ohaithar
Aug 22, 07:37 AM
I bought GT PSP and its as if the developers actively tried to suck all the enjoyment out of the series.
GT for the PSP did suck
GT for the PSP did suck
zacman
Apr 19, 03:29 PM
2.5 million more? Apple has likely sold more than double then number of iPhones in q1 2011 than q1 2010 (8.75 million).
I'm speaking about estimated Q1/11 to Q4/10 numbers (the est. Q1/11 numbers is what that news was about...). And what about reading the graphs I posted yourself? :rolleyes:
I'm speaking about estimated Q1/11 to Q4/10 numbers (the est. Q1/11 numbers is what that news was about...). And what about reading the graphs I posted yourself? :rolleyes:
aafuss1
Jul 14, 11:54 PM
Interesting question, but I don't think any of us here will have the answers.
PCs don't use EFI. I don't know if a generic AGP/PCIe card can be initialized by EFI, or if the card will need some EFI code to be on-board.
As for OS X, I think we can be fairly certain that Apple will only bundle drivers for cards that Apple sells. If you install a third-party card, they will probably tell you that you'll need a driver from the card's manufacturer - that's what they've historically told customers.
Generic VGA drivers? I'm sure they were developed - they'd be very useful during that time when OS X/Intel was internal-only. But I wouldn't expect them to be bundled with a shipping copy of the system software.
Now, assuming that the Mac firmware (including whatever EFI drivers they include in it) is capable of initializing a generic video card, then there should be no need for more than a device driver, which the card vendors can probably provide, if they are so inclined. If the cards will require special ROM code for EFI, however, then we're back to the same problem that plagued the PPC systems.
I agree-eg. to add a Crossfire configuration would mean that Apple would need to have a preference pane to configure that, which they don't-they supply a driver only.
PCs don't use EFI. I don't know if a generic AGP/PCIe card can be initialized by EFI, or if the card will need some EFI code to be on-board.
As for OS X, I think we can be fairly certain that Apple will only bundle drivers for cards that Apple sells. If you install a third-party card, they will probably tell you that you'll need a driver from the card's manufacturer - that's what they've historically told customers.
Generic VGA drivers? I'm sure they were developed - they'd be very useful during that time when OS X/Intel was internal-only. But I wouldn't expect them to be bundled with a shipping copy of the system software.
Now, assuming that the Mac firmware (including whatever EFI drivers they include in it) is capable of initializing a generic video card, then there should be no need for more than a device driver, which the card vendors can probably provide, if they are so inclined. If the cards will require special ROM code for EFI, however, then we're back to the same problem that plagued the PPC systems.
I agree-eg. to add a Crossfire configuration would mean that Apple would need to have a preference pane to configure that, which they don't-they supply a driver only.
marksman
Mar 22, 03:04 PM
I don't get all the negative ratings/comments.
1. Competition is good (I know this is hardly an original point)
People keep saying that but in the smartphone market and now especially in the tablet market we have seen no evidence of that at all.
In the tablet market Apple has released an iPad and an iPad 2 with literally no competition to impact their design or product and they have both been home runs.
In the smart phone market, the iPhone came along and 4+ years later the only competition are all iPhone clones. There is no competition pushing or driving the market. Apple drives the market for both these segments and they do it regardless of what the competition is doing... and all the competition is doing in both cases is copying Apple, so that makes no difference at all.
So besides being cliche and tired, the competition is good mantra is not even accurate or true when it comes to these Apple market segments.
1. Competition is good (I know this is hardly an original point)
People keep saying that but in the smartphone market and now especially in the tablet market we have seen no evidence of that at all.
In the tablet market Apple has released an iPad and an iPad 2 with literally no competition to impact their design or product and they have both been home runs.
In the smart phone market, the iPhone came along and 4+ years later the only competition are all iPhone clones. There is no competition pushing or driving the market. Apple drives the market for both these segments and they do it regardless of what the competition is doing... and all the competition is doing in both cases is copying Apple, so that makes no difference at all.
So besides being cliche and tired, the competition is good mantra is not even accurate or true when it comes to these Apple market segments.
brsboarder
Apr 11, 06:35 PM
Apple is already starting to fall behind in the cell phone market, the iphone 4 has the best gui, but not the best specs...waiting till Christmas will only push them farther behind
netdog
Aug 11, 03:22 PM
First, what makes you think the cellusage is similar to internet????? Mind blowing step here.
Secondly, Europa has 291 million internet users; North america US&Canada 227 milion; Rest of the world 500 million
Hence europe would be close to 30% of the total market???? What about india??? Japan??? china??? come on you cant say jack *** from this statistics
China, having bypassed installing a massive landline strucutre, now has enormous GSM network penetration.
India is also a HUGE GSM market.
Secondly, Europa has 291 million internet users; North america US&Canada 227 milion; Rest of the world 500 million
Hence europe would be close to 30% of the total market???? What about india??? Japan??? china??? come on you cant say jack *** from this statistics
China, having bypassed installing a massive landline strucutre, now has enormous GSM network penetration.
India is also a HUGE GSM market.
SevenInchScrew
Aug 12, 11:05 AM
similar genre given racing, but one is a simulator - the other is, a bit more fictional (in a sense).
but anyway, thats a technicality. no doubt that NFS seems to be higher grossing and more popular, as GT targets a pretty acute market. i wonder if GT5 will change that at all.
My point is, he was trying to use GT's high sales as a quantifier of the series greatness. Then, when I showed 2 examples of other racing game series with higher sales, he said they were different types of racing games, and that they don't count. Which is understandable, because they are not the same type of game. But then, ultimately, as I said before, if you don't count those other types of racing games, you're really only comparing GT to Forza, since that is the only other similar game.
But what does that prove? A game series that has been out for almost 13 years has sold more than a similar type of game series that has only been out for a little over 5 years. Big shock there. I'll be the first to admit that Forza isn't even remotely close to as big of a sales hit as the GT series. But, like I've said before, liking a game is a subjective thing, and everyone is entitled to their own choices. But sales are an objective thing, that has no relevance to somethings greatness.
but anyway, thats a technicality. no doubt that NFS seems to be higher grossing and more popular, as GT targets a pretty acute market. i wonder if GT5 will change that at all.
My point is, he was trying to use GT's high sales as a quantifier of the series greatness. Then, when I showed 2 examples of other racing game series with higher sales, he said they were different types of racing games, and that they don't count. Which is understandable, because they are not the same type of game. But then, ultimately, as I said before, if you don't count those other types of racing games, you're really only comparing GT to Forza, since that is the only other similar game.
But what does that prove? A game series that has been out for almost 13 years has sold more than a similar type of game series that has only been out for a little over 5 years. Big shock there. I'll be the first to admit that Forza isn't even remotely close to as big of a sales hit as the GT series. But, like I've said before, liking a game is a subjective thing, and everyone is entitled to their own choices. But sales are an objective thing, that has no relevance to somethings greatness.
NoSmokingBandit
Dec 8, 10:18 AM
Actually, Sony explained that the damage is not unlocked or progressive as one dives deeper into the game. It's just that as one goes further into the game, one is able to FINALLY collect more premium cars which do have the better damage engine.
I have close to 20 premium cars (level 17) and i've not noticed much in the way of damage. I do generally drive very safely though.
I both love and hate how many tracks there are in the game. Cape Ring Periphery has quickly become one of my favorites and it only shows up in a few evens. The full SSR5 track is incredible as well, but it isnt used as much as it should be, imo. They use Tsukuba and Suzuka a lot early on and i was getting tired of them by the time i got to the Pro races.
I have close to 20 premium cars (level 17) and i've not noticed much in the way of damage. I do generally drive very safely though.
I both love and hate how many tracks there are in the game. Cape Ring Periphery has quickly become one of my favorites and it only shows up in a few evens. The full SSR5 track is incredible as well, but it isnt used as much as it should be, imo. They use Tsukuba and Suzuka a lot early on and i was getting tired of them by the time i got to the Pro races.
marksman
Mar 31, 09:09 PM
I neither agree or disagree with this statement, I'm just very curious as to whether or not it is true. Anyone have an data that can prove/disprove this?
I have just tried to find some information on this, and the only information I can find are two seperate quarters where a blackberry phone was number 1 for that particular quarter. The 3G was second in that quarter. In another instance, Blackberry was #1 for a quarter, and the 3GS was #2 and the 3G was #4.
There is a lack of data actually listing the top selling individual smartphones out there.
The interesting thing is I suspect the other top selling phones are all Blackberry devices. Maybe the Droid would be in there, but I suspect if you did a top 10 only one android device would be there.
I have just tried to find some information on this, and the only information I can find are two seperate quarters where a blackberry phone was number 1 for that particular quarter. The 3G was second in that quarter. In another instance, Blackberry was #1 for a quarter, and the 3GS was #2 and the 3G was #4.
There is a lack of data actually listing the top selling individual smartphones out there.
The interesting thing is I suspect the other top selling phones are all Blackberry devices. Maybe the Droid would be in there, but I suspect if you did a top 10 only one android device would be there.
firestarter
Apr 12, 03:10 PM
Would not excluding capture from tape be quite dumb?
Maybe I'm the stone age man using XH A1...
You could use an app to turn it into a file first.
That's what effectively happens anyway...
Maybe I'm the stone age man using XH A1...
You could use an app to turn it into a file first.
That's what effectively happens anyway...
mactoday
Apr 6, 10:55 AM
Since you have no clue how the sandy bridge airs will perform, I'll take your statement as FUD.
Actually 320m performs better then Intel 3000, so the dude is right that graphics chip in SB is slower.
Actually 320m performs better then Intel 3000, so the dude is right that graphics chip in SB is slower.
janstett
Sep 15, 07:48 AM
The Today show is an embarrassment. The US major tv networks do not have any real morning news programs. How to trim your dog's ears and an inside look into American Idol contestants is NOT NEWS. It is an entertainment talk show.
The network morning "news" shows have always been fluff. What's worse is that the so-called "hard news" shows are just as bad, and not just in the morning -- CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News all run mindless fluff instead of news. And don't get me started with MSNBC airing Eye-Puss in the Morning.
The network morning "news" shows have always been fluff. What's worse is that the so-called "hard news" shows are just as bad, and not just in the morning -- CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News all run mindless fluff instead of news. And don't get me started with MSNBC airing Eye-Puss in the Morning.
vincenz
Apr 27, 07:58 AM
A "bug" right? ;)
wtmk81
Mar 22, 01:41 PM
Blackberry playbook = The IPad 2 killer - you heard it here first.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
I'd agree with you, but the Playbook is showing up Sunday for a party on Saturday. It had a chance, but I think the late release killed it.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
I'd agree with you, but the Playbook is showing up Sunday for a party on Saturday. It had a chance, but I think the late release killed it.
Yvan256
Apr 6, 01:45 PM
Once people start buying and using software (even freeware), the game is over. Most people don't want to lose what they use right now, it's their "personal software libraries".
That's why Microsoft Windows still dominates the desktop and even a free OS like Linux cannot compete. More than two decades of Windows near-monopoly on the desktop can't be pushed aside as easily as OSS folks would like to, though they did win on the server side.
That's also why the iPad currently dominates the tablet market and probably will for at least a few years down the road. The only chance competitors have is to sell a tablet for at most half the price of the iPad, with equivalent features (browser, music, videos, books). Unfortunately for them, the iPad can also run software made for the iPhone and iPod touch, so they are much more than a year late as far as "personal software libraries" go.
Apple, on the other hand, are simply competing with themselves. Their goal doesn't appear to be "beat the competitors products", it's probably "beat the previous iteration of our own product".
Twice as much RAM, faster dual-core CPU, up to 9 times faster GPU, facetime cameras... the iPad 1 just can't compare to the iPad 2. Imagine what's to come for future models.
That's why Microsoft Windows still dominates the desktop and even a free OS like Linux cannot compete. More than two decades of Windows near-monopoly on the desktop can't be pushed aside as easily as OSS folks would like to, though they did win on the server side.
That's also why the iPad currently dominates the tablet market and probably will for at least a few years down the road. The only chance competitors have is to sell a tablet for at most half the price of the iPad, with equivalent features (browser, music, videos, books). Unfortunately for them, the iPad can also run software made for the iPhone and iPod touch, so they are much more than a year late as far as "personal software libraries" go.
Apple, on the other hand, are simply competing with themselves. Their goal doesn't appear to be "beat the competitors products", it's probably "beat the previous iteration of our own product".
Twice as much RAM, faster dual-core CPU, up to 9 times faster GPU, facetime cameras... the iPad 1 just can't compare to the iPad 2. Imagine what's to come for future models.
smaffei
Apr 27, 08:05 AM
A lot of people are upset over this. But, no one seems to care that the US Government can snoop on any electronic communication it wants for well over 10 years now: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Echelon_(signals_intelligence)
Data transmissions, cell phone calls, you name it. I think we're trying to cook the wrong goose if you ask me.
Data transmissions, cell phone calls, you name it. I think we're trying to cook the wrong goose if you ask me.
gnasher729
Jul 27, 05:59 PM
but is still more productive because it handles more calculations per clock cycle
I'm no processor geek. I have a basic understanding of the terminology and how things work so correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't this one of the advantages that the PPC had over Intel chips? Does this mean Intel is moving toward shorter pipes? Are we talking more instructions per clock cycle or what? What does "calculations" mean in this context?
With most processors, especially the Intel/AMD processors, "instructions per cycle" is not a useful number. These processors have both simple instructions (add register number 3 to register number 6) and complex instructions (add register number 3 to the number whose address is in register number 6). A PowerPC has the simple instructions, but not the complex ones. Instead it would need three instructions "load the number whose address is in register number 6, and move it to register 7", "add register 3 to register 7", "store register 7 to the location whose address is in register 6". But the Intel processor doesn't magically do three times as much work. Instead, it splits the complex instruction into three so-called "macro-ops", and does exactly the same work. So in this case, the PowerPC would execute three times as many instructions per cycle (3 instead of 1), but because it doesn't do more actual work, that is pointless. Instead you would count the number of operations, and they are more or less the same.
Intel is indeed moving towards shorter pipelines. They have done that already with the Core Duo chips. Longer pipelines have the advantage that each pipeline step is a bit faster, so you can get higher clockspeed. Shorter pipelines have the advantage that they take much less energy (very important; at some point your chips just melt), they are much faster handling branches, and they are just much much easier to design. Pentium 4 needed absolutely heroic efforts to produce it, and would have needed twice the heroics to improve it. Instead, the Core Duo has a much simpler design, that is just as powerful, and because it was so simple, Core 2 Duo could improve it.
And Core 2 Duo can now execute up to four "micro-ops" per cycle, same as the G5, compared to three for Core Duo, Pentium 4 and G4. It also has some clever features that reduce the number of micro-ops needed up to 10 percent, and some other improvements.
I'm no processor geek. I have a basic understanding of the terminology and how things work so correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't this one of the advantages that the PPC had over Intel chips? Does this mean Intel is moving toward shorter pipes? Are we talking more instructions per clock cycle or what? What does "calculations" mean in this context?
With most processors, especially the Intel/AMD processors, "instructions per cycle" is not a useful number. These processors have both simple instructions (add register number 3 to register number 6) and complex instructions (add register number 3 to the number whose address is in register number 6). A PowerPC has the simple instructions, but not the complex ones. Instead it would need three instructions "load the number whose address is in register number 6, and move it to register 7", "add register 3 to register 7", "store register 7 to the location whose address is in register 6". But the Intel processor doesn't magically do three times as much work. Instead, it splits the complex instruction into three so-called "macro-ops", and does exactly the same work. So in this case, the PowerPC would execute three times as many instructions per cycle (3 instead of 1), but because it doesn't do more actual work, that is pointless. Instead you would count the number of operations, and they are more or less the same.
Intel is indeed moving towards shorter pipelines. They have done that already with the Core Duo chips. Longer pipelines have the advantage that each pipeline step is a bit faster, so you can get higher clockspeed. Shorter pipelines have the advantage that they take much less energy (very important; at some point your chips just melt), they are much faster handling branches, and they are just much much easier to design. Pentium 4 needed absolutely heroic efforts to produce it, and would have needed twice the heroics to improve it. Instead, the Core Duo has a much simpler design, that is just as powerful, and because it was so simple, Core 2 Duo could improve it.
And Core 2 Duo can now execute up to four "micro-ops" per cycle, same as the G5, compared to three for Core Duo, Pentium 4 and G4. It also has some clever features that reduce the number of micro-ops needed up to 10 percent, and some other improvements.
fblack
Nov 28, 07:29 PM
it's ridiculous for Universal to even be thinking this. NONE of the money would get to artists or anything like that. it would just go to the company.
also. i dont pirate music.
alot of itunes people don't. we are the people actually paying for it. so screw that.
Actually I read that Universal is planning in giving some royalties to artists from their zune deal (I believe it might have been businessweek). This of course would be a ploy to get some major acts, U2 maybe, on the side of the recording industry to pressure Apple to give up a piece of ipod sales.
Greed is too small a word for all of this. Evil comes closer and this has Microsofts' stink all over it. They gave IE away free in order to destroy Netscape, they operated xbox at a loss in order to gain market share, and now they will give up profits for market share and try to lure labels away from apple (or at least hurt apple's bottom line). What happens when all labels even indies want a piece of ipod sales? This is M$ making everyone greedy and that's evil.:mad:
also. i dont pirate music.
alot of itunes people don't. we are the people actually paying for it. so screw that.
Actually I read that Universal is planning in giving some royalties to artists from their zune deal (I believe it might have been businessweek). This of course would be a ploy to get some major acts, U2 maybe, on the side of the recording industry to pressure Apple to give up a piece of ipod sales.
Greed is too small a word for all of this. Evil comes closer and this has Microsofts' stink all over it. They gave IE away free in order to destroy Netscape, they operated xbox at a loss in order to gain market share, and now they will give up profits for market share and try to lure labels away from apple (or at least hurt apple's bottom line). What happens when all labels even indies want a piece of ipod sales? This is M$ making everyone greedy and that's evil.:mad:
MrXiro
Apr 8, 12:22 AM
I wouldn't be surprised. The quota explanation was given already, but they might also be holding back stock of the cheaper models in order to drive more sales of the higher end ones. "Oh, you wanted the 16 gig wifi model? Sorry, all sold out. But we do have this lovely 64 gig 3G version. If you really want the iPad 2, this is your big chance... it's only a little bit more..."
That happened to me, almost, when I bought the original iPad from Best Buy here in Canada on our launch day last year. The guy almost smirked when he said, sorry, the 16 gig ones were all sold out, but they had plenty of the 64 gig models. Luckily I persisted and he managed to find one more 16 gig, the last one! How lucky was that! :rolleyes:
Hmm... I think they did that to me! I went in just a few hours after the iPad 2 went on sale... they said all they had left was the 64gb Verizon model. :-/
I have an iPad already... I was just asking to see how they were selling.
That happened to me, almost, when I bought the original iPad from Best Buy here in Canada on our launch day last year. The guy almost smirked when he said, sorry, the 16 gig ones were all sold out, but they had plenty of the 64 gig models. Luckily I persisted and he managed to find one more 16 gig, the last one! How lucky was that! :rolleyes:
Hmm... I think they did that to me! I went in just a few hours after the iPad 2 went on sale... they said all they had left was the 64gb Verizon model. :-/
I have an iPad already... I was just asking to see how they were selling.
leekohler
Apr 27, 02:26 PM
They're not. The proper file is flat. I downloaded and opened the PDF from the White House. Flat in both Illustrator and Photoshop, just one group on one layer... and no security on the PDF. No embedded fonts.
This is a fraud.
Uh huh- thanks again, fivepoint.
This is a fraud.
Uh huh- thanks again, fivepoint.
Chaszmyr
Jul 27, 10:04 AM
Rule 1 of Apple Events:
You never get all the marbles.
Very, very true. You usually only get half the things you expect... the real gem is when you get something you didn't expect.
You never get all the marbles.
Very, very true. You usually only get half the things you expect... the real gem is when you get something you didn't expect.
TangoCharlie
Jul 20, 11:25 AM
You realize there are probably only four people on this board who are old enough to get that joke, right? [snip]
I'm one of them! :eek: What I woudn't have given for a Quadra 650 when they came out. I was stuck with an LC (original pizza box Mac). In fact, I'd have been happy with the LC475 (which was basically a cut-down Quadra 605)!! :)
Eventually did get an LC475... minus the case. Oh, those were the days!
I'm one of them! :eek: What I woudn't have given for a Quadra 650 when they came out. I was stuck with an LC (original pizza box Mac). In fact, I'd have been happy with the LC475 (which was basically a cut-down Quadra 605)!! :)
Eventually did get an LC475... minus the case. Oh, those were the days!
hobi316
Jun 9, 02:15 PM
I just called a local store here in SC and this was pretty much all confirmed. His computer system was down, so he didn't have the info in front of him, but he said it would run pretty much like the EVO did, with a $50 downpayment for the pre-orders. Unfortunately he wasn't yet sure if all stores would be doing pre-orders or just the "in-stock" stores. I'll call back Monday to see if that store can get me a phone on the 24th, since it's close to my work. We'll see, I guess.
Silentwave
Aug 17, 11:05 AM
pc world, september issue, mentioned amd's plan for a quad core processor in 2007 and if that happens, some pc box will be faster than our best xeon powered machines...that is, he he, unless we get that quad core K8L amd with their 4x4 motherboard architecture which would enable a desktop to run two quads for a total of 8 amd cores (but the price of such a machine will debut at a very high price and probably won't directly compete with the mac pro)
Um....that's why intel has quad core chips coming out...starting in *2006*
On the Xeon side, Clovertown, on the consumer side, kentsfield. Sometime in the first half of 2007 I believe we'll see Tigerton, which will be an even more formidable quad core xeon, capable of more than 2 processor configurations- so if apple gets a 3 socket logic board, or a 4 socket one, we could have 12 or 16 cores.
Um....that's why intel has quad core chips coming out...starting in *2006*
On the Xeon side, Clovertown, on the consumer side, kentsfield. Sometime in the first half of 2007 I believe we'll see Tigerton, which will be an even more formidable quad core xeon, capable of more than 2 processor configurations- so if apple gets a 3 socket logic board, or a 4 socket one, we could have 12 or 16 cores.
