. Apple hasn't let the product lay fallow, they've recovered from an internal crossed wires as to platform direction in which resulted in a modest update with FCS3, but have been working on a complete rewrite.
If Apple were just delivering a reheated 64bit FCP7 that could play DSLR footage natively, THEN I'd be worried! But by all accounts they've rewritten from scratch, and completely rethought the product, the goals, the interface. That takes a lot more time and effort.
Until the cat is out of the bag, I prefer to be more interested than worried.
BWhaler
Jul 14, 03:33 PM
I've never thought much of the relevance of its placement myself - why do you say that? Care to elaborate on why it is "REALLY stupid"?
1. Notice the power plug hole at the top? Now imagine a cord running out of it. Yup, there is a reason why Apple has put it at the bottom.
2. Top heavy.
1. Notice the power plug hole at the top? Now imagine a cord running out of it. Yup, there is a reason why Apple has put it at the bottom.
2. Top heavy.
scottgroovez
Apr 8, 06:09 AM
Why anyone would ever choose to buy an Apple product at Best Buy over the Apple Store is beyond me. :confused:
I just ordered a Macbook pro from BB with 15% off and a further 8% cashback saving me just over �200.
I just ordered a Macbook pro from BB with 15% off and a further 8% cashback saving me just over �200.
RebeccaL
Mar 31, 09:20 PM
I hope this silences all the Android trolls that claimed there was no fragmentation.
relimw
Aug 6, 04:02 PM
The internet didn't exist in 1988. He was probably a local business.
::blink::
<sarcasm>
I beg to differ, just because Al Gore didn't invent the internet until 1988 doesn't mean it didn't exist before then :)
</sarcasm>
But this is totally off topic, back to the rumors...
Apple wows world with intermodalnet! Now you really can take the internet with you!
::blink::
<sarcasm>
I beg to differ, just because Al Gore didn't invent the internet until 1988 doesn't mean it didn't exist before then :)
</sarcasm>
But this is totally off topic, back to the rumors...
Apple wows world with intermodalnet! Now you really can take the internet with you!
samcraig
Apr 27, 08:39 AM
if any of you are concerned about being tracked - why on earth would you buy any product that has a GPS in it (all computers cash info) and why on earth would you buy a cell phone - the towers know almost exactly when (which apple doesn't know) and where you are? The reaction to this news is stupid.
Your type of apathy in the long term will do more harm than good.
There is a big difference between voluntarily and involuntarily giving out personal information and that's what was at stake here.
Apple admitted error - it's ok - you can admit it might not have been in the best interest of consumers too. Apple won't come and take your iPhone away.
Your type of apathy in the long term will do more harm than good.
There is a big difference between voluntarily and involuntarily giving out personal information and that's what was at stake here.
Apple admitted error - it's ok - you can admit it might not have been in the best interest of consumers too. Apple won't come and take your iPhone away.
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.
Analog Kid
Aug 7, 03:55 PM
All in all, it looks good. Time machine, if it works how I hope it will, is going to be a killer. I like the iChat features-- interesting mix of useful business like features with toys for the teenagers...
CoreAnimation has be a little wary. I have a bad feeling we're going to get a run of really cheesy applications before this gets taken under control...
CoreAnimation has be a little wary. I have a bad feeling we're going to get a run of really cheesy applications before this gets taken under control...
