bearbo
Oct 10, 08:49 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Xeon#5100-series_.22Woodcrest.22
On 26 June Intel released the Dual-Core Xeon codenamed Woodcrest; it was the first Intel Core microarchitecture processor to be launched on the market. It is a server and workstation version of the Intel Core 2 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Core_2) processor. Intel claims that it provides an 80% boost in performance, while reducing power consumption by 20% relative to the Pentium D.
sure it mentioned intel core 2, but if you click on that link, and search for xeon, see what you can find.
the both use the Intel Core microarchitecture technology, however they are branded differently
You can also find Xeon information on Intel's Core 2 Duo page...
http://www.intel.com/core2duo/index.htm?iid=HMPAGE+Feature_06ww39
Where is your proof that the Woodcrest Xeon is not built on Core?
on the left side, is the only place that Xeon was listed. There are 5 processors listed there, however on the top where the tabs are, there are only 4, there is no xeon
something they taught in SAT's (i dont know if they still have this these days)
Merom:Woodcrest = C2D:Xeon... they are at the same level, but not one under the other
On 26 June Intel released the Dual-Core Xeon codenamed Woodcrest; it was the first Intel Core microarchitecture processor to be launched on the market. It is a server and workstation version of the Intel Core 2 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Core_2) processor. Intel claims that it provides an 80% boost in performance, while reducing power consumption by 20% relative to the Pentium D.
sure it mentioned intel core 2, but if you click on that link, and search for xeon, see what you can find.
the both use the Intel Core microarchitecture technology, however they are branded differently
You can also find Xeon information on Intel's Core 2 Duo page...
http://www.intel.com/core2duo/index.htm?iid=HMPAGE+Feature_06ww39
Where is your proof that the Woodcrest Xeon is not built on Core?
on the left side, is the only place that Xeon was listed. There are 5 processors listed there, however on the top where the tabs are, there are only 4, there is no xeon
something they taught in SAT's (i dont know if they still have this these days)
Merom:Woodcrest = C2D:Xeon... they are at the same level, but not one under the other
RaceTripper
Jan 9, 10:46 AM
I drive 5000+ miles worth of road trips each year. AT&T 3G is available for maybe 5-10% of that, and EDGE is mostly useless otherwise. I use Navigon and it works great. A GPS program that relies on live downloads would be a comlete disaster for me.
zeemeerman2
Apr 12, 12:45 PM
So what's fixed?
To me, in Office nothing seemed broken.
To me, in Office nothing seemed broken.
hsotnicam8002
Apr 13, 03:15 AM
I can't get this to work either even when the correct sync services box is checked. :confused:Doesn't work for me either. Turning to Time Machine now after messing up all of my calendars in the wasted time with this. :mad::mad::mad::mad:
more...
elusion
May 4, 07:55 AM
I am a very new mac user, having just switched in February with the purchase of my iBook. I'm 17 and have been using computers since I was like 6. I remember DOS, Apple IIes, Windows 3.1/95/98/ME/NT, Mac 8. I also spent a year using linux (Mandrake, Redhat, Debian) before going to a mac. I hate PCs.
You ask about hardware. That's not why I switched, though it was a nice bonus. I switched because of OS X.
I always use to be a Windows guy, from a Windows family. My brother's a MCSE. The previous experience I had with Apple was horrible. We had Apple's in our school computer lab, and they were crap. Nothing worked. Now I know that they weren't multitasking. I hated them with a passion and said I'd never use one.
Oh how things have changed. PCs have become the pieces of crap. Windows may be getting better with XP, but it's a different experience. Everything is just better with a Mac. Things just work, right away. I haven't used XP much, but I can tell you it doesn't work like this does.
Windows' interface sucks. Really it does. I'm sure you think the interface in MacOS X is horrible. It's not, it's different. And, it's better. It's easier just use, just because of the interface.
Windows' filesystem sucks. Unix machines have a much better filesystem -- none of the drive crap.
Windows software sucks. There is much less software for OS X than there is for XP. No one can deny that. Fortunately, the software for OS X is usually of a very high quality. It's very well designed and stable.
Windows' interoperability sucks. Windows runs on a huge variety of hardware, but that's noticible from the software. OS X just detects and sets up -- no wizards.
Really I don't expect you to believe this or anything. Maybe you will if you try using one. Things are going to be different for you because you use computers primarily for gaming. Maybe someday you'll end up switching to Linux because you don't like Windows. If you do, I almost guarentee you'll switch to Mac, because Linux's a pain to set up.
Oh, and getting away from Microsoft was good too. They are evil. Apple has potential to start a monopoly and become evil, but that's besides the point. Microsoft is doing things that are bad for the consumer. Wait and see.
You ask about hardware. That's not why I switched, though it was a nice bonus. I switched because of OS X.
I always use to be a Windows guy, from a Windows family. My brother's a MCSE. The previous experience I had with Apple was horrible. We had Apple's in our school computer lab, and they were crap. Nothing worked. Now I know that they weren't multitasking. I hated them with a passion and said I'd never use one.
Oh how things have changed. PCs have become the pieces of crap. Windows may be getting better with XP, but it's a different experience. Everything is just better with a Mac. Things just work, right away. I haven't used XP much, but I can tell you it doesn't work like this does.
Windows' interface sucks. Really it does. I'm sure you think the interface in MacOS X is horrible. It's not, it's different. And, it's better. It's easier just use, just because of the interface.
Windows' filesystem sucks. Unix machines have a much better filesystem -- none of the drive crap.
Windows software sucks. There is much less software for OS X than there is for XP. No one can deny that. Fortunately, the software for OS X is usually of a very high quality. It's very well designed and stable.
Windows' interoperability sucks. Windows runs on a huge variety of hardware, but that's noticible from the software. OS X just detects and sets up -- no wizards.
Really I don't expect you to believe this or anything. Maybe you will if you try using one. Things are going to be different for you because you use computers primarily for gaming. Maybe someday you'll end up switching to Linux because you don't like Windows. If you do, I almost guarentee you'll switch to Mac, because Linux's a pain to set up.
Oh, and getting away from Microsoft was good too. They are evil. Apple has potential to start a monopoly and become evil, but that's besides the point. Microsoft is doing things that are bad for the consumer. Wait and see.
aperez
Mar 30, 06:35 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7E18 Safari/528.16)
I'm still waiting for apple to address the full screen edit problem. The photo distorts and turns
either green or red when editing the photo especially using the shadow, highlight and sharpness tool. It's been months.
I'm still waiting for apple to address the full screen edit problem. The photo distorts and turns
either green or red when editing the photo especially using the shadow, highlight and sharpness tool. It's been months.
more...
Salty Pirate
Apr 25, 10:07 AM
A 15" air would be SICK:eek:
MatP
Apr 1, 12:52 PM
Woohoo! I have always wanted to be able to watch C-SPAN from somewhere besides my living room. Nothing will help you to fall asleep on the train better than some C-SPAN. C-SPAN 2! and 3! even better!:D
more...
CaoCao
Apr 16, 12:59 AM
Nobody is saying you can't discriminate against someone who's shoved a gun in your face and asked for all the money in your cash register.
However, what's your rationale for discriminating against someone who has sat down at a table and wants to order a hamburger and fries?
Males are far more likely to commit violent crimes than females. If you were worried about statistics, then it would make sense to open an "ladies only" establishment.
I'm pointing out just how ridiculous discrimination is ;)
However, what's your rationale for discriminating against someone who has sat down at a table and wants to order a hamburger and fries?
Males are far more likely to commit violent crimes than females. If you were worried about statistics, then it would make sense to open an "ladies only" establishment.
I'm pointing out just how ridiculous discrimination is ;)
basesloaded190
Jan 6, 03:25 PM
This is probably a very easy question, but how do I get to that screen?
Facebook under settings
Facebook under settings
more...
matthewroth
Sep 1, 03:24 AM
if you think that apple have enough time to speak to every one with this istalled you are wrong! they will however stop people distributing it... this has been shown many times over the past few weeks.
i am proud to say i am running 10.5 on my top end mini, and will be updating it to leopard beta V0.2
EDIT: YAY, this fixed my problem with external hard drive crashes and makes this Super Speedy!
i am proud to say i am running 10.5 on my top end mini, and will be updating it to leopard beta V0.2
EDIT: YAY, this fixed my problem with external hard drive crashes and makes this Super Speedy!
DoNoHarm
Mar 23, 06:26 PM
ipod warriors.
more...
Juan007
Apr 5, 10:28 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
CR is not qualified to review tech products. They need to stick to reviewing toasters. Any CR review of iPhone, iPad, etc is guaranteed to have 10% of the depth of a real review. Why even bother? Why give CR the page hits from being on the front page? Just let them fade into obscurity.
CR is obsolete.
CR is not qualified to review tech products. They need to stick to reviewing toasters. Any CR review of iPhone, iPad, etc is guaranteed to have 10% of the depth of a real review. Why even bother? Why give CR the page hits from being on the front page? Just let them fade into obscurity.
CR is obsolete.
zioxide
Mar 27, 10:22 AM
Yeah no thanks. Are you going to tax just individuals or corporations too? Taxing corporations that deliver goods would raise the costs of everything from milk to televisions.
How about if you need more tax revenue, you jack up taxes on imported goods? This will increase revenue, and maybe help prevent some of these companies from moving all their jobs to china.
How about if you need more tax revenue, you jack up taxes on imported goods? This will increase revenue, and maybe help prevent some of these companies from moving all their jobs to china.
more...
alamein
Nov 22, 11:09 PM
seeing the success of these kids i'm sure apple will start selling them too (only better quality)
dasmb
Apr 5, 09:04 AM
So I guess this means there's nothing wrong with the antenna?
more...
macFanDave
Nov 21, 11:41 PM
As a mechanical engineer, I'm not exactly cynical about this application of Eneco's technology, but I remain very, very skeptical. With such a relatively small temperature difference, I would say it is very unlikely that such a device would be economically feasible. A quick visit to Eneco's site shows me that they don't even have lab data for temperature differences of less than 100 deg C!
They obfuscate the issue of efficiency by referring to the Carnot efficiency to inflate the numbers to the uninitiated. Sadi Carnot showed that an ideal heat engine that operated between two infinite reservoirs at temperatures, T(hot) and T(cold) would have an efficiency of ( T(hot)-T(cold) ) / T(hot), and the temperatures have to be on an absolute scale like Kelvin or Rankine. The "Carnot efficiency" compares the performance of the system in question to this ideal heat engine.
Suppose you ran your chip at a very warm 90 deg C (363 K) and could dump the heat to your 25 deg C (298 K) room, your perfect efficiency would be about 18%! This means that for every 5W of heat you dissipate from the chip, you get a little less that 1 W of electric power. Something with an impressive-sounding 50% Carnot efficiency would really have a measly 9% real efficiency.
Unless Eneco sells these things very cheaply and makes them very small, I can't see Apple going through the trouble and expense of adding them to their portables for such a small benefit in recycled power. I remain skeptical, yet open-minded.
They obfuscate the issue of efficiency by referring to the Carnot efficiency to inflate the numbers to the uninitiated. Sadi Carnot showed that an ideal heat engine that operated between two infinite reservoirs at temperatures, T(hot) and T(cold) would have an efficiency of ( T(hot)-T(cold) ) / T(hot), and the temperatures have to be on an absolute scale like Kelvin or Rankine. The "Carnot efficiency" compares the performance of the system in question to this ideal heat engine.
Suppose you ran your chip at a very warm 90 deg C (363 K) and could dump the heat to your 25 deg C (298 K) room, your perfect efficiency would be about 18%! This means that for every 5W of heat you dissipate from the chip, you get a little less that 1 W of electric power. Something with an impressive-sounding 50% Carnot efficiency would really have a measly 9% real efficiency.
Unless Eneco sells these things very cheaply and makes them very small, I can't see Apple going through the trouble and expense of adding them to their portables for such a small benefit in recycled power. I remain skeptical, yet open-minded.
bwaltens
Mar 6, 05:03 PM
I'm thinking leaving work early on Friday and heading to the Southlake store will be a fun way to start off my weekend. I'm also hoping this isn't as crazy as an iPhone launch. I don't think it will be.
what time do you think you'll get there? I'm thinking i will get there at 3 and be okay. I want a white 32 wifi
what time do you think you'll get there? I'm thinking i will get there at 3 and be okay. I want a white 32 wifi
DoFoT9
Feb 28, 08:07 PM
nore
yeh that is that stupid Server.app. what an insult!
yeh that is that stupid Server.app. what an insult!
christian_k
Apr 28, 08:56 AM
When developers download and install Lion from the App Store, it does create a recover partition. No need to burn it to a disk or restore to USB, but of course you can if you want.
I would gladly pay a $15 premium to get Lion on a flash drive. DVD-based installs are just too slow and painful.
I think theys should offer it on flash drive as an option at least.
Imageine you have an 11'' MBA with 64 GB SSD:
- Space too tight for an additional recovery parition
- No drive to burn installation disc, maybe no USB drive for the MBA if you used another computer to do it.
- Possibly no 8GB+ flash drive at home to create a bootable yourself
. Panic recovery: MBA does not boot anymore. Install 10.5 from flash drive, download 10.6, update to 10.6 -> very long time
- Installation via HTTP/FTP: Dangerous when upgrading. If your connection fails during update your system is in an unpredictable state
- Many people in many places still do not have internet access fast enough to download a multi GB OS or they have volume caps.
Christian
I would gladly pay a $15 premium to get Lion on a flash drive. DVD-based installs are just too slow and painful.
I think theys should offer it on flash drive as an option at least.
Imageine you have an 11'' MBA with 64 GB SSD:
- Space too tight for an additional recovery parition
- No drive to burn installation disc, maybe no USB drive for the MBA if you used another computer to do it.
- Possibly no 8GB+ flash drive at home to create a bootable yourself
. Panic recovery: MBA does not boot anymore. Install 10.5 from flash drive, download 10.6, update to 10.6 -> very long time
- Installation via HTTP/FTP: Dangerous when upgrading. If your connection fails during update your system is in an unpredictable state
- Many people in many places still do not have internet access fast enough to download a multi GB OS or they have volume caps.
Christian
davidjearly
Dec 23, 07:29 AM
I actually find it amusing how much time you've spent making a big deal out of nothing here. But whatever puts the wind in your sails.
Again I find myself repeating what I've said already, but that's no more time than you and your man have arguing your point.
Again I find myself repeating what I've said already, but that's no more time than you and your man have arguing your point.
skunk
Sep 17, 10:42 AM
Not looking good. Unless she was hoping you'd follow her into the back of the store...
BWhaler
Nov 15, 12:08 AM
This is a brilliant idea.
I just don't buy the "mid-2007" part. Airlines don't move that fast.
I just don't buy the "mid-2007" part. Airlines don't move that fast.
Hellhammer
Apr 25, 07:06 AM
@ Retina display. I seriously doubt IGP 3000 is capable of even running OS X at this resolution let alone anything 3D based like a game.
Define Retina display. No, it's not +300 PPI. Well, it is if you are viewing it from 1 foot away like phones usually are. Computer screens are often viewed at 2 feet, making retina +150 PPI. This is what most people forget, the viewing distance!
Now:
13.3" 1440x900 = 128 PPI
11.6" 1366x768 = 135 PPI
Required for "retina":
13.3" 1680x1050 = 149 PPI (close enough)
11.6" 1600x900 = 158 PPI
Intel HD 3000 can drive 1280x800 internal simultaneously with up to 2560x1600 external monitor. And that is just in 13" MBP, I'm sure it can theoretically drive even more. "Retina" displays aren't that far off since the next step from 1440x900 and 1366x768 will be "retina".
Define Retina display. No, it's not +300 PPI. Well, it is if you are viewing it from 1 foot away like phones usually are. Computer screens are often viewed at 2 feet, making retina +150 PPI. This is what most people forget, the viewing distance!
Now:
13.3" 1440x900 = 128 PPI
11.6" 1366x768 = 135 PPI
Required for "retina":
13.3" 1680x1050 = 149 PPI (close enough)
11.6" 1600x900 = 158 PPI
Intel HD 3000 can drive 1280x800 internal simultaneously with up to 2560x1600 external monitor. And that is just in 13" MBP, I'm sure it can theoretically drive even more. "Retina" displays aren't that far off since the next step from 1440x900 and 1366x768 will be "retina".