ssk2
Mar 22, 03:39 PM
Why are you comparing the Playbook that is coming out this summer to iOS 4? Chances are it will be competing with iOS 5. If you want to be fair and all.
Oh FFS... Ok, yes, if we're being pedantic, I'll wait until I try both iOS 5 and the Playbook before deciding.
Oh FFS... Ok, yes, if we're being pedantic, I'll wait until I try both iOS 5 and the Playbook before deciding.
ssamani
Sep 13, 07:15 PM
DAMN :eek:
so 2-3 years from now are people going to be asking "do I need a quad core or an 8 core macbook? oh yeah I'll mostly be surfing the web and maybe editing a photo once and a while" :rolleyes:
I'll be mostly surfing the web to simultaneously stream multiple TV channels, download HD movies and video chat with friends with a live video substitution background and maybe editing a 16 Megapixel camera phone photo and the odd HD camcorder movie once in a while.
Hey, as Steve said, 128K is more than anyone will ever need...
so 2-3 years from now are people going to be asking "do I need a quad core or an 8 core macbook? oh yeah I'll mostly be surfing the web and maybe editing a photo once and a while" :rolleyes:
I'll be mostly surfing the web to simultaneously stream multiple TV channels, download HD movies and video chat with friends with a live video substitution background and maybe editing a 16 Megapixel camera phone photo and the odd HD camcorder movie once in a while.
Hey, as Steve said, 128K is more than anyone will ever need...
yoak
Apr 12, 09:25 AM
I don't use batch monitor so I'm not sure where to look. It doesn't show much more than compressor, merely the name of the job and a progress bar. I see that the little inspector window should show the "segments" (I'm not sure they call it that in Englsh), but I don't see any segments in the test encoding I just did. Plus, disabling task segmentation (fragmentation?) in the encoder settings doesn't change the CPU load. Maybe a source file isn't split when QMaster isn't configured
Anyway, the encoding uses 4 cores since CPU usages exceeds 300%. I'm positive it uses all of my cores. As a comparison, by Mac Pro is more than twice faster than my friend's iMac, which has 2 core but roughly similar CPU speed (GHz).
You open it from Compressor, in the top right corner. Then, if you have a cluster (set up in Qmaster) it will show on top of "Your computer"
Here you can monitor your render progress and see how many cores are used.
See attached screen shot
Anyway, the encoding uses 4 cores since CPU usages exceeds 300%. I'm positive it uses all of my cores. As a comparison, by Mac Pro is more than twice faster than my friend's iMac, which has 2 core but roughly similar CPU speed (GHz).
You open it from Compressor, in the top right corner. Then, if you have a cluster (set up in Qmaster) it will show on top of "Your computer"
Here you can monitor your render progress and see how many cores are used.
See attached screen shot
skunk
Feb 28, 07:12 PM
2) okay, they can pretend to get marriedNo, you are absolutely wrong., They can get married like any other couple where the laws allow. Marriage is not a special preserve of any religion. You cannot just commandeer it.
No, I'm not kidding. To the Catholic Church sex outside of a valid sacramental marriage is fornicationWho cares what Catholic dogma claims? It's an irrelevance.
Last time I checked when the vast majority of people did such behavior it was with the opposite gender not the same.So what is the problem? Are you against variation?
Do you have proof that Plato was a repressed homosexual?No, not proof
"Homosexuality," Plato wrote, "is regarded as shameful by barbarians and by those who live under despotic governments just as philosophy is regarded as shameful by them, because it is apparently not in the interest of such rulers to have great ideas engendered in their subjects, or powerful friendships or passionate love-all of which homosexuality is particularly apt to produce." This attitude of Plato's was characteristic of the ancient world, and I want to begin my discussion of the attitudes of the Church and of Western Christianity toward homosexuality by commenting on comparable attitudes among the ancients.
To a very large extent, Western attitudes toward law, religion, literature and government are dependent upon Roman attitudes. This makes it particularly striking that our attitudes toward homosexuality in particular and sexual tolerance in general are so remarkably different from those of the Romans. It is very difficult to convey to modern audiences the indifference of the Romans to questions of gender and gender orientation. The difficulty is due both to the fact that the evidence has been largely consciously obliterated by historians prior to very recent decades, and to the diffusion of the relevant material.
Romans did not consider sexuality or sexual preference a matter of much interest, nor did they treat either in an analytical way. An historian has to gather together thousands of little bits and pieces to demonstrate the general acceptance of homosexuality among the Romans.
One of the few imperial writers who does appear to make some sort of comment on the subject in a general way wrote, "Zeus came as an eagle to god like Ganymede and as a swan to the fair haired mother of Helen. One person prefers one gender, another the other, I like both." Plutarch wrote at about the same time, "No sensible person can imagine that the sexes differ in matters of love as they do in matters of clothing. The intelligent lover of beauty will be attracted to beauty in whichever gender he finds it." Roman law and social strictures made absolutely no restrictions on the basis of gender. It has sometimes been claimed that there were laws against homosexual relations in Rome, but it is easy to prove that this was not the case. On the other hand, it is a mistake to imagine that anarchic hedonism ruled at Rome. In fact, Romans did have a complex set of moral strictures designed to protect children from abuse or any citizen from force or duress in sexual relations. Romans were, like other people, sensitive to issues of love and caring, but individual sexual (i.e. gender) choice was completely unlimited. Male prostitution (directed toward other males), for instance, was so common that the taxes on it constituted a major source of revenue for the imperial treasury. It was so profitable that even in later periods when a certain intolerance crept in, the emperors could not bring themselves to end the practice and its attendant revenue.
Gay marriages were also legal and frequent in Rome for both males and females. Even emperors often married other males. There was total acceptance on the part of the populace, as far as it can be determined, of this sort of homosexual attitude and behavior. This total acceptance was not limited to the ruling elite; there is also much popular Roman literature containing gay love stories. The real point I want to make is that there is absolutely no conscious effort on anyone's part in the Roman world, the world in which Christianity was born, to claim that homosexuality was abnormal or undesirable. There is in fact no word for "homosexual" in Latin. "Homosexual" sounds like Latin, but was coined by a German psychologist in the late 1 9th century. No one in the early Roman world seemed to feel that the fact that someone preferred his or her own gender was any more significant than the fact that someone preferred blue eyes or short people. Neither gay nor straight people seemed to associate certain characteristics with sexual preference. Gay men were not thought to be less masculine than straight men and lesbian women were not thought of as less feminine than straight women. Gay people were not thought to be any better or worse than straight people-an attitude which differed both from that of the society that preceded it, since many Greeks thought gay people were inherently better than straight people, and from that of the society which followed it, in which gay people were often thought to be inferior to others.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/1979boswell.html
The most celebrated account of homosexual love comes in Plato's Symposium, in which homosexual love is discussed as a more ideal, more perfect kind of relationship than the more prosaic heterosexual variety. This is a highly biased account, because Plato himself was homosexual and wrote very beautiful epigrams to boys expressing his devotion. Platonic homosexuality had very little to do with sex; Plato believed ideally that love and reason should be fused together, while concern over the body and the material world of particulars should be annihilated. Even today, "Platonic love" refers to non-sexual love between two adults.
Behind Plato's contempt for heterosexual desire lay an aesthetic, highly intellectual aversion to the female body. Plato would have agreed with Schopenhauer's opinion that "only a male intellect clouded by the sexual drive could call the stunted, narrow-shouldered, broad-hipped and short-legged sex the fair sex".
http://www.newstatesman.com/199908230009
No, I'm not kidding. To the Catholic Church sex outside of a valid sacramental marriage is fornicationWho cares what Catholic dogma claims? It's an irrelevance.
Last time I checked when the vast majority of people did such behavior it was with the opposite gender not the same.So what is the problem? Are you against variation?
Do you have proof that Plato was a repressed homosexual?No, not proof
"Homosexuality," Plato wrote, "is regarded as shameful by barbarians and by those who live under despotic governments just as philosophy is regarded as shameful by them, because it is apparently not in the interest of such rulers to have great ideas engendered in their subjects, or powerful friendships or passionate love-all of which homosexuality is particularly apt to produce." This attitude of Plato's was characteristic of the ancient world, and I want to begin my discussion of the attitudes of the Church and of Western Christianity toward homosexuality by commenting on comparable attitudes among the ancients.
To a very large extent, Western attitudes toward law, religion, literature and government are dependent upon Roman attitudes. This makes it particularly striking that our attitudes toward homosexuality in particular and sexual tolerance in general are so remarkably different from those of the Romans. It is very difficult to convey to modern audiences the indifference of the Romans to questions of gender and gender orientation. The difficulty is due both to the fact that the evidence has been largely consciously obliterated by historians prior to very recent decades, and to the diffusion of the relevant material.
Romans did not consider sexuality or sexual preference a matter of much interest, nor did they treat either in an analytical way. An historian has to gather together thousands of little bits and pieces to demonstrate the general acceptance of homosexuality among the Romans.
One of the few imperial writers who does appear to make some sort of comment on the subject in a general way wrote, "Zeus came as an eagle to god like Ganymede and as a swan to the fair haired mother of Helen. One person prefers one gender, another the other, I like both." Plutarch wrote at about the same time, "No sensible person can imagine that the sexes differ in matters of love as they do in matters of clothing. The intelligent lover of beauty will be attracted to beauty in whichever gender he finds it." Roman law and social strictures made absolutely no restrictions on the basis of gender. It has sometimes been claimed that there were laws against homosexual relations in Rome, but it is easy to prove that this was not the case. On the other hand, it is a mistake to imagine that anarchic hedonism ruled at Rome. In fact, Romans did have a complex set of moral strictures designed to protect children from abuse or any citizen from force or duress in sexual relations. Romans were, like other people, sensitive to issues of love and caring, but individual sexual (i.e. gender) choice was completely unlimited. Male prostitution (directed toward other males), for instance, was so common that the taxes on it constituted a major source of revenue for the imperial treasury. It was so profitable that even in later periods when a certain intolerance crept in, the emperors could not bring themselves to end the practice and its attendant revenue.
Gay marriages were also legal and frequent in Rome for both males and females. Even emperors often married other males. There was total acceptance on the part of the populace, as far as it can be determined, of this sort of homosexual attitude and behavior. This total acceptance was not limited to the ruling elite; there is also much popular Roman literature containing gay love stories. The real point I want to make is that there is absolutely no conscious effort on anyone's part in the Roman world, the world in which Christianity was born, to claim that homosexuality was abnormal or undesirable. There is in fact no word for "homosexual" in Latin. "Homosexual" sounds like Latin, but was coined by a German psychologist in the late 1 9th century. No one in the early Roman world seemed to feel that the fact that someone preferred his or her own gender was any more significant than the fact that someone preferred blue eyes or short people. Neither gay nor straight people seemed to associate certain characteristics with sexual preference. Gay men were not thought to be less masculine than straight men and lesbian women were not thought of as less feminine than straight women. Gay people were not thought to be any better or worse than straight people-an attitude which differed both from that of the society that preceded it, since many Greeks thought gay people were inherently better than straight people, and from that of the society which followed it, in which gay people were often thought to be inferior to others.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/1979boswell.html
The most celebrated account of homosexual love comes in Plato's Symposium, in which homosexual love is discussed as a more ideal, more perfect kind of relationship than the more prosaic heterosexual variety. This is a highly biased account, because Plato himself was homosexual and wrote very beautiful epigrams to boys expressing his devotion. Platonic homosexuality had very little to do with sex; Plato believed ideally that love and reason should be fused together, while concern over the body and the material world of particulars should be annihilated. Even today, "Platonic love" refers to non-sexual love between two adults.
Behind Plato's contempt for heterosexual desire lay an aesthetic, highly intellectual aversion to the female body. Plato would have agreed with Schopenhauer's opinion that "only a male intellect clouded by the sexual drive could call the stunted, narrow-shouldered, broad-hipped and short-legged sex the fair sex".
http://www.newstatesman.com/199908230009
ryanx
Apr 10, 06:37 PM
a >>dramatic<< change - the truth is that it really needs to be dramatic :))
nwcs
Apr 10, 07:40 AM
Oh boo hoo about the companies being "booted" from sponsorships. The company I work for goes to trade shows. The time invested is actually quite small and most of the materials are in inventory anyway. The presentations are usually based on the same script. I bet the companies aren't that disappointed. In fact they would like to be there and see what Apple is up to more than anyone else. So I bet they'll send the same presenter staff there to view and record anything of note to send back to their company.
Businesses deal with things by contract and those contracts have terms and conditions. No company would just break a contract so I'm sure everything wad handled quite smoothly behind the scenes. So I think this idea that Apple bullied or pushed people is silly.
Businesses deal with things by contract and those contracts have terms and conditions. No company would just break a contract so I'm sure everything wad handled quite smoothly behind the scenes. So I think this idea that Apple bullied or pushed people is silly.
digitalbiker
Aug 25, 07:51 PM
I'm not trying to be a wise a@@, but when did Apple make a Pismo. I do remember them, but not being made by Apple. I am sorry, I don't recall the manufactuer for them at this time.:confused:
Apple always made the Pismo. I don't know the exact years but it was a black G3 PowerBook.
Apple always made the Pismo. I don't know the exact years but it was a black G3 PowerBook.
bibbz
Jun 9, 08:48 AM
I like the trade-in part. But must we activate the phone in the store? I would rather take the sealed box home and activate there over the phone with AT&T. Will that be allowed? :confused:
No, we activate all phones in the store. we connect the phone to our cashlanes and open itunes and activate them after we are finished processing the upgrade inside ATT's system. The phone will be on, your numbers transferred and everything when you walk out the door. At least at my store. :)
But honestly this whole trade in thing sounds fishy. Why would they give you 270 for a phone you can buy brand new starting the launch date for half that.
Like i said, once the iPhone 4 launches, i would imagine the prices come down some on the trades, but as of last night, those were the values. We trade in 3G's for roughly $100 off 3G's all day at my store. Its a really good system. A lot of phones you don't get much for, like a original razr will get you about 10 bucks. We just pay out a lot for iphones.
This is a huge story. I don't understand why it wasn't posted on page 1 especially since learning of the Radio Shack Trade-In program. I think the Doctor should reconsider not putting this on Page 1. :confused:
Who do i need to PM this too, i would LOVE for The Shack to get this attention.
How can I check which stores will be carrying the phone on launch day? And also, if I go into a particular store next Tuesday and pre-order, you're saying I will be able to pick that phone up on the 24th?
Stores that carry the iPhone now should have them on launch, give your local store a call in the next few days and we should know.
this post is a LITTLE misleading... i looked on the site and it says UP TO
118$ for 8gb 3G.. which means it could go for less right ? if so you made it seems as not matter what your getting the prices you showed which i believe is wrong.. correct me if im wrong
Up to means we appraise the phone. In store we have a much more detailed system when we process the trade in. It's about 15 questions about the condition of the phone. If your phones in good shape, i promise you will get very close, if not exactly what the site says.
If you click on the phone you have it will ask for its condition and overall functionality. I have a newly-replaced 16gb 2G and it showed me that I can get $100 or something like that for it, for instance.
Thank you!!
Guys, if any of you are in DFW, shoot me a pm i will be more than happy to help you guys and get you your iPhone 4 setup at my store. I'll be getting mine there. :)
No, we activate all phones in the store. we connect the phone to our cashlanes and open itunes and activate them after we are finished processing the upgrade inside ATT's system. The phone will be on, your numbers transferred and everything when you walk out the door. At least at my store. :)
But honestly this whole trade in thing sounds fishy. Why would they give you 270 for a phone you can buy brand new starting the launch date for half that.
Like i said, once the iPhone 4 launches, i would imagine the prices come down some on the trades, but as of last night, those were the values. We trade in 3G's for roughly $100 off 3G's all day at my store. Its a really good system. A lot of phones you don't get much for, like a original razr will get you about 10 bucks. We just pay out a lot for iphones.
This is a huge story. I don't understand why it wasn't posted on page 1 especially since learning of the Radio Shack Trade-In program. I think the Doctor should reconsider not putting this on Page 1. :confused:
Who do i need to PM this too, i would LOVE for The Shack to get this attention.
How can I check which stores will be carrying the phone on launch day? And also, if I go into a particular store next Tuesday and pre-order, you're saying I will be able to pick that phone up on the 24th?
Stores that carry the iPhone now should have them on launch, give your local store a call in the next few days and we should know.
this post is a LITTLE misleading... i looked on the site and it says UP TO
118$ for 8gb 3G.. which means it could go for less right ? if so you made it seems as not matter what your getting the prices you showed which i believe is wrong.. correct me if im wrong
Up to means we appraise the phone. In store we have a much more detailed system when we process the trade in. It's about 15 questions about the condition of the phone. If your phones in good shape, i promise you will get very close, if not exactly what the site says.
If you click on the phone you have it will ask for its condition and overall functionality. I have a newly-replaced 16gb 2G and it showed me that I can get $100 or something like that for it, for instance.
Thank you!!
Guys, if any of you are in DFW, shoot me a pm i will be more than happy to help you guys and get you your iPhone 4 setup at my store. I'll be getting mine there. :)
Macnoviz
Jul 22, 03:03 AM
So I read in this thread that Kentsfield and Clovertown ARE compatible with Conroe and Woodcrest sockets (respectively) (Cloverton or Clovertown?)
Hope for upgrading an iMac to Quad Core is kindled! At least if Apple releases Conroe iMacs.
BTW, In my opinion, one thing a person should never, ever say is some computer has too much power, and that it will never be needed. So when 128 core CPUs come out in ~10 years time, will we still be considering dual core CPUs as fast enough for our use?
I seem to remember that when the original DOS operating system was created, its RAM was limited. I can't remember exactly to how much, but it was decided that people would never use more than a few kilobytes of memory. Now we are arguing that Mac should provide no less than a gigabyte! Now we are moving to 64 bit processing, with its capability to address a few exobytes, or millions of Terabytes of storage, it seems impossible that we will ever need 128bit computing. But, no doubt, one day we will.
When we will be able to download our entire lives, and even conciousness into a computer, as is said to happen in about 40 years (very much looking forward to), I dare say it will take a lot of memory to do, and even more processing power to manage effectively, especially if we wanted to "live" inside computers, as we will no doubt want to do someday.
So as a conclusion to my most recent rant, Please, never tell me a computer is too powerfu, has too many cores, or has too much storage capacity. If it is there to be used, it will be used. It always is.
I agree with your point on never saying a computer is too powerful, although living in computers is probably not going to happen. Sounds a bit too Matrix-like for me.
Hope for upgrading an iMac to Quad Core is kindled! At least if Apple releases Conroe iMacs.
BTW, In my opinion, one thing a person should never, ever say is some computer has too much power, and that it will never be needed. So when 128 core CPUs come out in ~10 years time, will we still be considering dual core CPUs as fast enough for our use?
I seem to remember that when the original DOS operating system was created, its RAM was limited. I can't remember exactly to how much, but it was decided that people would never use more than a few kilobytes of memory. Now we are arguing that Mac should provide no less than a gigabyte! Now we are moving to 64 bit processing, with its capability to address a few exobytes, or millions of Terabytes of storage, it seems impossible that we will ever need 128bit computing. But, no doubt, one day we will.
When we will be able to download our entire lives, and even conciousness into a computer, as is said to happen in about 40 years (very much looking forward to), I dare say it will take a lot of memory to do, and even more processing power to manage effectively, especially if we wanted to "live" inside computers, as we will no doubt want to do someday.
So as a conclusion to my most recent rant, Please, never tell me a computer is too powerfu, has too many cores, or has too much storage capacity. If it is there to be used, it will be used. It always is.
I agree with your point on never saying a computer is too powerful, although living in computers is probably not going to happen. Sounds a bit too Matrix-like for me.
Flowbee
Aug 5, 04:06 PM
My longshot dream is the Mac Pro Cube.
aegisdesign
Sep 13, 12:30 PM
The Mac Pro isn't for most people. It's for professionals and professional applications, which are usally multithreaded, and will take advantage of the capabilities.
If you have a complaint about all these cores and not being able to take advantage of them, then this is not the computer for you. You're probably not using the software that will take advantage of them, so let it go and stop whining about it. For the those of us that do, this is great news.
It was just a general point, not a whine, so don't get your panties in a bunch. And some of the applications that don't take advantage of multiple cores currently are Adobe Photoshop and Quicktime which both rarely use more than two cores and sometimes only one. Both pretty important to professionals.
If you have a complaint about all these cores and not being able to take advantage of them, then this is not the computer for you. You're probably not using the software that will take advantage of them, so let it go and stop whining about it. For the those of us that do, this is great news.
It was just a general point, not a whine, so don't get your panties in a bunch. And some of the applications that don't take advantage of multiple cores currently are Adobe Photoshop and Quicktime which both rarely use more than two cores and sometimes only one. Both pretty important to professionals.
m-dogg
Aug 7, 04:06 PM
Time Machines sounds interesting, though I think I'd have to buy an external drive to ever use it.
What about Safari? Doesn't sound like there was any reference to this, except related to widgets. I'd love to have more control over tabs, like moving/rerranging thier order, adding a second row of tabs instead of the annoying arrow to see what doesn't fit on one row, moving a tab from one open Safari window to another, tab expose, alerts like Ollie's Tab so you don't accidentally close a window with multiple tabs, and a new unified UI to name a few...
What about Safari? Doesn't sound like there was any reference to this, except related to widgets. I'd love to have more control over tabs, like moving/rerranging thier order, adding a second row of tabs instead of the annoying arrow to see what doesn't fit on one row, moving a tab from one open Safari window to another, tab expose, alerts like Ollie's Tab so you don't accidentally close a window with multiple tabs, and a new unified UI to name a few...
Legion93
Apr 6, 03:34 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!
Don't get your hopes up, as any rumour is just a speculation. Apple may or may not release any updated version of the MBA very soon, but it can all depend. If you really want power, you could sell your Air for a MBP, which came out only couple months ago.
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!
Don't get your hopes up, as any rumour is just a speculation. Apple may or may not release any updated version of the MBA very soon, but it can all depend. If you really want power, you could sell your Air for a MBP, which came out only couple months ago.
iMikeT
Aug 5, 07:36 PM
I can't wait!
NebulaClash
Apr 6, 01:31 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
Motorola doesn't "get" tablets yet, but the G1 didn't sell well either. Let's look at the market again in two years, I bet it'll look a lot different.
In two years the iPad 4 will be trouncing whatever tablets are trying to top the year-old iPad 3s.
Motorola doesn't "get" tablets yet, but the G1 didn't sell well either. Let's look at the market again in two years, I bet it'll look a lot different.
In two years the iPad 4 will be trouncing whatever tablets are trying to top the year-old iPad 3s.
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.
dethmaShine
Apr 6, 10:11 AM
For a programmer dealing with Terminal, Xcode, Netbeans, Eclipse, etc (not graphic intensive softwares), would this macbook air be a better deal than the 13/15" Macbook pro?
Anyone?
Anyone?
bdkennedy1
Apr 11, 12:18 PM
Good. I'm tired of this yearly battle of upgrades.
samcraig
Apr 27, 08:43 AM
The iPhone is voluntary. You enabled location services.
Did you read ANY of the news articles.
With location services turned off, this data was still be collected. And Apple says this was a "bug"
So you're wrong.
Did you read ANY of the news articles.
With location services turned off, this data was still be collected. And Apple says this was a "bug"
So you're wrong.
sinisterdesign
Jul 20, 10:09 AM
eight cores + Tiger = Octopussy?!?
Trekkie
Sep 13, 05:42 PM
According to tha Anandtech article its likely that the Clovertown family will be clocked slower then the Woodcrests
clock speed isn't everything. workload dependant of course.
clock speed isn't everything. workload dependant of course.
balamw
Aug 7, 04:42 PM
Still, nothing fundamentally new, and definitely not Vista 2.0... ;)
Remember that Vista and Leopard are desktop OSes, not server OSes...
Anyhow, I'll wait until I see Vista 1.0 (not RC2) before I'm sure about that. ;)
B
Remember that Vista and Leopard are desktop OSes, not server OSes...
Anyhow, I'll wait until I see Vista 1.0 (not RC2) before I'm sure about that. ;)
B
netdog
Aug 11, 02:51 PM
I really think the time is coming soon where any phone that does not have Wifi that is easy to switch on and off will be considered obsolete.
brownpaw
Jun 11, 03:50 PM
I used to work at radioshack too and the resources there suck. Activation will take longer than usual and they can mess up your account/credit. I hated activating phones cause it was a hassle since we were not connected directly with carriers.
Now for Radioshack. Brother-in-Law goes and his credit gets run twice by child who works at Radioshack and signs him up to expensive plan. So they have to call their 3rd party service provider and the manager there and employee make a big mess of his ATT account and turns out the phone they had was from a customer return, not even brand new. He ends up just getting bad credit after 4 hrs in the stuffy dusty shack. We go to apple next week, now he has to put deposit cause his credit was messed up but guess what? thats right apple waived it as they saw the mistake and he gets a brand new phone. :) Radioshack = worse place to get any phone Apple = smart well trained employees
I just talked about these cases closest to me but I'll tell you those Radioshack employees are the worst to buy any cellphone from. you take a risk with your credit, used phone possibly, long activations, and bad locale.
Just wanted to say that generally when people have these types of experiences, they are at RadioShack franchises and not company-run (corporate) stores. I have worked at both in the past, and though it's been about 6 years, I can say that things were definitely very different.
Franchise stores, at the time, did indeed work through 3rd party processors for cell phones so it was easier to mess things up. However, it was all through a web interface so more often than not the problems stemmed from the interface crashing or it not being up to date with the latest promotions, etc, than actual user error.
Corporate stores also ran through a web interface but it was directly through the carrier so it was much more reliable.
The bigger problem with cell phones at RadioShack was consistency. The sales flyers would always talk about this deal or that deal, and oftentimes that deal wasn't even offered to franchise stores.
I think a bit of this has been resolved, and I wouldn't mind getting a phone through RadioShack nowadays if there was a good promotion.
However, as someone else said, RadioShack prices on most other things are ridiculously high. I felt terrible when I saw a guy at our store sell this old man a 30-ft HDMI cable for $300. Not kidding at all. I don't know how they stay in business, their prices on most things are not competitive at all.
sw
Now for Radioshack. Brother-in-Law goes and his credit gets run twice by child who works at Radioshack and signs him up to expensive plan. So they have to call their 3rd party service provider and the manager there and employee make a big mess of his ATT account and turns out the phone they had was from a customer return, not even brand new. He ends up just getting bad credit after 4 hrs in the stuffy dusty shack. We go to apple next week, now he has to put deposit cause his credit was messed up but guess what? thats right apple waived it as they saw the mistake and he gets a brand new phone. :) Radioshack = worse place to get any phone Apple = smart well trained employees
I just talked about these cases closest to me but I'll tell you those Radioshack employees are the worst to buy any cellphone from. you take a risk with your credit, used phone possibly, long activations, and bad locale.
Just wanted to say that generally when people have these types of experiences, they are at RadioShack franchises and not company-run (corporate) stores. I have worked at both in the past, and though it's been about 6 years, I can say that things were definitely very different.
Franchise stores, at the time, did indeed work through 3rd party processors for cell phones so it was easier to mess things up. However, it was all through a web interface so more often than not the problems stemmed from the interface crashing or it not being up to date with the latest promotions, etc, than actual user error.
Corporate stores also ran through a web interface but it was directly through the carrier so it was much more reliable.
The bigger problem with cell phones at RadioShack was consistency. The sales flyers would always talk about this deal or that deal, and oftentimes that deal wasn't even offered to franchise stores.
I think a bit of this has been resolved, and I wouldn't mind getting a phone through RadioShack nowadays if there was a good promotion.
However, as someone else said, RadioShack prices on most other things are ridiculously high. I felt terrible when I saw a guy at our store sell this old man a 30-ft HDMI cable for $300. Not kidding at all. I don't know how they stay in business, their prices on most things are not competitive at all.
sw
No comments:
Post a Comment