-SD-
Aug 19, 02:25 PM
Kart racing and Course Maker videos and pictures over on Joystiq (http://www.joystiq.com/2010/08/19/gran-turismo-5-course-maker-and-kart-racing-unveiled/).
:apple:
:apple:
iJon
Apr 5, 05:08 PM
I have a friend who is attending NAB next week was was told by a friend who has a booth there that Apple has arranged for lots of training sessions, more training sessions then they have usually have had in the past.
Considering Final Cut Studio is a bit outdated I would presume we will see an announcement next week.
Considering Final Cut Studio is a bit outdated I would presume we will see an announcement next week.
theonekcrow
Jun 18, 07:50 PM
Basically if a store takes 20 reservations, they will get 20 phones plus a few extra based on how many reservations they took.!
Are you certain on this statement, if so I will be camping out in front of Radio Shack on the 24th...
Are you certain on this statement, if so I will be camping out in front of Radio Shack on the 24th...
MacBoobsPro
Jul 20, 08:55 AM
I agree, increasing the number of cores can't be the only solution on long term. In my opinion it's time to rethink CPUs: Single, maybe dual core, high processing* power with extremly low power consumption, much lower than we have nowadays.
* Whatever that exactly means, I don't know.
Is having more cores more energy efficient than having one big fat ass 24Ghz processor? Maybe thats a factor in the increasing core count.
* Whatever that exactly means, I don't know.
Is having more cores more energy efficient than having one big fat ass 24Ghz processor? Maybe thats a factor in the increasing core count.
relimw
Sep 12, 11:15 AM
Very cool. Now to find apps (os10.5 direct blind support?) that can make use of all those cores. :cool:
~Shard~
Jul 14, 03:05 PM
Power Supply at the top is REALLY stupid.
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"?
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"?
LarryB08
Apr 8, 08:24 AM
Reminds me of a true story - went into one of those pre-made sandwich shops because I need to feed a horde unexpectedly, and quickly. I asked for all their stock of three different kinds of sandwich. The woman behind the counter said "but sir what will we sell to other people!".
Bizarre way to run a business.
Scenario 1: Store expects 1000 customers. Customer 15 walks in and buys all the store's stock. The remaining 985 customer walk in through the day and are told we have nothing to sell you. These 98.5% of the daily customers never return to the store in the future.
Scenario 2: Store expects 1000 customers and rations stock to serve the needs of the greatest percentage of their daily customers as possible. The great majority of customers are happy and continue to patronize the store in the future.
Scenario 2 above does not seem so bizarre to me.
We are talking business here, business that needs to function over time and not just over one day. All I know is there are a lot of people here who are taking great pleasure trashing a store for their own personal reasons. But the store must serve their overall client base as best as possible and sometimes that may mean being unable to satisfy every specific request every day.
Bizarre way to run a business.
Scenario 1: Store expects 1000 customers. Customer 15 walks in and buys all the store's stock. The remaining 985 customer walk in through the day and are told we have nothing to sell you. These 98.5% of the daily customers never return to the store in the future.
Scenario 2: Store expects 1000 customers and rations stock to serve the needs of the greatest percentage of their daily customers as possible. The great majority of customers are happy and continue to patronize the store in the future.
Scenario 2 above does not seem so bizarre to me.
We are talking business here, business that needs to function over time and not just over one day. All I know is there are a lot of people here who are taking great pleasure trashing a store for their own personal reasons. But the store must serve their overall client base as best as possible and sometimes that may mean being unable to satisfy every specific request every day.
Multimedia
Aug 21, 01:25 AM
Mac Pros will need 64bit Leopard to achieve their full multi-core potential. Expect all Core 2 based Macs to hold value well through the next release cycle of OSX Leopard.
Apple is still selling G5's on the website for $3299! Until
Adobe gets out - and optimizes - universal binaries, Quad G5 will sell for more than Quad Xeon Mac Pros! :rolleyes:Quad G5 is only $2799 on the SAVE refurb page. Refurbs are the same as new with a new warranty. But I think that would be a poor choice compared to a Mac Pro. The Mac Pro is not cheaper because you have to add more expensive RAM. But it is faster overall and Rosetta Photoshop performance isn't bad. Quad G5 will also benefit from Leopard don't forget. It's not like Leopard is going to not be written to take advantage of the 64-bit G5 as well.
But I would not recomend a G5 Quad to anyone at this point. I'm pondering a Mac Pro purchase myself. But I'm going to try and hold out for a refurb or even see if I can wait for Clovertown. But I'm likely to be one of the first to snag a Mac Pro refurb when they hit the SAVE page in November-December. By then I may even be thinking about waiting for the January 9th SteveNote. Quad G5 is no slouch. But Mac Pro is faster overall.And I thought you were married to your quad last week ......While I may be married to my Quad G5, we're not exclusive and she likes a threesome with the younger faster models as much as I do too. :p
Apple is still selling G5's on the website for $3299! Until
Adobe gets out - and optimizes - universal binaries, Quad G5 will sell for more than Quad Xeon Mac Pros! :rolleyes:Quad G5 is only $2799 on the SAVE refurb page. Refurbs are the same as new with a new warranty. But I think that would be a poor choice compared to a Mac Pro. The Mac Pro is not cheaper because you have to add more expensive RAM. But it is faster overall and Rosetta Photoshop performance isn't bad. Quad G5 will also benefit from Leopard don't forget. It's not like Leopard is going to not be written to take advantage of the 64-bit G5 as well.
But I would not recomend a G5 Quad to anyone at this point. I'm pondering a Mac Pro purchase myself. But I'm going to try and hold out for a refurb or even see if I can wait for Clovertown. But I'm likely to be one of the first to snag a Mac Pro refurb when they hit the SAVE page in November-December. By then I may even be thinking about waiting for the January 9th SteveNote. Quad G5 is no slouch. But Mac Pro is faster overall.And I thought you were married to your quad last week ......While I may be married to my Quad G5, we're not exclusive and she likes a threesome with the younger faster models as much as I do too. :p
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.
tazinlwfl
Apr 25, 02:25 PM
I think most people are missing this key bit of info - Location Services was turned off and the database was purged, and it still made a new database with new data...
MikeD23nu
Apr 6, 03:29 PM
Perfect day for this news....
I have a new 13" MBA sitting here at my desk unopened...just dropped off from FedEx today. I'm debating whether or not to just return it and wait for the refresh or be happy with what I got.
I'm a very light user..web, email, iTunes, sync iPhone and iPad. Do I really need the Sandy Bridge power..probably not but I dont want to have the "old not so shiny ball" come June (as the rumors suggest).
Any help from the MR community is greatly appreciated!
I have a new 13" MBA sitting here at my desk unopened...just dropped off from FedEx today. I'm debating whether or not to just return it and wait for the refresh or be happy with what I got.
I'm a very light user..web, email, iTunes, sync iPhone and iPad. Do I really need the Sandy Bridge power..probably not but I dont want to have the "old not so shiny ball" come June (as the rumors suggest).
Any help from the MR community is greatly appreciated!
Elvin77
Mar 22, 01:24 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.
1) Battery life IS a big deal
2) Are we forgetting about apps? The best hardware in the world is useless unless there are apps to make it sing. A $200 tablet can surf the web just as good as the playbook.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
1) Battery life IS a big deal
2) Are we forgetting about apps? The best hardware in the world is useless unless there are apps to make it sing. A $200 tablet can surf the web just as good as the playbook.
ezekielrage_99
Aug 17, 02:01 AM
A lot of folks are waiting for game benchmarks...bring 'em on!
Yeah put up some World of Warcraft or Doom 3 results, that's what this is all about a Mac being the fastest gaming machine :cool:
Yeah put up some World of Warcraft or Doom 3 results, that's what this is all about a Mac being the fastest gaming machine :cool:
marksman
Apr 11, 01:20 PM
The iPhone 4 is still the best smartphone in the market, so not surprising.
As for people expecting a 4" screen on the next iPhone dream on. They are not going to make an iPhone with a bigger screen.]]
The people who are saying this is bad for apple are clearly spec chasers.. Which is not what 99% of all iPhone customers are.... They buy into apple for the experience of the UI, the device and the ecosystem. None of that changes or goes away... None of that experience stops existing because some sucky android phone has a better CPU.
The iPhone 4 runs everything that is available for it really well... That some commodity android handset maker has to beef up their spec sheet because they can't compete where it really counts doesn't matter.
The reality is the iPhone doesn't get surpassed until the next iPhone comes out...
Again I am amazed at how many people here think a 4" screen is the wave of the future. It is not.
As for people expecting a 4" screen on the next iPhone dream on. They are not going to make an iPhone with a bigger screen.]]
The people who are saying this is bad for apple are clearly spec chasers.. Which is not what 99% of all iPhone customers are.... They buy into apple for the experience of the UI, the device and the ecosystem. None of that changes or goes away... None of that experience stops existing because some sucky android phone has a better CPU.
The iPhone 4 runs everything that is available for it really well... That some commodity android handset maker has to beef up their spec sheet because they can't compete where it really counts doesn't matter.
The reality is the iPhone doesn't get surpassed until the next iPhone comes out...
Again I am amazed at how many people here think a 4" screen is the wave of the future. It is not.
DeVizardofOZ
Aug 26, 04:34 AM
Now apple is switching to Intel, They don't have that expirience that they had with the "old" powermacs...
...When the APPLE management decided to go with the INTEL platform, I considered that an intelligent decision, even though I think they should have kept the door open to AMD (maybe they have internally). At the same time they knew the possible problems, and should have done their soft- as well as hardware-homework, like R&D. Now it seems they do what MS has been doing for the past decades with their problem stricken OS's... let the poor consumer do it for them... Very bad policy!
I will buy a MBP, but will wait until things get better. By doing so I probably will get the benefit of an new formfactor, the MEROM, a faster FSB, maybe even a higher resolution on the 17"... We'll see.
...When the APPLE management decided to go with the INTEL platform, I considered that an intelligent decision, even though I think they should have kept the door open to AMD (maybe they have internally). At the same time they knew the possible problems, and should have done their soft- as well as hardware-homework, like R&D. Now it seems they do what MS has been doing for the past decades with their problem stricken OS's... let the poor consumer do it for them... Very bad policy!
I will buy a MBP, but will wait until things get better. By doing so I probably will get the benefit of an new formfactor, the MEROM, a faster FSB, maybe even a higher resolution on the 17"... We'll see.
AvSRoCkCO1067
Aug 11, 01:41 PM
From what we're read so far, especially the quote that went something like: "it's not like we're sitting around not doing anything." or however it went, and everybody read this:
It's not a question of if, it's a question of WHEN
I just find it rather funny that so many people are already giving it the name iPhone. I think that is the worst name ever, and a little too predictable. Even the false "iChat Mobile" was a far superior name.
I don't think anyone actually thinks it will be called the 'iPhone' - instead, we're just using that highly generic name until we find out what it really will be called...
It's not a question of if, it's a question of WHEN
I just find it rather funny that so many people are already giving it the name iPhone. I think that is the worst name ever, and a little too predictable. Even the false "iChat Mobile" was a far superior name.
I don't think anyone actually thinks it will be called the 'iPhone' - instead, we're just using that highly generic name until we find out what it really will be called...
cjc81
Sep 19, 11:31 AM
I don't think you've got anything to worry about there...
Looks like your order is going to be delayed, in your favour =)
Looks like your order is going to be delayed, in your favour =)
jmbear
Nov 29, 12:39 PM
See, that's the catch-22 for new artists. The labels are the ones that get tunes played on the radio. In the 50's and 60's they would strong-arm their stuff in, but I'm sure even nowadays they provide incentives (read: bribes) to get new stuff on the air. Especially if they think the band is really good and will make it in the long run. And don't fool yourself into thinking a new band can get huge without radio.
The internet can become the new radio. I am quite fond of looking for pre-made playlists, I will get the songs on LimeWire, listen to them, the ones I like, I buy legally, the ones I don�t I delete them. You don�t get commercials, just music. I am not saying that radio is going to dissapear completely. TV didn�t kill it. But its importance will diminish.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend..
iTMS could potentially change this. There are some people that will do all the research for you (as in what is good music), then ratings will allow you to get the good songs! It�s similar (and somebody will flame me for saying this) to researching a product on Amazon or CNET, you usually look for a LCD screen, all the results pop, and you will go for the ones with the highest ratings, read the comments and eventually make up your mind. Some day you will look up for electronic music (which I love), all the DJ�s will pop, you will pick the highest rated songs or playlists (because most people like a song because other people like it), listen to their songs for free (yeah, just like radio), and then buy them if you want.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label..
I agree record labels + good music = superstars like Calpton, Floyd, U2 etc... But these bands became popular in a different time (before the internet). Internet is changing the record labels� business model, and that is what they afraid of. The new wait of creating bands and distributing their music is not as profitable for them as it used to.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
Internet is offering them exposure. Right now MTV and VH1 are still popular. But YouTube, Yahoo!, MSN could become the new MTV and VH1.
Not really relevant, but interesting to think about is that most of you have probably seen the video of the ruma ruma guy (I can�t link it because I am at work and the proxie does not allow me to visit YouTube). But how many have actually seen the video for the song? YouTube made that fat kid a star, and most people probably know his face better than the guys that sing the song. Exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
I agree, they won�t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
The internet can become the new radio. I am quite fond of looking for pre-made playlists, I will get the songs on LimeWire, listen to them, the ones I like, I buy legally, the ones I don�t I delete them. You don�t get commercials, just music. I am not saying that radio is going to dissapear completely. TV didn�t kill it. But its importance will diminish.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend..
iTMS could potentially change this. There are some people that will do all the research for you (as in what is good music), then ratings will allow you to get the good songs! It�s similar (and somebody will flame me for saying this) to researching a product on Amazon or CNET, you usually look for a LCD screen, all the results pop, and you will go for the ones with the highest ratings, read the comments and eventually make up your mind. Some day you will look up for electronic music (which I love), all the DJ�s will pop, you will pick the highest rated songs or playlists (because most people like a song because other people like it), listen to their songs for free (yeah, just like radio), and then buy them if you want.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label..
I agree record labels + good music = superstars like Calpton, Floyd, U2 etc... But these bands became popular in a different time (before the internet). Internet is changing the record labels� business model, and that is what they afraid of. The new wait of creating bands and distributing their music is not as profitable for them as it used to.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
Internet is offering them exposure. Right now MTV and VH1 are still popular. But YouTube, Yahoo!, MSN could become the new MTV and VH1.
Not really relevant, but interesting to think about is that most of you have probably seen the video of the ruma ruma guy (I can�t link it because I am at work and the proxie does not allow me to visit YouTube). But how many have actually seen the video for the song? YouTube made that fat kid a star, and most people probably know his face better than the guys that sing the song. Exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
I agree, they won�t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
cecildk9999
Nov 28, 07:30 PM
I agree with pretty much everyone else here; this royalty notion won't fly with Apple being (for once) in the dominant market position. If Universal pulls their music/content, it'll all be downloaded illegally, since the Zune isn't about to replace the iPod as the must-have 'cool' item (even if Zune marketplace does offer the Universal catalog). Universal just wants Apple to throw them a bone.
CorvusCamenarum
Feb 28, 05:14 PM
According to the school's website (http://www.chc.edu/News/2011/February/statement_regarding_jim_st_george/), he was not fired as the OP's article suggests. Rather, his contract was not renewed. AFAIK, adjunct instructors do not enjoy the same privileges as tenured professors. If his contract ran out and was simply not renewed, then that's that, unless it can be argued that the college has some legal obligation to offer a new contract.
mrwombat
Sep 19, 08:43 AM
As a fomer Mac user, who had Macs from 1987 through about 1997, and did most of my graduate school work on a Quadra in that period, I am looking forward to returning to the fold. For a variety of personal and professional reasons I need and will continue to need a high-end gaming rig, meaning a Windows box, but for my academic work I really want to switch to a Mac Book Pro to replace my aging Compaq laptop that I use as my primary office machine. I want a machine I can carry about, that is easy to use, and that will be more useful for me in doing classroom presentations, working with some video and audio stuff (again for presentations). So a MBP seems ideal.
But I'm also a computer fan, reasonably knowledgeable, and reasonably savvy. I've built machines before, routinely do hardware and software tweaking and upgrading, and have had multiple computers of various sorts since my first back in early 1983. That's the main reason the delay in getting the new MBPs out is frustrating. I don't need a 64bit processor right now. I don't need the extra 20% or whatever it is performance boost. But I also don't want to drop $2500 on a notebook that is neither leading-edge nor a price-performance leader within it's own market segment.
In buying PCs, I usually buy a step below the best, because the price performance ratio is very good. Until Apple upgrades the MBPs, I can't do that, as there is only, um, one choice really. I also can't get the latest and greatest, C2D, either. So while the current Yonah MBP is 100% fine for my needs, I'm reluctant to drop a wad of cash on it when I know that is will either be 1) superceded by a newer model I'd buy for the same price, or 2) reduced in price to help clear out the old stock. Either of those options would work for me at this time, but neither is available.
Part of buying something like a Mac is the satisfaction one gets from buying a well-engineered piece of gear that works and looks and feels like a sophisticated work of technology. The current MBPs lose a lot of that when you know you're buying something that is in the last days of its product life cycle, even if you also know it doesn't make any difference in day to day usability.
Luckily, my old machine is working fine, so I can wait, but still, bah....
But I'm also a computer fan, reasonably knowledgeable, and reasonably savvy. I've built machines before, routinely do hardware and software tweaking and upgrading, and have had multiple computers of various sorts since my first back in early 1983. That's the main reason the delay in getting the new MBPs out is frustrating. I don't need a 64bit processor right now. I don't need the extra 20% or whatever it is performance boost. But I also don't want to drop $2500 on a notebook that is neither leading-edge nor a price-performance leader within it's own market segment.
In buying PCs, I usually buy a step below the best, because the price performance ratio is very good. Until Apple upgrades the MBPs, I can't do that, as there is only, um, one choice really. I also can't get the latest and greatest, C2D, either. So while the current Yonah MBP is 100% fine for my needs, I'm reluctant to drop a wad of cash on it when I know that is will either be 1) superceded by a newer model I'd buy for the same price, or 2) reduced in price to help clear out the old stock. Either of those options would work for me at this time, but neither is available.
Part of buying something like a Mac is the satisfaction one gets from buying a well-engineered piece of gear that works and looks and feels like a sophisticated work of technology. The current MBPs lose a lot of that when you know you're buying something that is in the last days of its product life cycle, even if you also know it doesn't make any difference in day to day usability.
Luckily, my old machine is working fine, so I can wait, but still, bah....
johnj84
Mar 26, 02:24 AM
Been on Lion for the past month and I can't see myself going back to Snow Leopard.
hobo.hopkins
Apr 25, 01:46 PM
Oh please if someone has direct access to your phone or computer they could do or find almost anything they wanted. The fact that Apple doesn't even receive this information makes it a non-issue.
swingerofbirch
Aug 26, 07:40 PM
I'm sure the GPU will also be bumped, at the very least. The MBP will probably also see some things that the MB has like a user-removable hard drive and magnetic latch. The CPU and GPU alone make it worth getting the new one, IMO.
Also, I'll say it one last time (yea right) - the imac should not and will not get a mobile processor. It only got Yonah because there was no alternative. It had a real desktop processor when one was available on the PPC side (G5), and it will have a real desktop processor now that one is available on the intel side (Conroe). Leave merom for what it was meant for - laptops.
I agree with you wholeheartedly.
But, I guess they COULD have put a pentium d in them...didnt they have dual cores?
Also, I'll say it one last time (yea right) - the imac should not and will not get a mobile processor. It only got Yonah because there was no alternative. It had a real desktop processor when one was available on the PPC side (G5), and it will have a real desktop processor now that one is available on the intel side (Conroe). Leave merom for what it was meant for - laptops.
I agree with you wholeheartedly.
But, I guess they COULD have put a pentium d in them...didnt they have dual cores?