takao
Dec 3, 05:28 PM
I've started rally a bit today while i save up for a car with a bit more balls. Rally is completely sublime. I am loving every second of it. I had no problem with the dirt and snow tracks, but the tarmac rally is giving me some trouble. I use an 06 Focus ST that is around 215hp, so i can bump up the HP and still compete in the series. I might just have to do that.
same here .. on tarmac level there always seems to be 1 car in the bunch who will cause me troubles with being really fast
same here .. on tarmac level there always seems to be 1 car in the bunch who will cause me troubles with being really fast
spinko
Jul 15, 06:25 AM
For what it's worth, Alienware's top-of-the-line ALX series desktops (actually, all of their desktops, I believe) have the power supply at the top, too. I know some will scoff but they are lauded for their gaming performance and they brag about their cooling technology.
-Squire
well, that looks a real mess.. but I suppose it's a good idea since heated air tends to rise.. :-)
-Squire
well, that looks a real mess.. but I suppose it's a good idea since heated air tends to rise.. :-)
Eidorian
Jul 14, 06:02 PM
oh, btw, i did some of my own investigations and found this site:
http://www.nvidia.com/object/7_series_techspecs.html
which may mean that the standard cards are compatible with mac os x now.You can get the 7xxx series in the Power Mac G5.
http://www.nvidia.com/object/7_series_techspecs.html
which may mean that the standard cards are compatible with mac os x now.You can get the 7xxx series in the Power Mac G5.
clockworksaulo
Jun 9, 02:26 PM
RadioShack store manager here and i have some
These prices are taken off instantly from what you purchase(no mail in rebates) or applied to a gift card instantly. Your choice.
3Gs 32Gb - $271
3Gs 16Gb - $210
3G 16Gb - $149
3G 8Gb - $118
The older models are on the website as well, look for yourself...
http://radioshack.cexchange.com/online/Home/ManufacturerSelected.rails?enc=sU4reD6QJWP5MQn1SwFn38CtURe9PcXAJv9fUpYciv8=
That means if you are eligible for the $199 price and trade in your 16gb 3Gs, we will instantly (no mail in rebates) take $210 off the $199 for the iPhone 4 and you will have a $10 balance either applied on a gift card, to the taxes, or towards an accessory, whatever you prefer.
Intrigued yet? Now follow me here...
Not sure if this will be the same policy on the iPhone 4, but the way its set up right now: The day you do an upgrade to any phone, you are immediately eligible for an "Early iPhone Upgrade". That means ATT tacks on a $200 early upgrade fee.
If you are currently not eligible for an upgrade, but eligible for an "Early iPhone Upgrade" (You will be, you always are, again even if you did an upgrade 5 minutes ago.) Now, that $199 iPhone 4 becomes $399. You can trade in your current model towards that $399 price.
Trade in a 16Gb 3Gs and the $399 Early upgrade on the iPhone 4 is now $189. If you need to, take a sec and read this again so you fully understand.
This is 100% accurate except there has been no announcement made for the "Early iPhone Upgrade" continuing on the iPhone 4. I very strongly believe it will. Also, the trade in values may drop a tad when the iPhone 4 launches, but look at the current prices we give on 3G's and original iPhones, it is still very good. You are not gonna get "eBay money" but you get a respectable amount and it is all taken care of instantly in the store. SPREAD THE WORD!!
you there... :)
BEST BUY HAS BETTER TRADE IN PRICE
32gb 3GS = $315.00 compared to radioshacks $279
Personally i would try ebay, theyre going for about 400-500, thast 100-200 dollars more. Spoke to radioshack managers and they charge the upgrade fee, ATT and Apple and best buy are waiving upgrade fee.
Early Upgrade fee also available at all retail locations, Wal-mart, apple, att, radioshack, best buy
These prices are taken off instantly from what you purchase(no mail in rebates) or applied to a gift card instantly. Your choice.
3Gs 32Gb - $271
3Gs 16Gb - $210
3G 16Gb - $149
3G 8Gb - $118
The older models are on the website as well, look for yourself...
http://radioshack.cexchange.com/online/Home/ManufacturerSelected.rails?enc=sU4reD6QJWP5MQn1SwFn38CtURe9PcXAJv9fUpYciv8=
That means if you are eligible for the $199 price and trade in your 16gb 3Gs, we will instantly (no mail in rebates) take $210 off the $199 for the iPhone 4 and you will have a $10 balance either applied on a gift card, to the taxes, or towards an accessory, whatever you prefer.
Intrigued yet? Now follow me here...
Not sure if this will be the same policy on the iPhone 4, but the way its set up right now: The day you do an upgrade to any phone, you are immediately eligible for an "Early iPhone Upgrade". That means ATT tacks on a $200 early upgrade fee.
If you are currently not eligible for an upgrade, but eligible for an "Early iPhone Upgrade" (You will be, you always are, again even if you did an upgrade 5 minutes ago.) Now, that $199 iPhone 4 becomes $399. You can trade in your current model towards that $399 price.
Trade in a 16Gb 3Gs and the $399 Early upgrade on the iPhone 4 is now $189. If you need to, take a sec and read this again so you fully understand.
This is 100% accurate except there has been no announcement made for the "Early iPhone Upgrade" continuing on the iPhone 4. I very strongly believe it will. Also, the trade in values may drop a tad when the iPhone 4 launches, but look at the current prices we give on 3G's and original iPhones, it is still very good. You are not gonna get "eBay money" but you get a respectable amount and it is all taken care of instantly in the store. SPREAD THE WORD!!
you there... :)
BEST BUY HAS BETTER TRADE IN PRICE
32gb 3GS = $315.00 compared to radioshacks $279
Personally i would try ebay, theyre going for about 400-500, thast 100-200 dollars more. Spoke to radioshack managers and they charge the upgrade fee, ATT and Apple and best buy are waiving upgrade fee.
Early Upgrade fee also available at all retail locations, Wal-mart, apple, att, radioshack, best buy
kev0476
Jul 20, 09:28 AM
New MacPro rev2.
8 cores = 24Ghz
(with Free fire extinguisher and ear plugs) :p
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!
8 cores = 24Ghz
(with Free fire extinguisher and ear plugs) :p
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!
JesterJJZ
Apr 12, 07:52 PM
No, it hasn't.
Yeah no kidding...they should have taken the "New" off the page at least a year ago.
Yeah no kidding...they should have taken the "New" off the page at least a year ago.
nsjoker
Aug 11, 12:13 PM
this phone is going to have to be pretty amazing for me to get one.. I'm talking a full-fledged iPod with capabilities of a great cell phone.. and decently priced. terminating my contract just isn't worth it from an economical point of view.
Chupa Chupa
Apr 11, 06:05 AM
I think the point is apple is trying to break the mold of traditional NLE editing. Many tools and terms we use in FCP and other NLEs are derived from linear tape editing from 20+ years ago. They are trying to push to the future of editing in a new direction and that may involve rethinking aspects of how we edit. Whether it's going to work or not I guess we'll have to see...
Thank you.
The funny thing is that most of the ranters here calling themselves "professionals" are really just hacks using professional grade equipment. They comfort themselves in the fact they use the same s/w (FCP) as many in the H'wood TV and movie studios (home of the true professionals), much like a kid with an Albert Pujois edition L'ville Slugger.
I admit when iMovie '08 came out my head imploded. The entire concept seemed so ass-backwards after years with NLEs. I still don't like the "new" iMovie because its features pale in comparison of previous versions, which limits creativity. iMovie '09 and '11 have improved but are still too basic.
I have warmed up to the editing concept. I actually like it now for a quick splice job. So if it turns out iMovie has really been the beta engine for the new FCP all along I'm OK with that. It's really a snappier, more organized way to edit once you divorce all previous notions of NLE editing. Of course I don't pretend to be a professional either.
Thank you.
The funny thing is that most of the ranters here calling themselves "professionals" are really just hacks using professional grade equipment. They comfort themselves in the fact they use the same s/w (FCP) as many in the H'wood TV and movie studios (home of the true professionals), much like a kid with an Albert Pujois edition L'ville Slugger.
I admit when iMovie '08 came out my head imploded. The entire concept seemed so ass-backwards after years with NLEs. I still don't like the "new" iMovie because its features pale in comparison of previous versions, which limits creativity. iMovie '09 and '11 have improved but are still too basic.
I have warmed up to the editing concept. I actually like it now for a quick splice job. So if it turns out iMovie has really been the beta engine for the new FCP all along I'm OK with that. It's really a snappier, more organized way to edit once you divorce all previous notions of NLE editing. Of course I don't pretend to be a professional either.
Rt&Dzine
Apr 27, 08:54 AM
Funny I had to prove my education credentials and proof of citizenship for 3 companies that extend offers.
Is it really out of line for the president to furnish such information?
Did I cross the the line of being a racist?
He did furnish his official state-certified short-form birth certificate.
Is it really out of line for the president to furnish such information?
Did I cross the the line of being a racist?
He did furnish his official state-certified short-form birth certificate.
layte
Mar 31, 03:04 PM
From now on, companies hoping to receive early access to Google's most up-to-date software will need approval of their plans.
Emphasis on the important bit for those who didn't bother to actually read the article. If you want to wait a bit, you can get the code and do whatever you want. Well that's my reading of it anyway, but please, don't let get in the way of giving the new enemy number one a good kicking.
Emphasis on the important bit for those who didn't bother to actually read the article. If you want to wait a bit, you can get the code and do whatever you want. Well that's my reading of it anyway, but please, don't let get in the way of giving the new enemy number one a good kicking.
peeInMyPantz
Jul 27, 10:40 PM
if merom produces less heat.. i would think that apple will quickly update both MB and MBP so it won't be releasing anymore problematic notebooks
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
epitaphic
Aug 21, 01:21 PM
Owners of quad G5s have been up in arms about this, as it is being suggested this is a deliberate crippling to avoid admitting that the quad G5 is potentially faster for musicians
I think the deal is that when the G5 Quad came out, there was nothing to compare it to. Sure it was going to be faster than a dual but no app to this day can fully utilize it. With the release of the Mac Pro, all of a sudden there is another quad for comparison. With apple's traditional "we moved to a new machine and we'll go through hell to show you how it's much faster than what you've got" they're having to optimize the code to show it. Now why would you go and optimize the code for the old machine? All it'll do is show that the new one isn't that much faster for that particular app.
You know how there's politics in everything? There's also marketing in everything :)
I think the deal is that when the G5 Quad came out, there was nothing to compare it to. Sure it was going to be faster than a dual but no app to this day can fully utilize it. With the release of the Mac Pro, all of a sudden there is another quad for comparison. With apple's traditional "we moved to a new machine and we'll go through hell to show you how it's much faster than what you've got" they're having to optimize the code to show it. Now why would you go and optimize the code for the old machine? All it'll do is show that the new one isn't that much faster for that particular app.
You know how there's politics in everything? There's also marketing in everything :)
lyzardking
Apr 6, 11:56 AM
I have something better than a MacBook Air. It's called an iPad 2.
Let me know when it can run CS5 (in a pinch) and I'm in
Until then, I'm waiting for a back-lit key board and a faster processor (yah, I know learn how to type, yada-yada. I've been at this long enough that if you could type you became a "typesetter")
Let me know when it can run CS5 (in a pinch) and I'm in
Until then, I'm waiting for a back-lit key board and a faster processor (yah, I know learn how to type, yada-yada. I've been at this long enough that if you could type you became a "typesetter")
gnasher729
Apr 19, 03:36 PM
Does anyone think that a normal person would actually confuse a Samsung Galaxy (especially with that huge "Samsung" on it) with an Apple iPhone when they're buying it?
I mean, is Apple going to claim that they're losing sales because the Galaxy is so close to the iPhone that people can't tell the difference? If so, that sure doesn't say much for the iPhone. Or it says a lot for the Galaxy.
You made up your mind and you argue accordingly. Consider this: Many people know the name "iPhone" and the way it looks, they may even know the name "Macintosh", but not the name "Apple". They might have talked to someone who used an iPhone and was very happy with it, were convinced to buy one, and go to a shop and pick up the phone that looks exactly like the one they wanted to buy. And end up with a Samsung phone when they actually wanted an iPhone.
Your second argument doesn't really make much sense. Samsung knew what the iPhone looks like, so if the Galaxy looks the same, it is because Samsung decided that it should look that way. Confusion surely goes both ways, so there would be a danger for Samsung that someone wanting to buy a Galaxy ends up buying an iPhone. Samsung had to know and accept this. So obviously Samsung is of the opinion that if people who want an iPhone buy a Galaxy by mistake, and people who want a Galaxy buy an iPhone by mistake, then Samsung will overall benefit. Doesn't seem to say much for the Galaxy, if they try to create this confusion.
I mean, is Apple going to claim that they're losing sales because the Galaxy is so close to the iPhone that people can't tell the difference? If so, that sure doesn't say much for the iPhone. Or it says a lot for the Galaxy.
You made up your mind and you argue accordingly. Consider this: Many people know the name "iPhone" and the way it looks, they may even know the name "Macintosh", but not the name "Apple". They might have talked to someone who used an iPhone and was very happy with it, were convinced to buy one, and go to a shop and pick up the phone that looks exactly like the one they wanted to buy. And end up with a Samsung phone when they actually wanted an iPhone.
Your second argument doesn't really make much sense. Samsung knew what the iPhone looks like, so if the Galaxy looks the same, it is because Samsung decided that it should look that way. Confusion surely goes both ways, so there would be a danger for Samsung that someone wanting to buy a Galaxy ends up buying an iPhone. Samsung had to know and accept this. So obviously Samsung is of the opinion that if people who want an iPhone buy a Galaxy by mistake, and people who want a Galaxy buy an iPhone by mistake, then Samsung will overall benefit. Doesn't seem to say much for the Galaxy, if they try to create this confusion.
Bubba Satori
Apr 6, 08:17 AM
Forget about new Macs! just give us FCS A.S.A.P. :eek:
That makes a lot of sense.
Can't the most profitable corporation in the universe do two things at once?
That makes a lot of sense.
Can't the most profitable corporation in the universe do two things at once?
citizenzen
Mar 22, 08:28 PM
Plenty of time to move ships into the area if only on a just in case basis.
Enough time to move diplomatically as well?
Enough time to move diplomatically as well?
BlizzardBomb
Aug 27, 09:49 AM
Well for one thing, Apple doesn't pay street prices. iMacs will only have 2 cores until Kentsfield. So I think it's fair to expct aggressive Conroe speed in the iMac due to the 2 core limitation. iMacs need to be about the same speed as Mac Pros because they only have 2 cores.
All pricing of chips are quoted in bulks of 1000s. And does it matter whether its street pricing or not because Apple still has to fork out an extra 30% for the CPU (+ logic board redesign costs).
All pricing of chips are quoted in bulks of 1000s. And does it matter whether its street pricing or not because Apple still has to fork out an extra 30% for the CPU (+ logic board redesign costs).
WildCowboy
Aug 17, 01:43 AM
lol you mac folk and your photoshop :D
let's get some game benchmarks :rolleyes:
A lot of folks are waiting for game benchmarks...bring 'em on!
let's get some game benchmarks :rolleyes:
A lot of folks are waiting for game benchmarks...bring 'em on!
SuperCachetes
Mar 1, 10:48 AM
I refuse to protect others from negative consequences when they need to learn from them.
Negative consequences? :rolleyes:
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.
Endangering themselves? And a Catholic website as backup? :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Wow. Just wow.
At least we're back to the childhood anecdotes again - so in between reading all the ignorant, antiquated, religion-clouded bollocks you are spewing, we can find a little entertainment value.
Negative consequences? :rolleyes:
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.
Endangering themselves? And a Catholic website as backup? :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Wow. Just wow.
At least we're back to the childhood anecdotes again - so in between reading all the ignorant, antiquated, religion-clouded bollocks you are spewing, we can find a little entertainment value.
ccrandall77
Aug 11, 12:56 PM
Hahahahaha you do not know much about the cell business here in the U.S. T-Mobile uses Cingulars network in a better part of the country, and Cingular uses T-Mobiles in the other parts, under a roaming deal agreement they made when Deustche Telecom bought Voicestream creating T-Mobile.
Hahahaha you obviously have not been a customer of either T-Mo or Cingular. And if you looked at their coverage maps, Cingular's coverage is quite a bit better than T-Mobile's. Yes, they do share SOME towers, but not all.
Hahahaha you obviously have not been a customer of either T-Mo or Cingular. And if you looked at their coverage maps, Cingular's coverage is quite a bit better than T-Mobile's. Yes, they do share SOME towers, but not all.
wpotere
Apr 27, 01:26 PM
No it's not. It's basically what Mitt Romney put in place in Massachusetts. And he's a (gasp!) Republican!
And.... Having used German healthcare which can be supplemented with private insurance, I'll take it. My needed emergency room visit lasted a whopping 45 min because people could afford to go to a doctor in the morning and everyone was covered.
And.... Having used German healthcare which can be supplemented with private insurance, I'll take it. My needed emergency room visit lasted a whopping 45 min because people could afford to go to a doctor in the morning and everyone was covered.
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.
boncellis
Aug 27, 09:12 PM
Sifting through this thread can make one either optimistic or irrational, depending on who you ask. One point I found absent among the discussion was the possibility of a Core 2 Duo machine coinciding with the September 16th iPod offer end date.
Makes sense to me, but then I tend to get shouted down a lot in this forum. ;)
Makes sense to me, but then I tend to get shouted down a lot in this forum. ;)
