Multimedia
Aug 19, 07:18 AM
Darn it ... I just received my crossgrade upgrade yesterday eventhough I only own powerbook and am waiting for merom based laptop. While on the topic of fcp, can I install on my powerbook for now and in install on later on my future intel-laptop? (reading the legal eula it seems install is only allowed for one laptop and desktop... I guess I will have to uninstall first on powerbook .....) I am just not sure if apple will block my serial number or something ...No they won't block your serial number. It's the honor system. Yes you can put it on what you have now and what you get later.
Analog Kid
Apr 6, 02:04 PM
Xoon...
oldwatery
Apr 19, 02:09 PM
What annoys me even more is that Apple always seems to make these claims that they made such and such first, and that Windows is copying Mac OS.. What annoys me is if you know a bit of the history you'll find that Apple copied Xerox interface, with permission of course, but it's not like they came up with it first..
Now they are making another claim that Samsung is copying..
x2
Everything is just a development of something else.
There is no absolute originality.
This is a stupid waste of time and effort.
But I guess when you get all big and high and mighty then why not throw some of the spare cash at a silly law suit if for no other reason than getting more publicity.
Now they are making another claim that Samsung is copying..
x2
Everything is just a development of something else.
There is no absolute originality.
This is a stupid waste of time and effort.
But I guess when you get all big and high and mighty then why not throw some of the spare cash at a silly law suit if for no other reason than getting more publicity.
alent1234
Mar 23, 08:32 AM
LOL what?
LG and others had semi-smartphones with 3.5" screens back in 2006 and early 2007
LG and others had semi-smartphones with 3.5" screens back in 2006 and early 2007
backdraft
Jul 29, 05:57 PM
well I'd rather see a ppc update...
Porchland
Aug 7, 04:18 PM
I'm real excited for the new iChat and Spaces, along with these new "top secret features..." They better be good!
The finder is definately my bet for something to be revamped, along with probably iLife which will be revamped for leopard.
Edit : Also something more with virtualization (boot camp area) as they did not touch that really.
My bets are on some kind of Boot Camp-ish feature that will allow for native installation of Windows applications -- without Windows -- right into OS X. It would obliterate the need for applications to be written for both Windows and Mac.
<ducks and waits for flamers to whine about how impossible this is>
The finder is definately my bet for something to be revamped, along with probably iLife which will be revamped for leopard.
Edit : Also something more with virtualization (boot camp area) as they did not touch that really.
My bets are on some kind of Boot Camp-ish feature that will allow for native installation of Windows applications -- without Windows -- right into OS X. It would obliterate the need for applications to be written for both Windows and Mac.
<ducks and waits for flamers to whine about how impossible this is>
doobs22
Mar 22, 10:14 PM
That just makes me glad I ordered my iPad 2 wifi w/64GB
tyra banks crazy. Tyra Banks…
Tyra Banks the show#39;s
Tyra Banks Show –
on Tyra Banks#39; order,
Photo: Tyra Banks looks
Tyra Banks Real Hair
tyra banks modeling agency.
Tyra banks website
Tyra#39;s show.
tyra banks
tyra banks hair flip. tyra
On March 15th Tyra Banks is
noire anqa
Mar 26, 07:35 AM
Thank you for your constructive reply but I have a feeling it will all fall on deaf ears given that most have never actually gone on Google and researched what has been added/changed/enhanced to Mac OS X Lion. For example SAMBA has been removed and completely replaced with a ground up clean room implementation of SMB2 which will translate into better support for Windows Vista and 7 clients as well as the latest versions of Windows. Why hasn't that been mentioned by the nay sayers here?
OpenGL 3.2 has been added and funny enough not a single thing has been said about the fact that it lays the foundation for future updates that will be more prompt.
Then there is Webkit2 based web browser whose knock on effects go well beyond Safari and into applications wishing to utilise web based technologies with framework that provides said functionality but handles all the mundane security/process isolation/etc behind the scenes.
The merging of AV Foundation that serves as the foundation for future development for media products that will span iOS and Mac OS X; that you can have the same media core on iOS and Mac OS X then build upon it to differentiate between the desktop and tablet version by having a different interface, more features on the desktop version etc.
Sandboxing is being enhanced further and more system components are being put into it as to reduce the security exposure when a bug is found.
I'm sure others can note even more enhancements but it is frustrating when I hear the same nauseating ignorance over and over again from the cheap seats screaming there are no new features and yet they've done zero in the way of researching and reading on the matter.
You can't hear me .. but i'm cheering for you.
OpenGL 3.2 has been added and funny enough not a single thing has been said about the fact that it lays the foundation for future updates that will be more prompt.
Then there is Webkit2 based web browser whose knock on effects go well beyond Safari and into applications wishing to utilise web based technologies with framework that provides said functionality but handles all the mundane security/process isolation/etc behind the scenes.
The merging of AV Foundation that serves as the foundation for future development for media products that will span iOS and Mac OS X; that you can have the same media core on iOS and Mac OS X then build upon it to differentiate between the desktop and tablet version by having a different interface, more features on the desktop version etc.
Sandboxing is being enhanced further and more system components are being put into it as to reduce the security exposure when a bug is found.
I'm sure others can note even more enhancements but it is frustrating when I hear the same nauseating ignorance over and over again from the cheap seats screaming there are no new features and yet they've done zero in the way of researching and reading on the matter.
You can't hear me .. but i'm cheering for you.
Tehy
Sep 19, 09:26 AM
I hope that the MacBook with Core 2 Duo is better than the Core Duo version :)
Multimedia
Jul 15, 05:02 AM
Here's Link To NTI Dragon Burn for Mac OS X (http://www.ntius.com/default.asp?p=dragonburn/dburn4_main).
Dragon Burn enables Mac desktop and PowerBook notebook computer users to quickly and easily begin producing audio, data, mixed-mode CDs, and DVDs. Dragon Burn's Multi-Burning engine allows users to simultaneously write multiple CDs or DVDs. It also fully supports the newest internal and external drives, including 16x DVD-R drives.Thanks ksz. I checked it out and the multi burning capability is great. But Dragon Burn will not let you write Images which I find incredibly lame. I use Toast 7 a lot and I use it most of the time to write images not to physically burn discs. I would love to be able to write multiple Images with something. But, alas, Dragon Burn is not it. :(http://www.creativemac.com/2001/04_apr/news/toast53.htm
Still, from what I've read you need multiple instances of Toast open. I'll try Disk Utility for burning two images at once when I get a new image that I need to burn.Wow. I had no idea I could have multiple copies of Toast 7 open. Just made a dupe and it works! Thanks Eldorian. I can really push my Quad to further limits now that I know this. Mucho Gracias.
Dragon Burn enables Mac desktop and PowerBook notebook computer users to quickly and easily begin producing audio, data, mixed-mode CDs, and DVDs. Dragon Burn's Multi-Burning engine allows users to simultaneously write multiple CDs or DVDs. It also fully supports the newest internal and external drives, including 16x DVD-R drives.Thanks ksz. I checked it out and the multi burning capability is great. But Dragon Burn will not let you write Images which I find incredibly lame. I use Toast 7 a lot and I use it most of the time to write images not to physically burn discs. I would love to be able to write multiple Images with something. But, alas, Dragon Burn is not it. :(http://www.creativemac.com/2001/04_apr/news/toast53.htm
Still, from what I've read you need multiple instances of Toast open. I'll try Disk Utility for burning two images at once when I get a new image that I need to burn.Wow. I had no idea I could have multiple copies of Toast 7 open. Just made a dupe and it works! Thanks Eldorian. I can really push my Quad to further limits now that I know this. Mucho Gracias.
notabadname
Apr 25, 03:32 PM
There is also a difference in whether the phone keeps and uses data to function and perform services, and whether that data is transmitted to Apple and used by Apple for tracking. The burden of proof (it would seem - in my non-laywer opinion) would be to show that Apple is specifically collecting that data and using or storing it. Not just that the phone keeps it resident, on-board for use by Apps which the user may "allow" to use location data.
I'm betting Apple is smart enough not to be collecting the data outside the SLA.
I'm betting Apple is smart enough not to be collecting the data outside the SLA.
Yamcha
Mar 26, 04:00 PM
I'm looking forward to it, but what would be really amazing if on the next major release of Mac OS they add support for running .EXE files. I know there are third party applications out there to do that, but If it could be legally done and done properly where we don't see any major performance hits then it would truly be the end of using Windows for me, and I'm sure for most others..
I think that would be awesome.. But I know probably unlikely..
I think that would be awesome.. But I know probably unlikely..
jeanlain
Apr 5, 05:16 PM
I'm not trolling, this is an honest question. But isn't a Final Cut pretty much worthless for commercial use without a way to put the results on Blu-Ray?
Final Cut does a bit more than disc authoring.
Final Cut does a bit more than disc authoring.
wtmcgee
Mar 26, 03:46 PM
Wouldn't surprise me if Lion and iOS 5 are one and the same... if that's the case, and since Apple really needs to get iOS in the 21st century, I can believe this...
So much hilarity in this comment.
So much hilarity in this comment.
syklee26
Mar 26, 01:27 AM
I have a feeling Apple won't charge $129 for Lion. It is not going to be easy to tell users that, after charging only $29 for SL, they are back to charging $129.
I feel like Apple may charge around $49 for Lion.
This is unless Jobs is going to be at WWDC with some really awesome secret features in his sleeve, like he did with Leopard.
I feel like Apple may charge around $49 for Lion.
This is unless Jobs is going to be at WWDC with some really awesome secret features in his sleeve, like he did with Leopard.
scelzifan
Apr 11, 02:32 PM
Are you serious? Your comments are not only incorrect but just flat out ignorant. Whoever said that angry birds is not available on android obviously can't read or just does not know how to use the app store because I have all three on my Thunderbolt and they are full versions and they were free to boot. So before you go make comments about people being ignorant you might want to do some research first!! And why do people keep saying we are getting throttled?? I am using between 8-10 gigs a month on LTE and I am still hitting mid 30's in download speeds so if I am getting throttled then I would hate to see how fast the network really is!! Plus I get unlimited data and all the 4G I can use. And I hate to tell you but the iphone is seriously outdated, look at benchmark test, download tests etc and on top of that the flaws the phone has physically and internally like the way it delivers messages and mail is absolutely terrible. It is not even close to the top phone on the market anymore and has not been for several months now and its only going to get worse!! So if people think that most consumers will just wait it out for the next iphone because it is an iphone is sadly mistaken, its not going to happen. Why would you when android has at the moment passed apple on every standard out there?Are you serious? The Moto Droid (i.e.: the original one) is slower than molasses. You cannot be talking about the original Verizon Droid. That phone under-delivered out the gate. My friend from work whose entire family uses Verizon bought a Motorola Droid and she thought she was getting the equivalent of an iPhone and hated it ever since. She was jumping up and down when Verizon got the iPhone.
Maybe, just maybe, a Verizon Motorola Droid, rooted and with the latest stable version of Gingerbread installed you can get decent performance and responsiveness, but certainly not with an approved Froyo update running on it.
I sure hope you are talking about a newer "Verizon Droid" phone -- some of those are nice, but I still would not trade the Apple user experience for the Android experience -- though I hate having to wait until Sep/Oct.
As a side note, I laughed heartily last night when my sister-in-law asked if I had Angry Birds on my iPhone or iPad because her mom loved that game. Her husband, my wife's brother, who owns a Motorola Droid and a Xoom and is a huge Android enthusiast promptly answered her saying "that Angry Birds is only available on Android". I proceeded to show him the number of "Angry Birds" games available on iOS. Made me realize that Android enthusiasts often don't know that there is something better out there, and yet Apple enthusiasts are called "ignorant, stupid, and sheep". His response was to show me an app he had that could automatically throttle his CPU down to save battery when the phone was not in heavy use. I admitted that I did not have that capability, but that I also did not need it. The moral of the story was, if you want really useful apps and games and fantastic user experience and tight integration with a suite of great (albeit sometimes expensive) products, then you buy Apple. If you want a heterogenous computing environment, your greatest apps to come from Google, and the ability to throttle the clock-speed on your smartphone's CPU, then Android is for you.
I think it is very telling that last week (http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9215598/Clorox_cleans_out_BlackBerries_in_favor_of_iPhones_Android_devices?taxonomyId=154&pageNumber=1) when Clorox CIO offered 2000 Clorox employees the option to switch off Blackberry and get an iPhone, Android or Win Phone 7 device on the company's dime to replace their Blackberry device, that 92% of those 2000 employees chose a 10-month-old iPhone 4, with only 6% choosing Android, and 2% choosing WP7. Google would have you believe that people prefer Android. The truth of the matter is that the people who don't care about having a smartphone or not just choose the best "free phone" or BOGO option that the carrier offers -- if that option happens to be Android, then sure Android commands a greater market share of the growing smartphone market. Those customers will never care what their mobile OS is -- they were just looking to get what they could for free (or cheap). Its like asking somebody if they would prefer the Honda or Hyundai -- most would prefer the Honda, but many may settle for the Hyundai if it is cheaper. But when you take cost out of the equation then the story changes. The moral of that story is that Apple needs a cheaper entry point for an iOS smartphone if they want to command market share and especially to put their phones in the hands of more teenagers.
Maybe, just maybe, a Verizon Motorola Droid, rooted and with the latest stable version of Gingerbread installed you can get decent performance and responsiveness, but certainly not with an approved Froyo update running on it.
I sure hope you are talking about a newer "Verizon Droid" phone -- some of those are nice, but I still would not trade the Apple user experience for the Android experience -- though I hate having to wait until Sep/Oct.
As a side note, I laughed heartily last night when my sister-in-law asked if I had Angry Birds on my iPhone or iPad because her mom loved that game. Her husband, my wife's brother, who owns a Motorola Droid and a Xoom and is a huge Android enthusiast promptly answered her saying "that Angry Birds is only available on Android". I proceeded to show him the number of "Angry Birds" games available on iOS. Made me realize that Android enthusiasts often don't know that there is something better out there, and yet Apple enthusiasts are called "ignorant, stupid, and sheep". His response was to show me an app he had that could automatically throttle his CPU down to save battery when the phone was not in heavy use. I admitted that I did not have that capability, but that I also did not need it. The moral of the story was, if you want really useful apps and games and fantastic user experience and tight integration with a suite of great (albeit sometimes expensive) products, then you buy Apple. If you want a heterogenous computing environment, your greatest apps to come from Google, and the ability to throttle the clock-speed on your smartphone's CPU, then Android is for you.
I think it is very telling that last week (http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9215598/Clorox_cleans_out_BlackBerries_in_favor_of_iPhones_Android_devices?taxonomyId=154&pageNumber=1) when Clorox CIO offered 2000 Clorox employees the option to switch off Blackberry and get an iPhone, Android or Win Phone 7 device on the company's dime to replace their Blackberry device, that 92% of those 2000 employees chose a 10-month-old iPhone 4, with only 6% choosing Android, and 2% choosing WP7. Google would have you believe that people prefer Android. The truth of the matter is that the people who don't care about having a smartphone or not just choose the best "free phone" or BOGO option that the carrier offers -- if that option happens to be Android, then sure Android commands a greater market share of the growing smartphone market. Those customers will never care what their mobile OS is -- they were just looking to get what they could for free (or cheap). Its like asking somebody if they would prefer the Honda or Hyundai -- most would prefer the Honda, but many may settle for the Hyundai if it is cheaper. But when you take cost out of the equation then the story changes. The moral of that story is that Apple needs a cheaper entry point for an iOS smartphone if they want to command market share and especially to put their phones in the hands of more teenagers.
kresh
Nov 28, 10:47 PM
If this went into effect, I would have a defense in court when I downloaded the entire Universal Label Catalog (All Their Music) off the net. I would no longer buy anything from iTS that is Universal!
Wow, is the Music label the same as the Movie label. I could get all the movies too (to play on my iPod)!
I mean if the royalties are paid when the device is manufactured, there is no need for them to double dip and collect royalties again when I pay for content right? I think it would hold in court!
Wow, is the Music label the same as the Movie label. I could get all the movies too (to play on my iPod)!
I mean if the royalties are paid when the device is manufactured, there is no need for them to double dip and collect royalties again when I pay for content right? I think it would hold in court!
mcrain
Mar 17, 12:51 PM
How many times did Barack Obama attempt to draw a difference between himself and Hillary by saying "I was against the war from the beginning."? Lots. He was against the war from the beginning, and he campaigned on ending the Iraq war and escalating the Afghanistan war in an attempt to do what we went there for in the first place; and actually plan on an orderly end of the conflict. So, yes, you are correct. He was against the Iraq war from the beginning, and he said so. Bravo, 1-1 so far.
How many times did he attempt to portray himself as the polar opposite of George Bush, especially his foreign policy? Lots. In what ways has he not been the polar opposite? Do you have examples or cites? He did try to close Guantanamo, and the GOP blocked him. He actually put in place a time table for withdrawal from Iraq. He actually focused our efforts on Afghanistan; the war that started in response to 9/11 (almost 10 years ago btw).
How many times did he say that he was going to repair the view of America in the eyes of the Muslim world? Lots. Hasn't he? A dead fish would have had a better image than GWB in that part of the world.
How many times did he the right wing media say he would talk to leaders of 'terrorist nations' without preconditions? Lots. Fixed that for ya.
How many times did he attempt to portray himself as the polar opposite of George Bush, especially his foreign policy? Lots. In what ways has he not been the polar opposite? Do you have examples or cites? He did try to close Guantanamo, and the GOP blocked him. He actually put in place a time table for withdrawal from Iraq. He actually focused our efforts on Afghanistan; the war that started in response to 9/11 (almost 10 years ago btw).
How many times did he say that he was going to repair the view of America in the eyes of the Muslim world? Lots. Hasn't he? A dead fish would have had a better image than GWB in that part of the world.
How many times did he the right wing media say he would talk to leaders of 'terrorist nations' without preconditions? Lots. Fixed that for ya.
GQB
Mar 31, 05:09 PM
Thats not at all what this article is saying. The Android project is still going to be "open source".
'Open Source' to the degree that it serves Google's purposes.
The point is that Apple is derided as 'closed' while Google is erroneously beatified as 'open', when in fact there is little difference between the two (other than the fact that I somewhat trust Apple with private info, while I wouldn't trust Google as far as I could throw them.)
'Open Source' to the degree that it serves Google's purposes.
The point is that Apple is derided as 'closed' while Google is erroneously beatified as 'open', when in fact there is little difference between the two (other than the fact that I somewhat trust Apple with private info, while I wouldn't trust Google as far as I could throw them.)
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.
ugp
Jun 11, 01:57 PM
We are being told that inventory will be limited for non preorder customers. Basically, if you want one, you better preorder.
About opening before apple stores...
Thats what i thought too, but the only thing we were told is no later than 8am opening. Basically we can open anytime up to 8am.
I am praying that the Managers here get told the same thing by the DMs as well. Would make things a lot easier. If Radio Shack announces they are opening before everyone else you better prepare for a lot of customers.
About opening before apple stores...
Thats what i thought too, but the only thing we were told is no later than 8am opening. Basically we can open anytime up to 8am.
I am praying that the Managers here get told the same thing by the DMs as well. Would make things a lot easier. If Radio Shack announces they are opening before everyone else you better prepare for a lot of customers.
appleguy123
Feb 28, 08:34 PM
I said "Both cases are untreatable."
Very sorry.
I have dyslexia, so I read sentences in my head, not words. When the words fit, my brain just makes that model of what it thinks the text said.
Sorry for getting mad. :o
Very sorry.
I have dyslexia, so I read sentences in my head, not words. When the words fit, my brain just makes that model of what it thinks the text said.
Sorry for getting mad. :o
NoSmokingBandit
Dec 6, 02:50 PM
I'm letting my B-Spec driver earn me some cash. He is so slow..... He is only Lvl3 right now, but i'm really impatient!
I got the Lotus Top Gear race done today. Took me a whole hour. About 40 minutes in i got pissed and turned ABS all the way up and ASM on. It helped so much, but the AI made it difficult to finsh. They'd ram into me and i'd get a dsq. Pissed me off.
If anyone is having trouble, try turning off TCS completely, ABS all the way up, ASM on, and the front brake bias to 10. It makes up for the awful tires they put on it.
I accepted littleman and psychofetus as friends, so if either of you want to trade cars let me know what you are looking for.
I got the Lotus Top Gear race done today. Took me a whole hour. About 40 minutes in i got pissed and turned ABS all the way up and ASM on. It helped so much, but the AI made it difficult to finsh. They'd ram into me and i'd get a dsq. Pissed me off.
If anyone is having trouble, try turning off TCS completely, ABS all the way up, ASM on, and the front brake bias to 10. It makes up for the awful tires they put on it.
I accepted littleman and psychofetus as friends, so if either of you want to trade cars let me know what you are looking for.
shamino
Jul 20, 09:58 AM
No I think you are confused. :) I meant "Is having more cores, lets say 8, more efficient than one big core equal in processing power to the 8 cores?"
First of all, you assume that it is possible to make "one big core equal in processing power to the 8 cores". I don't think it is possible to do this (at least not with the x86 architecture using today's technology.)
But assuming such a chip exists, the answer depends on what kind of efficiency you're thinking of.
If you mean computational efficiency (meaning the most useful processing per clock-tick), then a single big core will do better. This is because single-threaded apps will be able to use the full power (whereas multiple threads are needed to take advantagte of multiple cores.) Also, the operating system can get rid of the overhead that is needed to keep software running on the multiple cores from stepping on each other.
If you mean energy efficiency (amount of processing per watt of electricity consumed), then it could go either way, depending on how the chips are made. But given today's manufacturing processes and the non-linear power curve that we see as clock speeds are increased, the multiple-core solution will almost definitely use less power.
First of all, you assume that it is possible to make "one big core equal in processing power to the 8 cores". I don't think it is possible to do this (at least not with the x86 architecture using today's technology.)
But assuming such a chip exists, the answer depends on what kind of efficiency you're thinking of.
If you mean computational efficiency (meaning the most useful processing per clock-tick), then a single big core will do better. This is because single-threaded apps will be able to use the full power (whereas multiple threads are needed to take advantagte of multiple cores.) Also, the operating system can get rid of the overhead that is needed to keep software running on the multiple cores from stepping on each other.
If you mean energy efficiency (amount of processing per watt of electricity consumed), then it could go either way, depending on how the chips are made. But given today's manufacturing processes and the non-linear power curve that we see as clock speeds are increased, the multiple-core solution will almost definitely use less power.