buckers
Apr 19, 01:02 PM
I fancy a bit of a redesign (nothing wild, maybe a bit thinner and change of colour? a bit bored of them now, but probably just me).
But yeah, good stuff :)
But yeah, good stuff :)
jharv
Nov 26, 03:04 PM
http://www.aussie-nintendo.com/up/news/DonkeyKongCountryReturnsBox.jpg
Brilliant.
Brilliant.
Tomorrow
Apr 20, 03:46 PM
Were your other cars manual? The Camaro isn't helping your argument any more than the Lotus is helping mine.
;)
What argument? My main point is that I hate driving, and a manual transmission doesn't help me enjoy it any more than an automatic.
;)
What argument? My main point is that I hate driving, and a manual transmission doesn't help me enjoy it any more than an automatic.
diamond.g
Mar 24, 02:15 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mdPi4GPEI74
Wow, that is impressive (if it is not full of some sort of trickery...)
Wow, that is impressive (if it is not full of some sort of trickery...)
DewGuy1999
Nov 28, 09:10 AM
and 2 receipts from the Veterinarian Hospital for my female cat - 325.25$
Hope she's doing well.
Hope she's doing well.
JackAxe
Mar 25, 06:44 PM
This is LAME and I'm say that in the nicest most passive agressive way. ;)
I'm coming from the standpoint of someone that owns a G25 racing wheel, a Track IR 5 head tracker, and racing games and sims all of which support my toys. Games that run dead-locked at 60 fps -- as I enable what's called VSYNC --- at a substantially higher detail level than any low-powered GPU/CPU can currently muster.
I'm coming from the standpoint of someone that owns a G25 racing wheel, a Track IR 5 head tracker, and racing games and sims all of which support my toys. Games that run dead-locked at 60 fps -- as I enable what's called VSYNC --- at a substantially higher detail level than any low-powered GPU/CPU can currently muster.
SciFrog
Feb 10, 07:03 PM
You need to update to the 6.29 client.
Bigadv are still more ppd but on win side many people are switching to SMP2 because the a3 core is quite fast on 4 cores (8 virtual).
Soon bigadv units are switching to a3 core also. I would then hope that we will not be loosing units due to restart or power loss or network switching as the a3 core is now threaded.
Bigadv are still more ppd but on win side many people are switching to SMP2 because the a3 core is quite fast on 4 cores (8 virtual).
Soon bigadv units are switching to a3 core also. I would then hope that we will not be loosing units due to restart or power loss or network switching as the a3 core is now threaded.
kadajawi
Sep 7, 03:36 AM
Well I posted it in another thread however I just built a PC with some amazing specs for under $500. It was a P4 3ghz, 2gb ram, 250GB HD, 256MB GPU, DVDR, bluetooth, wifi. The kicker is it's a Shuttle so it's tiny, not much bigger than a mini, and it's made of aluminum. The thing is very Mac like. And being able to build it so cost effectively, really ticked me off.
Because no matter what I'd get on the Apple side it would either cost much, much more or it would be hobbled in some way (GPU, monitor, etc.). In the end you have to realize that as a Mac user you're paying more for a brand and for the ability to run OS X. That's fine, provided you can find a system which meets your needs.
(yeah it's late and I'm cranky) :P
Yes, I was about to build one with a Athlon 64 3000+ (doesn't eat up electricity like the P4... and with RM Clock or so you can reduce power consumption quite a bit additionally. The default voltages are usually far above whats needed, both AMDs I've built run perfectly with 1.1V (standard is 1.4 to 1.45), unfortunately it isn't possible to lover the voltage further), 512 MB RAM, 160 GB HD, onboard graphics, DVDR, in a 9x27.5x35 cm enclosure. Price with Windows: around 400 �. Bluetooth and WiFi is lacking, but shouldn't add too much. In comparison the Mac Mini Core Solo was 600 � at that time. I'd consider both systems comparable... Mini has front row, BT and WiFi, PC has better connectivity (especially on the display side), 100 gig more HD, DVD writer, card reader. Quite a price difference to me.
Lack of OS X + iLife, the upgrade to Core Duo, student discount and the printer promo made me chose the Mac Mini.
Because no matter what I'd get on the Apple side it would either cost much, much more or it would be hobbled in some way (GPU, monitor, etc.). In the end you have to realize that as a Mac user you're paying more for a brand and for the ability to run OS X. That's fine, provided you can find a system which meets your needs.
(yeah it's late and I'm cranky) :P
Yes, I was about to build one with a Athlon 64 3000+ (doesn't eat up electricity like the P4... and with RM Clock or so you can reduce power consumption quite a bit additionally. The default voltages are usually far above whats needed, both AMDs I've built run perfectly with 1.1V (standard is 1.4 to 1.45), unfortunately it isn't possible to lover the voltage further), 512 MB RAM, 160 GB HD, onboard graphics, DVDR, in a 9x27.5x35 cm enclosure. Price with Windows: around 400 �. Bluetooth and WiFi is lacking, but shouldn't add too much. In comparison the Mac Mini Core Solo was 600 � at that time. I'd consider both systems comparable... Mini has front row, BT and WiFi, PC has better connectivity (especially on the display side), 100 gig more HD, DVD writer, card reader. Quite a price difference to me.
Lack of OS X + iLife, the upgrade to Core Duo, student discount and the printer promo made me chose the Mac Mini.
Tronic
Mar 25, 08:26 PM
What I would like to see is 1080p out via wifi to apple TV, thus negating the need for dock connector out as seen in the video. Then companies will start developing in the opposite direction. IE apps optimized to take advantage of the apple TVs power while using the ipad/iphone/itouch as remotes/controllers.
musicpyrite
Apr 4, 05:18 PM
Never!!! Fight the Man!!!
Long live Apple and its 5% market share.
Long live Apple and its 5% market share.
vaderhater245
Mar 18, 03:41 AM
just started back up on team MR with my GTX 260 equipped PC(play) running 24/7. Don't trust my i5 iMac(work) enough to run it 24/7.
edit: seems that im getting about 8k ppd between a E6750 OC @ 3.4 and GTX 260 Core 216. Normal or not?
Already at 481st place too, this team needs a comeback!
edit: seems that im getting about 8k ppd between a E6750 OC @ 3.4 and GTX 260 Core 216. Normal or not?
Already at 481st place too, this team needs a comeback!
La Porta
Mar 25, 08:35 PM
At the very least, the "It doesn't have 1GB RAM=FAIL/512MB RAM isn't good enough" crowd maybe can keep quiet now. Apparently, this thing can do some amazing things even while "crippled" by your expectations. Apparently, numbers aren't everything.
Multimedia
Sep 1, 01:41 PM
wouldn't swapping a conroe chip in be an option? just go to Fry's and buy the chip then.No.
MacMan86
Apr 26, 12:20 PM
EDIT - wrong thread - nothing to see here
icloud
Jan 11, 09:00 PM
worst-name-ever. i hope that it's anything but "macbook air"
Agreed. It's not just a bad name; it's a sin!
Agreed. It's not just a bad name; it's a sin!
Xpress
Apr 2, 11:42 PM
My backlight bleeds
Mine did too. Returned it to Apple, got a new one in 10 days. No bleeding.:D
Mine did too. Returned it to Apple, got a new one in 10 days. No bleeding.:D
shawnce
Nov 16, 10:55 AM
One question about 512MB vs 1 & 2 GB mod bandwidth. If the Mac comes with two 512MB mods installed in Riser A and I buy two 2GB modules to put into Riser B - total 5GB, will the slower bandwidth (or whatever it's called) of the two 512MB mods slowing down the faster 2GB mods be offset by having RAM installed in both risers rather than pulling the 512's and only having two 2GB mods installed in Riser A only - total 4GB? The difference of 1GB of RAM doesn't seem like that part would matter if the 512 mods slow everything down.
The bandwidth of DIMMs doesn't really change with their capacity (assuming their timings are the same). It is the number of active channels that gives you the increase in memory bandwidth.
I believe the memory controller will interleave the lower 512MB (since you have a branch populated with 512MB) of each DIMM resulting in full bandwidth access (4 channels) to that range of memory (512 x 4 = 2 GB) with the remainder of the 2 GB DIMMs (the remaining 3 GB) only getting the benefit of a single branch (two channels).
Personally I wouldn't purchase 2 GB DIMMs given their extra cost in relation to two 1 GB DIMMs... in other words use more of the memory slots you have ... unless you really want to leave room to add more RAM later.
The bandwidth of DIMMs doesn't really change with their capacity (assuming their timings are the same). It is the number of active channels that gives you the increase in memory bandwidth.
I believe the memory controller will interleave the lower 512MB (since you have a branch populated with 512MB) of each DIMM resulting in full bandwidth access (4 channels) to that range of memory (512 x 4 = 2 GB) with the remainder of the 2 GB DIMMs (the remaining 3 GB) only getting the benefit of a single branch (two channels).
Personally I wouldn't purchase 2 GB DIMMs given their extra cost in relation to two 1 GB DIMMs... in other words use more of the memory slots you have ... unless you really want to leave room to add more RAM later.
vand0576
Sep 1, 01:09 PM
Hmm... the problem with that line-up is that when consumers see the shiny new advert saying "Meet the new iMacs" they'll look at the clock speeds and say "What new iMacs?". I think it would be reasonable for Apple to offer...
17" iMac - $1,199 - 2 GHz, X1650 Pro 128 MB
20" iMac - $1,699 - 2.16 GHz, X1650 Pro 256 MB
23" iMac - $2,199 - 2.33 GHz, X1650 Pro 256 MB
I think EVERYONE's suggested prices are way too high, even for a chip upgrade. They'll want to do a cost comparison for these new machines the same way they did the Mac Pro. iMacs are still quite overpriced compared to similar desktops from other companies, even with monitors. Bring those prices down Apple, and you'll have a TON of "switchers" with these machines.
17" iMac - $1,199 - 2 GHz, X1650 Pro 128 MB
20" iMac - $1,699 - 2.16 GHz, X1650 Pro 256 MB
23" iMac - $2,199 - 2.33 GHz, X1650 Pro 256 MB
I think EVERYONE's suggested prices are way too high, even for a chip upgrade. They'll want to do a cost comparison for these new machines the same way they did the Mac Pro. iMacs are still quite overpriced compared to similar desktops from other companies, even with monitors. Bring those prices down Apple, and you'll have a TON of "switchers" with these machines.
Kingsly
Aug 7, 12:32 AM
Kingsly: I'll keep an eye out for you before the Keynote tomorrow. EDIT: Sorry -- just saw your other thread. Have fun visiting Cupertino!
Dang. I am sooo totally completely insanely disappointed that I wont be there tomorrow...
I even went to the info booth and tried to sweet talk my way into some comp tickets to the keynote... oh well. There's always MWSF 2007.
Dang. I am sooo totally completely insanely disappointed that I wont be there tomorrow...
I even went to the info booth and tried to sweet talk my way into some comp tickets to the keynote... oh well. There's always MWSF 2007.
shurcooL
Mar 26, 08:41 AM
"silky smooth" 30 frames per second
Welcome to where the above phrase is not considered an oxymoron. :rolleyes:
Welcome to where the above phrase is not considered an oxymoron. :rolleyes:
gnasher729
Aug 29, 04:47 PM
IF TRUE - Just In Time Invintory Management Makes When Yonah Price Falls The Time To Do It. That would be once Merom is shipping - like NOW.
I'm still not convinced this rumor is true. I've got my fingers crossed these two processors are going to be C2D at 1.66 and 1.83GHz - not Yonah.
Only fair & logical reason it might be true would be due to constrained supply of Merom to begin with so Apple has to use all those for MacBook Pro first, then iMac - excluding a Conroe plan -, MacBook and finally mini when supply of Merom is unconstrained like around November-December. By first doing the speed bumps to the Merom speeds with Yonah, they can deliver an immediate benefit to their mini customers without spreading the limited supply of Meroms all over the lines yet.
So after they have enough Meroms for MBP they can switch the MB to Meroms at the same speeds as now, then switch the mini ALMOST silently once that line is satisfied fully. iMac is a big unknown due to Conroe possability.
More I think about it, that is probably what's happening. Intel probably has the order with Apple designed to reduce the Yonah supply as quickly as they can provde enough Meroms to keep satisfying Apple's every growing appetite for more and more C2 Intel processors at the ever growing assembly lines in Taiwan & China.
I think Apple has to use a Core 2 Duo chip in the iMac immediately following the MacBook Pro, before MacBook and MacMini. So if a Conroe iMac isn't developed quick enough, I would expect iMac using Merom, even if it ships that way for two months only.
I'm still not convinced this rumor is true. I've got my fingers crossed these two processors are going to be C2D at 1.66 and 1.83GHz - not Yonah.
Only fair & logical reason it might be true would be due to constrained supply of Merom to begin with so Apple has to use all those for MacBook Pro first, then iMac - excluding a Conroe plan -, MacBook and finally mini when supply of Merom is unconstrained like around November-December. By first doing the speed bumps to the Merom speeds with Yonah, they can deliver an immediate benefit to their mini customers without spreading the limited supply of Meroms all over the lines yet.
So after they have enough Meroms for MBP they can switch the MB to Meroms at the same speeds as now, then switch the mini ALMOST silently once that line is satisfied fully. iMac is a big unknown due to Conroe possability.
More I think about it, that is probably what's happening. Intel probably has the order with Apple designed to reduce the Yonah supply as quickly as they can provde enough Meroms to keep satisfying Apple's every growing appetite for more and more C2 Intel processors at the ever growing assembly lines in Taiwan & China.
I think Apple has to use a Core 2 Duo chip in the iMac immediately following the MacBook Pro, before MacBook and MacMini. So if a Conroe iMac isn't developed quick enough, I would expect iMac using Merom, even if it ships that way for two months only.
celticpride678
Apr 1, 11:52 PM
Thus far, stability-wise, it is not too bad for a beta. A lot of the UI rendering errors from beta 1 have been ironed out. My bet would be that this will be a $29 upgrade, as it doesn't add much but rather refines what 10.6 started.
As far as I know, Snow Leopard "fixed" what Leopard started. Mac OS X Lion is a completely new OS with new features, most of which are not present in Snow Leopard.
As far as I know, Snow Leopard "fixed" what Leopard started. Mac OS X Lion is a completely new OS with new features, most of which are not present in Snow Leopard.
Surely
Nov 25, 11:39 AM
True, but it's a lot of fun to occasionally leave the house! :D
Yes, but shopping online ≠ never leaving the house
I buy online because I find things that:
Yes, but shopping online ≠ never leaving the house
I buy online because I find things that:
Raska
Apr 1, 09:41 AM
Two *major* bugs:
1) TextEdit crashes on launch (tried trashing the prefs file - nothing)
2) cmd+left/right no longer goes to the start/end of the line :O wtf!
Anyone else experiencing these?
I haven't experienced either of those issues in either dev preview.
1) TextEdit crashes on launch (tried trashing the prefs file - nothing)
2) cmd+left/right no longer goes to the start/end of the line :O wtf!
Anyone else experiencing these?
I haven't experienced either of those issues in either dev preview.
