Kid Red
Sep 20, 12:39 AM
Obsolete? Two ways to look at it.
1)Obsolete as far as technology is concerned, in 6 months when your's becomes the low end.
2)Obsolete in usability terms? 3-5 years depending on how bloated apps and OS's get.
1)Obsolete as far as technology is concerned, in 6 months when your's becomes the low end.
2)Obsolete in usability terms? 3-5 years depending on how bloated apps and OS's get.
Mr. Anderson
Aug 27, 09:22 AM
Originally posted by soilchmst
I think Apple may be clearing out the processors to move to quad Power4's with true DDR, terabyte HD's, a bulit in video subsystem from nVida which will come with a free cinema display (to make room for the new 50 HD flat panels) for about 2000 bucks ;)
oh yeah, sure - free cinema displays - and what are you talking about 50 HD flat panels? is that 50" High Definition Flat Panels?
if you were going for sarcasm you should use the :rolleyes: , ;) isn't strong enough......
I think Apple may be clearing out the processors to move to quad Power4's with true DDR, terabyte HD's, a bulit in video subsystem from nVida which will come with a free cinema display (to make room for the new 50 HD flat panels) for about 2000 bucks ;)
oh yeah, sure - free cinema displays - and what are you talking about 50 HD flat panels? is that 50" High Definition Flat Panels?
if you were going for sarcasm you should use the :rolleyes: , ;) isn't strong enough......
idkew
Oct 22, 10:35 PM
i have every nintendo system.
maybe 50 games for NES
15 for SNES
10 for N64
and 15 for GC.
I love my nintendos, use them every once in a while, and will purchase every nintendo made until i die.
my kids and gkids will love me for it.
favorite games:
NES: Super Mario Brothers, the original is the best! Followed closely by RC Pro-Am
SNES: Mario World
N64: Goldeneye, Perfect Dark is great also
GC: Madden Also love Burnout
maybe 50 games for NES
15 for SNES
10 for N64
and 15 for GC.
I love my nintendos, use them every once in a while, and will purchase every nintendo made until i die.
my kids and gkids will love me for it.
favorite games:
NES: Super Mario Brothers, the original is the best! Followed closely by RC Pro-Am
SNES: Mario World
N64: Goldeneye, Perfect Dark is great also
GC: Madden Also love Burnout
Dreadnought
Jun 25, 08:33 PM
I totally agree! We almost where overtaken by the tin cans (knights) again and a few other teams, but with the production we are now having, they are way back. We have done a great job in the last few weeks, also a room full of computers has been added lately, and it seems that it makes a big difference!
vniow
Oct 24, 05:27 PM
Originally posted by Shadowfax
OH MY GOD EDVNIOW! that's freaking hilarious. i laughed my a$$ off the second i noticed!
that's the most foul, cruel, bad-tempered rodent you ever saw!
It's official.
People luv the 'tar.http://img.ranchoweb.com/images/veronica/grinning.gif
Just wish I had the link to that damn audio clip.http://img.ranchoweb.com/images/veronica/imad.gif
OH MY GOD EDVNIOW! that's freaking hilarious. i laughed my a$$ off the second i noticed!
that's the most foul, cruel, bad-tempered rodent you ever saw!
It's official.
People luv the 'tar.http://img.ranchoweb.com/images/veronica/grinning.gif
Just wish I had the link to that damn audio clip.http://img.ranchoweb.com/images/veronica/imad.gif
Rocksaurus
Jun 6, 07:26 PM
I've heard that P4's fold better than G5's due to SSE optimization.
Widgets don't need to be ported, they already work, according to Apple.
Widgets don't need to be ported, they already work, according to Apple.
.jpg "lucu hp lucu gratis games")
Laslo Panaflex
Sep 22, 09:29 AM
I have it, it came with my DVD duplicating tower. I have it installed on my machine and ran it, but I have never used it to burn anything, I just use Toast.
I'll give it a go and write back here.
I'll give it a go and write back here.
narco
Apr 5, 12:13 PM
We used ver 5 from the minute it was released...
I wanted to upgrade, but my boss was too cheap at the time. Now, when I accept ads from agencies, most of them use Quark 4.1. I don't think I have ever received a file made in Quark 5. I just thought it was kind of weird, but never really paid too much attention to it.
Fishes,
narco.
I wanted to upgrade, but my boss was too cheap at the time. Now, when I accept ads from agencies, most of them use Quark 4.1. I don't think I have ever received a file made in Quark 5. I just thought it was kind of weird, but never really paid too much attention to it.
Fishes,
narco.
SC68Cal
Apr 25, 04:09 PM
Can't say I like their mission statement that much. It basically recaps all their accomplishments, but doesn't make any broad statements about what they want to do in the future.
MacCoaster
Oct 16, 12:43 AM
Originally posted by Chad4Mac 64-bit sounds good? What, at under 2.0 GHz? Try and sell that to the consumers who are used to -- and don't tend to quickly flock to new technology -- 3-4+ Ghz. I don't know, it sounds like a risky thing to do. Does the consumer really know that it is faster?
Uhm. I never said it was at 3-4+GHz. I said it was rated at 3400+ on the AMD scale. Like Athlon XP 2600+, Athlon XP 2000+, etc.
If Dell -- the fastest growing PC manufactor -- wants to incorporate this 64-bit into the consumer side, they have to make sure that, one, Microsoft is willing to supply the software (not just on the cutting board), and, two, that they give up Intel contracts (which is quite a big pull). Once again, the three comapnies have to work together (which will cause conflict), as opposed to only two.
Uh. Microsoft already has the software. Why would three companies cause conflicts? Even two companies can cause conflicts (Apple & Motorola [was never AIM since 1998, so IBM is out of Apple & Motorola mess since 1998]). Besides, Dell would need little involvement from Microsoft, maybe a little bit customization of software, drivers, etc. Little involvement with AMD too. They just need the processor, documentation on processor, PCI, etc. (to design mobo), and more. I'm sure they work together more than I've impressed upon in this post.
If one thing Apple still hasn't learned, the freakin moral lesson of the Motorola screw up was: don't depend on one CPU supplier. Go with processors that *HAVE* competition. You don't see IBM PowerPC 970 based computers competing with Power Macs.
And why in the world does it have to be Dell. You know, HP and Compaq exist both of whom already have AMD based computers.
I see where you are going, and logically I tend to agree with you. It might be the case that AMD will come out/release the 64-bit chip, but it doesn't necessarily mean that they sell the chip to the consumer (maybe server) at great volume -- based in the market factor.
You fail to recognize that there is a 64bit Athlon based on Hammer. That's the *DESKTOP* one. Opteron, the server Hammer, is for, gasp, SERVERS.
Uhm. I never said it was at 3-4+GHz. I said it was rated at 3400+ on the AMD scale. Like Athlon XP 2600+, Athlon XP 2000+, etc.
If Dell -- the fastest growing PC manufactor -- wants to incorporate this 64-bit into the consumer side, they have to make sure that, one, Microsoft is willing to supply the software (not just on the cutting board), and, two, that they give up Intel contracts (which is quite a big pull). Once again, the three comapnies have to work together (which will cause conflict), as opposed to only two.
Uh. Microsoft already has the software. Why would three companies cause conflicts? Even two companies can cause conflicts (Apple & Motorola [was never AIM since 1998, so IBM is out of Apple & Motorola mess since 1998]). Besides, Dell would need little involvement from Microsoft, maybe a little bit customization of software, drivers, etc. Little involvement with AMD too. They just need the processor, documentation on processor, PCI, etc. (to design mobo), and more. I'm sure they work together more than I've impressed upon in this post.
If one thing Apple still hasn't learned, the freakin moral lesson of the Motorola screw up was: don't depend on one CPU supplier. Go with processors that *HAVE* competition. You don't see IBM PowerPC 970 based computers competing with Power Macs.
And why in the world does it have to be Dell. You know, HP and Compaq exist both of whom already have AMD based computers.
I see where you are going, and logically I tend to agree with you. It might be the case that AMD will come out/release the 64-bit chip, but it doesn't necessarily mean that they sell the chip to the consumer (maybe server) at great volume -- based in the market factor.
You fail to recognize that there is a 64bit Athlon based on Hammer. That's the *DESKTOP* one. Opteron, the server Hammer, is for, gasp, SERVERS.
dschlow
Sep 12, 03:03 PM
Originally posted by Moxiemike
Now sure, there might be workflow issues with magazine and large publishing but there is NO problem whatsoever with printing at commerical presses.
I don't know where this myth has arrived from, but it's just not true. I'm in po-dunky pittsburgh, pa and man, everyone has ID, most print shops have "ID Files accepted here"
What Qps/copy desk allows you to do is have the editors write in a seperate program (copy desk) so they don't f-up your nice layouts. The two work together, i.e. the writers work in copy desk and the text appears in your quark layout. Without them ever having access to move shapes/objects around. The process really speeds things up, as you can work on the layout while they're writing. It's not a matter of being able to accept files or not.
Now sure, there might be workflow issues with magazine and large publishing but there is NO problem whatsoever with printing at commerical presses.
I don't know where this myth has arrived from, but it's just not true. I'm in po-dunky pittsburgh, pa and man, everyone has ID, most print shops have "ID Files accepted here"
What Qps/copy desk allows you to do is have the editors write in a seperate program (copy desk) so they don't f-up your nice layouts. The two work together, i.e. the writers work in copy desk and the text appears in your quark layout. Without them ever having access to move shapes/objects around. The process really speeds things up, as you can work on the layout while they're writing. It's not a matter of being able to accept files or not.
sushi
Feb 4, 10:32 PM
is anyone still active on SETI and here? i noticed the top guy has 10 computers running SETI!!! that's insane!:eek:
I finish in December 2005 with a little over 12,000 work units under the old system.
I was just getting ready to make a cool SETI Farm starting with 10 CPUs. My concept was a hanging MB system. I planned on sharing power supplies and booting from USB flash memory devices. I had envisioned expanding my system by 10 CPUs each year until I had 50 on line. Yes, the electrical bill did concern me a bit. :eek:
Anyhow, the SETI folks changed to the system. I lost interest and haven't done anything since then with it. Maybe someday that will change.
I finish in December 2005 with a little over 12,000 work units under the old system.
I was just getting ready to make a cool SETI Farm starting with 10 CPUs. My concept was a hanging MB system. I planned on sharing power supplies and booting from USB flash memory devices. I had envisioned expanding my system by 10 CPUs each year until I had 50 on line. Yes, the electrical bill did concern me a bit. :eek:
Anyhow, the SETI folks changed to the system. I lost interest and haven't done anything since then with it. Maybe someday that will change.
TheGimp
Mar 22, 03:22 PM
I didn't like Partners in Time (too plodding), but I've reserved a copy of SPM. It looks like it will have mad action.
vniow
Oct 19, 08:57 PM
What the hell is 802.116?
Savage Henry
Mar 16, 10:36 AM
I don't like the page. The icons don't make any sense. They need labels.
Yeah... but it's shouldn't take long to make sense.
I kinda likes it .... of course had MSN done it I would have been foaming at the mouth; which I put down to the Jungian duality of man.
Yeah... but it's shouldn't take long to make sense.
I kinda likes it .... of course had MSN done it I would have been foaming at the mouth; which I put down to the Jungian duality of man.
Mechcozmo
Dec 7, 07:57 PM
Its ok. I like Safari more, but it is a nice browser.
[FLAME-RETARDANT] It's just a personal preference.[/FLAME RETARDANT]
[FLAME-RETARDANT] It's just a personal preference.[/FLAME RETARDANT]
Macmaniac
Sep 9, 07:11 PM
Well considering we have 10000 registered members alot of em leave but its when one the over 500s leave it is felt, and of course announcing your departure always adds to the "OH MY GOD THEY ARE ALL LEAVING feeling"
As long as eye is here things will feel normal.
As long as eye is here things will feel normal.
UnixMac
Oct 11, 11:15 AM
Originally posted by TMJ1974
Dissappointed..........
Tim
MAJOR UNDERSTATEMENT!
Dissappointed..........
Tim
MAJOR UNDERSTATEMENT!
UnixMac
Oct 23, 09:10 AM
7 AM Pacific, and still no change.... When do they normally effect these changes?
Arcady
Aug 30, 10:17 PM
Originally posted by dongmin
I didn't mean now, obviously, as the great majority of Mac users still boot off OS 9. But in 3 years let's say, I would think that 90% or more would be running OS X.
I bet 90% aren't running OS 9 and OS X combined. The majority of Mac users are probably running OS 7-8, because there are millions of Quadras and old PowerMacs (not to mention Mac II's and 68k LC/Performas) still out there being used by people who are oblivious to OS upgrades or anything beyond Word 5.1. I run across these people almost daily.
I didn't mean now, obviously, as the great majority of Mac users still boot off OS 9. But in 3 years let's say, I would think that 90% or more would be running OS X.
I bet 90% aren't running OS 9 and OS X combined. The majority of Mac users are probably running OS 7-8, because there are millions of Quadras and old PowerMacs (not to mention Mac II's and 68k LC/Performas) still out there being used by people who are oblivious to OS upgrades or anything beyond Word 5.1. I run across these people almost daily.
Dave Marsh
Oct 31, 01:26 PM
I believe I've read Apple makes the bulk of its income selling hardware. MacOS X is the software that makes that possible. If Apple permitted standard PCs to run MacOS X, several things would probably happen:
1. Apple hardware sales would initially plummet, killing Apple's revenue stream.
2. The user experience using MacOS X on Intel would be terrible as Apple would then have to deal with the plethora of hardware incompatibilities in the Wintel world.
3. Apple would be seen as a direct competitor to Microsoft, creating the expected Microsoft reaction, and subsequent marketing campaign pointing out those problems and how they work better currently using Windows XP, so why change?
4. The world would then realize that the reason that Apple's products have been so good is that Apple controls both the hardware and the OS, and stop buying the Intel version of MacOS X.
So, would Apple's $4.3B last long enough for this trauma to work its wait out and permit Apple to return to its closed hardware/OS solution?
It's an interesting thought, that of Apple Macs and Intel Macs in the marketplace. Would Microsoft stand by and permit this? Microsoft has never failed to use its monopoly clout to squash/influence competitors in the past, and I don't doubt they would have private talks with software developers would might think about developing software for this new platform. I think we could forget about Office for Mactel, or Office for Mac, for that matter.
A more realistic, if still far out alternative, is that Apple is simply covering its bases by preserving the ability to switch processors, while retaining control of the box. This means replace the PPC with an Intel chip, maintain a Mac ROM, continue to sell an integrated package that's better than a Wintel solution. That probably wouldn't be as compelling a solution as today's PPC-integrated box, but it would allow Apple to continue selling hardware.
I don't think we'll ever see Apple offering the MacOS to the generic Intel world.
1. Apple hardware sales would initially plummet, killing Apple's revenue stream.
2. The user experience using MacOS X on Intel would be terrible as Apple would then have to deal with the plethora of hardware incompatibilities in the Wintel world.
3. Apple would be seen as a direct competitor to Microsoft, creating the expected Microsoft reaction, and subsequent marketing campaign pointing out those problems and how they work better currently using Windows XP, so why change?
4. The world would then realize that the reason that Apple's products have been so good is that Apple controls both the hardware and the OS, and stop buying the Intel version of MacOS X.
So, would Apple's $4.3B last long enough for this trauma to work its wait out and permit Apple to return to its closed hardware/OS solution?
It's an interesting thought, that of Apple Macs and Intel Macs in the marketplace. Would Microsoft stand by and permit this? Microsoft has never failed to use its monopoly clout to squash/influence competitors in the past, and I don't doubt they would have private talks with software developers would might think about developing software for this new platform. I think we could forget about Office for Mactel, or Office for Mac, for that matter.
A more realistic, if still far out alternative, is that Apple is simply covering its bases by preserving the ability to switch processors, while retaining control of the box. This means replace the PPC with an Intel chip, maintain a Mac ROM, continue to sell an integrated package that's better than a Wintel solution. That probably wouldn't be as compelling a solution as today's PPC-integrated box, but it would allow Apple to continue selling hardware.
I don't think we'll ever see Apple offering the MacOS to the generic Intel world.
princealfie
Jun 26, 02:57 PM
I would stop buying Apple products if nothing changes. Globalization is bad... :eek:
Chaszmyr
Sep 30, 11:28 PM
New Displays maybe... Probably powerbooks... maybe ibooks.. but probably not both.... No portable device.
Eniregnat
Jun 26, 12:47 PM
Any rumor that states, "Next Tuesday".
Any rumor that states, "A credible source", with out noting why the source is creditable.
Any rumor that states, "A credible source", with out noting why the source is creditable.