cube
May 3, 12:11 PM
I understand that Eyefinity offers a single display per connector. The best example being the 5/6 Mini DisplayPort video cards on the market.
What I have not seen are daisy chaining multiple displays from a single DisplayPort connector (via proper cabling) or from a passthrough based on a display to an additional monitor.
You can see the multiple monitor setups for those cards in the usual hardware sites.
What I have not seen are daisy chaining multiple displays from a single DisplayPort connector (via proper cabling) or from a passthrough based on a display to an additional monitor.
You can see the multiple monitor setups for those cards in the usual hardware sites.
kdarling
Apr 19, 01:44 PM
Wait, people actually still listen to actual radios?
Please read post #162 above (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=12421810&postcount=162), for a definition of "radio controls" that is different from what you thought.
Please read post #162 above (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=12421810&postcount=162), for a definition of "radio controls" that is different from what you thought.
poppe
Sep 5, 08:54 PM
HecubusPro:
"C2D laptop information has come to a near stop"
Based on all of our POOR experience it is obvious that little real information on the Merom based MBP exists. I do not want to admit to all of the time I have wasted on this decision / upgrade. A new notebook is needed within a week - I can not bring myself to by a Yonah since I've waited this long - but............
Now - the next Tuesday (hahahahahahahahahaha) - 9/12 - then what:mad:
I've heard speculation of fricken october... So much for us all waiting if it doesnt come out next week...
"C2D laptop information has come to a near stop"
Based on all of our POOR experience it is obvious that little real information on the Merom based MBP exists. I do not want to admit to all of the time I have wasted on this decision / upgrade. A new notebook is needed within a week - I can not bring myself to by a Yonah since I've waited this long - but............
Now - the next Tuesday (hahahahahahahahahaha) - 9/12 - then what:mad:
I've heard speculation of fricken october... So much for us all waiting if it doesnt come out next week...
powers74
Mar 30, 12:51 PM
What is the App Store? It is a store where you buy apps, an app store.
It's not a "shed where you buy apps", for example.
Wow, great point. Care to pick off any of the other ideas?
It's not a "shed where you buy apps", for example.
Wow, great point. Care to pick off any of the other ideas?
Pravius
Apr 22, 08:12 AM
Really not getting this. Storage is a lot more cheap and plentiful than bandwidth. And the amount of music you can carry on an iphone - to say nothing of an ipod classic - is enough to listen to for days on end, 24 hrs a day, without repeat. Well, I'm glad if some find it useful, but I'll stick to local storage, thanks.
Personal preference really. I would personally pay for peace of mind knowing that my mechanical hard drives are not going to crash. Even backup and being redundant is not enough sometimes. If someone is willing to guarantee that I will never lose my content that I store on their shares then I am all in.
Personally my thought process will change on this when SSD's start getting more popular and larger.
Personal preference really. I would personally pay for peace of mind knowing that my mechanical hard drives are not going to crash. Even backup and being redundant is not enough sometimes. If someone is willing to guarantee that I will never lose my content that I store on their shares then I am all in.
Personally my thought process will change on this when SSD's start getting more popular and larger.
sunfast
Sep 13, 04:06 AM
Are independent developers going to be able to make iPod games? Maybe porting some of the freeware/shareware out there? Or is this an Apple only money spinner?
KnightWRX
Apr 23, 12:51 PM
If you read my post more carefully you'll understand I was referring to the people who play games on the 11". As far as I'm concerned, working on a laptop with an external monitor plugged in is an exception (rare) and not something common.
As far as you're concerned maybe, but as far as what's common or not, you're out of it. There's a reason every laptop out there has some kind of external display connector.
But silly me, I must be a moron for using the mini display port right ? :rolleyes:
Perhaps you mean it is capable of everything you need it to do. I used to have a laptop as a single computer at my home. It resembled a Christmas tree pretty much - it had an USB optical mouse, a printer, external speakers, a Yamaha keyboard, card reader and power cord plugged in. I was always plugging and unplugging cables whenever I wanted to move it to another place. Thank goodness I did not come to the idea to attach an external monitor to it.
You're doing it wrong. I plug in 4 cables. Power, Monitor, Speakers, USB. My keyboard/mouse/tablet/Printer/iPhone/iPod all get recognized instantly. That's what the USB hub on my desk is for. 1 cable, all devices.
If Apple had docks, it would be even better. Just drop the laptop in place and voila. But I guess docks just aren't esthetic enough.
There is nothing uncommon about it, so again, thank you for calling me stupid because I dare use a MBA as my only computer and I dare launch games on it, while connected to an external monitor of all things!
Keep your insults for yourself next time.
I was under the understanding that the reason that the current 320M has been so impressive considering the aging Duel Core CPU was the increased speed of data transfer from the SSD meaning a large increase in efficiency in both the CPU and the GPU.
Hum, no. The SSD is still a bottleneck compared to the bus speeds between the CPU and GPU. The 320M is impressive because the Intel GPU is so sub-par. Even a full power Sandy Bridge Intell 3000 HD barely compares to it, and then, only in benchmarks where the CPU is the bottleneck and the C2D is holding back the 320M. In pure GPU bottlenecked benchmarks, the 320M trumps the Intel 3000HD.
That's just the story with Intel. They always sucked at GPUs.
As far as you're concerned maybe, but as far as what's common or not, you're out of it. There's a reason every laptop out there has some kind of external display connector.
But silly me, I must be a moron for using the mini display port right ? :rolleyes:
Perhaps you mean it is capable of everything you need it to do. I used to have a laptop as a single computer at my home. It resembled a Christmas tree pretty much - it had an USB optical mouse, a printer, external speakers, a Yamaha keyboard, card reader and power cord plugged in. I was always plugging and unplugging cables whenever I wanted to move it to another place. Thank goodness I did not come to the idea to attach an external monitor to it.
You're doing it wrong. I plug in 4 cables. Power, Monitor, Speakers, USB. My keyboard/mouse/tablet/Printer/iPhone/iPod all get recognized instantly. That's what the USB hub on my desk is for. 1 cable, all devices.
If Apple had docks, it would be even better. Just drop the laptop in place and voila. But I guess docks just aren't esthetic enough.
There is nothing uncommon about it, so again, thank you for calling me stupid because I dare use a MBA as my only computer and I dare launch games on it, while connected to an external monitor of all things!
Keep your insults for yourself next time.
I was under the understanding that the reason that the current 320M has been so impressive considering the aging Duel Core CPU was the increased speed of data transfer from the SSD meaning a large increase in efficiency in both the CPU and the GPU.
Hum, no. The SSD is still a bottleneck compared to the bus speeds between the CPU and GPU. The 320M is impressive because the Intel GPU is so sub-par. Even a full power Sandy Bridge Intell 3000 HD barely compares to it, and then, only in benchmarks where the CPU is the bottleneck and the C2D is holding back the 320M. In pure GPU bottlenecked benchmarks, the 320M trumps the Intel 3000HD.
That's just the story with Intel. They always sucked at GPUs.
Josias
Aug 28, 12:26 PM
God I want a 15" Merom MBP, but I need to get rid of my MB first, and I want iLife '07 in them. I can't wait for Leopard. Please Steve, read it...:D
KnightWRX
Apr 22, 11:47 AM
Why would you think that? The Intel IGP can drive the same resolution on the 15" just fine.
My Matrox G200 AGP 4x card can drive these resolutions flawlessly, and it has only 8 MB of RAM and hails from 10 years ago. People seriously don't understand graphics performance and where it matters if they really think driving a framebuffer resolution is something we need modern hardware for.
My Matrox G200 AGP 4x card can drive these resolutions flawlessly, and it has only 8 MB of RAM and hails from 10 years ago. People seriously don't understand graphics performance and where it matters if they really think driving a framebuffer resolution is something we need modern hardware for.
OwlsAndApples
Oct 27, 08:12 AM
It's about time Apple got rid of some of the rubbish materials in their machines, it's not that the campaigners are trying to brusie Apple but encourage them to be better than their competitors. I mean, Apple already has many advantages over Windows, so surely 'Green' can be one of them.
Chris Bangle
Sep 1, 03:29 AM
I reckon Steves easily got rights to sell uk movies on itunes, hoping touchscreen thing, uk shows and moives and a iphone.
Has anyone seen how awesome this looks...
http://www.gizmodo.com/gadgets/portable-media/samsung-ypk5-mp3-mini-boombox-first-unboxing-review-and-video-198099.php
Has anyone seen how awesome this looks...
http://www.gizmodo.com/gadgets/portable-media/samsung-ypk5-mp3-mini-boombox-first-unboxing-review-and-video-198099.php
Optimus Frag
Apr 20, 10:58 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
With respect to all the "view with alarm" postings that will follow, this really doesn't mean anything. I leave my home at the same time every morning. The transponder in my car records my passage and debits my account with the state highway department. Traffic cameras record my license plate at several points during my journey. Once out of the car, my smiling phiz can be seen on any number of CCTVs en route to my office, whose door I open with a card that automatically records my entry. The IP address of this posting will reveal that I am sitting in my living room as I write. Even without the GPS turned on, my phone regularly initiates a conversation with the local cell tower. I can be found with almost pinpoint accuracy.
So I'm not exactly going to panic to learn that my computer and phone keep a record of my latitude and longitude that they don't share with anyone else.
The government already knows where I live, where I work, where I bank, and all kinds of other interesting information. It's how they collect their taxes and send me my mail.
If there were the slightest indication that liberals, atheists, and other enemies of the state were being tracked by their GPSes and rounded up, I'd be the first to the barricades. But there isn't. Our privacy is not based on "nobody knows", it's based on "nobody cares."
Precisely my feeling on the situation. If your not happy about the idea of being at all tracked and tagged I'm afraid it's not possible in today's interconnected electronic world. You have two choices, live with it and minimise what is recorded about you, which will severely limit the ways you have chosen to live your life thus far. Or the second choice. Give everything you have to charity, buy a quality survival knife in cash and move to the jungles of South America and live off the land, in a cave and hope that the Google Earth photography plane doesn't take a snap of you wiping your bum with a cocoa plant leaf.
With respect to all the "view with alarm" postings that will follow, this really doesn't mean anything. I leave my home at the same time every morning. The transponder in my car records my passage and debits my account with the state highway department. Traffic cameras record my license plate at several points during my journey. Once out of the car, my smiling phiz can be seen on any number of CCTVs en route to my office, whose door I open with a card that automatically records my entry. The IP address of this posting will reveal that I am sitting in my living room as I write. Even without the GPS turned on, my phone regularly initiates a conversation with the local cell tower. I can be found with almost pinpoint accuracy.
So I'm not exactly going to panic to learn that my computer and phone keep a record of my latitude and longitude that they don't share with anyone else.
The government already knows where I live, where I work, where I bank, and all kinds of other interesting information. It's how they collect their taxes and send me my mail.
If there were the slightest indication that liberals, atheists, and other enemies of the state were being tracked by their GPSes and rounded up, I'd be the first to the barricades. But there isn't. Our privacy is not based on "nobody knows", it's based on "nobody cares."
Precisely my feeling on the situation. If your not happy about the idea of being at all tracked and tagged I'm afraid it's not possible in today's interconnected electronic world. You have two choices, live with it and minimise what is recorded about you, which will severely limit the ways you have chosen to live your life thus far. Or the second choice. Give everything you have to charity, buy a quality survival knife in cash and move to the jungles of South America and live off the land, in a cave and hope that the Google Earth photography plane doesn't take a snap of you wiping your bum with a cocoa plant leaf.
Zimmy
Sep 14, 06:21 AM
Um how about to send a text? i used the nokia with the scroll thing to write a text, dam it takes too long..
Steve needs a world wide acceptable design, and not included a keypad, or call, hang up buttons, the phone is gonna have to have it. .
zim
Steve needs a world wide acceptable design, and not included a keypad, or call, hang up buttons, the phone is gonna have to have it. .
zim
CorvusCamenarum
Apr 20, 03:03 AM
I don't mean the parents, I meant those who run McDonalds.
Yes, murder them all. Just tonight as I was driving by a McDonalds, three corporate execs ran out, caught me at a red light, and forced a Big Mac down my throat. Thank god I didn't drive by the Krystal's, too - those soggy little gut bombers would have put a hurting on me.
Not you, the poster you were quoting was being sarcastic. I was drawing your attention to his sarcasism.
I wasn't being sarcastic. I was making his post(s) seem even more ridiculous than they come off as being, considering I don't think anyone in the history of time has ever been forced to eat at burger joints morning, noon, and night.
Yes, murder them all. Just tonight as I was driving by a McDonalds, three corporate execs ran out, caught me at a red light, and forced a Big Mac down my throat. Thank god I didn't drive by the Krystal's, too - those soggy little gut bombers would have put a hurting on me.
Not you, the poster you were quoting was being sarcastic. I was drawing your attention to his sarcasism.
I wasn't being sarcastic. I was making his post(s) seem even more ridiculous than they come off as being, considering I don't think anyone in the history of time has ever been forced to eat at burger joints morning, noon, and night.
Zwhaler
Sep 5, 05:54 PM
Strange, the movie store is the thing that I am least excited about :confused: But I still hope for new imac and/or mbp.
mrkramer
Apr 25, 01:30 AM
I really don't think it is necessary to call me or any member of my family "pathetic." There's nothing wrong with manipulating the system to your advantage, if you do it for a valid purpose (such as teaching a crappy driver a lesson).
-Don
It's definitely unethical, but maybe someday someone will do it for a valid purpose and teach you a lesson.
-Don
It's definitely unethical, but maybe someday someone will do it for a valid purpose and teach you a lesson.
afrowq
Mar 22, 10:04 PM
What I find extremely interesting is the LACK of rumors on the MacBook - it's the oldest Mac in the lineup and is extremely overdue for an upgrade (almost double it's normal product cycle). :confused:
According to Macrumors Buyers' Guide the Mac Pro is the oldest Mac in the lineup. Not the Macbook.
According to Macrumors Buyers' Guide the Mac Pro is the oldest Mac in the lineup. Not the Macbook.
IMPMAC
Apr 4, 12:11 PM
Did he use an iGun?
bamf
Apr 4, 11:48 AM
If you read the linked article you will see that the guard exchanged gunfire with the 2 male suspects. It's not excessive to try to save your own life...
poppe
Sep 5, 10:02 PM
My Guess:
Just think if that Data Center Apple bought was acctually a place to store alll the studios movies. Then you pay 9.99 for the rights to what ever movie and it is streamed Slingbox style to your Airport Extreme that has HDMI, Component, Composite etc outlets for your TV. Then you have your movie you bought anytime all the time but never have to take storage of your own, and never have to deal with downloading or anything.
You heard it hear first!
Just think if that Data Center Apple bought was acctually a place to store alll the studios movies. Then you pay 9.99 for the rights to what ever movie and it is streamed Slingbox style to your Airport Extreme that has HDMI, Component, Composite etc outlets for your TV. Then you have your movie you bought anytime all the time but never have to take storage of your own, and never have to deal with downloading or anything.
You heard it hear first!
kurtsayin
Oct 12, 11:14 PM
It makes me so happy to know that there are still plenty of stupid people in the world.
Thank you
LOL me too! What is so stupid about solving the problem with total success following my logic? Just because people are not going to follow my advice, does not mean that is somehow sophomoric.
Thank you
LOL me too! What is so stupid about solving the problem with total success following my logic? Just because people are not going to follow my advice, does not mean that is somehow sophomoric.
cmaier
Nov 13, 11:51 PM
Which law firm please. We'd all like to know for future reference, who to not trust our cases with. While most law has to do with the letter of the law, jury trials often are won or lost based on what the jury believes to be the intent or spirit of the law.
The british common law legal system was never intended to be like this. The lawyers have destroyed and twisted it beyond all recognition. It was originally supposed to be based on judeo-christian morals and ethics. There is not supposed to be a grey area. You are either deliberately infringing on the rights of others or you are not. The original intent was to have a court case as the last resort where parties would first try to solve the problem by talking to each other, then go to arbitration and then court as a last resort.
Wow. That's quite a diatribe. Historically inaccurate, too. English common law descends from the Roman system of laws that predates christianity (and which was not based on judaism) and from Saxon law, which also has nothing to do with judeo-christian ethics.
And juries are given instructions to follow the letter of the law as explained to them by the judge. Further, in the U.S. system, only matters at law, not equity, are subject to jury trial, and, in many cases, only if the defendant demands a jury trial.
You say:
"You are either deliberately infringing on the rights of others or you are not."
Ok. So when your third grader copies a few quotes from a book for his book report, he is infringing the copyright statute. But, of course, you complain that it's not the letter of the law that matters - it's the spirit. That's why judges came up with the fair use defense (later codified into the statute).
But what if the third grader copies 10 quotes? Still okay? A chapter? How about now? Where's the dividing line? What if instead of a third grader, it's another author who copies a few of the best quotes and competes with the first author? How about then? Gets more complicated, huh?
And that's why the fair use defense has evolved into a complicated legal test involving multiple factors. Among the factors:
the purpose and character of your use
the nature of the copyrighted work
the amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and
the effect of the use upon the potential market.
Let's look at these.
1) the purpose and character of your use
This is often called the transformative test. Am I creating something new and different and worthwhile to society, involving my own creativity? Many people say that the use in this case was pretty creative and useful, but let's assume no. So this factor weighs against fair use.
2) the nature of the copyrighted work
Published works, such as these icons, are entitled to less protection than unpublished. Also, factual or representative works, such as icons, are entitled to less protection than creative works like novels. So this factor weighs for fair use.
3) the amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and
A handful of icons out of an entire operating system? Seems small to me. Weighs for fair use.
4) the effect of the use upon the potential market.
By using these icons, is the "infringer" somehow preventing Apple from selling this sort of software, or preventing Apple from selling these icons? No. Again, weighs for fair use.
You simultaneously argue that things are black and white (you either infringe or you don't) and then you argue that the spirit of the law matters, not the letter. You argue for a bright line test, then for shades of gray.
Well, the answer is a little of both, but men and women far smarter than you have come up with the best tests they can to figure out how to deal with these fuzzy situations.
You can go to church and pray instead of going to court, if you'd like, but for those of us that believe in the legal system, we take solace in the fact that things really aren't black and white, and yet there is a framework in place that let's us try and figure these things out.
The british common law legal system was never intended to be like this. The lawyers have destroyed and twisted it beyond all recognition. It was originally supposed to be based on judeo-christian morals and ethics. There is not supposed to be a grey area. You are either deliberately infringing on the rights of others or you are not. The original intent was to have a court case as the last resort where parties would first try to solve the problem by talking to each other, then go to arbitration and then court as a last resort.
Wow. That's quite a diatribe. Historically inaccurate, too. English common law descends from the Roman system of laws that predates christianity (and which was not based on judaism) and from Saxon law, which also has nothing to do with judeo-christian ethics.
And juries are given instructions to follow the letter of the law as explained to them by the judge. Further, in the U.S. system, only matters at law, not equity, are subject to jury trial, and, in many cases, only if the defendant demands a jury trial.
You say:
"You are either deliberately infringing on the rights of others or you are not."
Ok. So when your third grader copies a few quotes from a book for his book report, he is infringing the copyright statute. But, of course, you complain that it's not the letter of the law that matters - it's the spirit. That's why judges came up with the fair use defense (later codified into the statute).
But what if the third grader copies 10 quotes? Still okay? A chapter? How about now? Where's the dividing line? What if instead of a third grader, it's another author who copies a few of the best quotes and competes with the first author? How about then? Gets more complicated, huh?
And that's why the fair use defense has evolved into a complicated legal test involving multiple factors. Among the factors:
the purpose and character of your use
the nature of the copyrighted work
the amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and
the effect of the use upon the potential market.
Let's look at these.
1) the purpose and character of your use
This is often called the transformative test. Am I creating something new and different and worthwhile to society, involving my own creativity? Many people say that the use in this case was pretty creative and useful, but let's assume no. So this factor weighs against fair use.
2) the nature of the copyrighted work
Published works, such as these icons, are entitled to less protection than unpublished. Also, factual or representative works, such as icons, are entitled to less protection than creative works like novels. So this factor weighs for fair use.
3) the amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and
A handful of icons out of an entire operating system? Seems small to me. Weighs for fair use.
4) the effect of the use upon the potential market.
By using these icons, is the "infringer" somehow preventing Apple from selling this sort of software, or preventing Apple from selling these icons? No. Again, weighs for fair use.
You simultaneously argue that things are black and white (you either infringe or you don't) and then you argue that the spirit of the law matters, not the letter. You argue for a bright line test, then for shades of gray.
Well, the answer is a little of both, but men and women far smarter than you have come up with the best tests they can to figure out how to deal with these fuzzy situations.
You can go to church and pray instead of going to court, if you'd like, but for those of us that believe in the legal system, we take solace in the fact that things really aren't black and white, and yet there is a framework in place that let's us try and figure these things out.
Eidorian
May 3, 10:25 AM
Still USB 2.0
Meh.Time for a break out box! :D
Which goes against the stark minimalism Apple was going for. Wait, what?
Meh.Time for a break out box! :D
Which goes against the stark minimalism Apple was going for. Wait, what?
dadoftwogirls
Mar 23, 05:33 PM
Very surprised by many of the responses in support of pulling the apps. I think Apple shouldn't. No I don't support drunk driving, but his borders on ridiculous. There are other apps that supposedly help to circumvent the law... red light camera apps, speed trap apps, police radio scanner apps. So doing one of these things is different? Type in the word "Pot" int he app store and your find apps for cannibus. Isn't that against the law? So now we are going to censor the app store. You open the door for one thing and the government will march right through and pick thing after thing. Bad idea.