kirk26
Sep 13, 07:49 AM
This is the first time I've thought about getting an iPod since the 4G.
jiggie2g
Jul 14, 03:52 PM
the original quote was to "G5/PPC fanboys," not "970MP fanboys." But whatever. My point is that it's hardly surprising that a bleeding edge chip beats an old one. That's kinda the point of technological progress, no?
So then AMD and IBM are dead in the water? Somebody better call them and tell them.
Believe it or not, the fact that intel is releasing new chips does not mean that the other companies have given up or that intel has "won." IBM's desktop and server chips have been and will continue to be very competitive. Apple switched because PPC was not cutting it for laptops.
1st of all I said Apple not IBM or AMD. AMD is going to get a through ass kicking for the next 12-18 months till K8L comes out. The Turion X2 is a flop(that's also 6 months late) It's so bad for AMD that they are practically having a fire sale on X2/A64's come the 24th. Let's not even go there with IBM they are too busy making toy CPU's for M$ , and talk about the nightmare IBM/Sony are having with the Cell yields(what are they like 20-30%).lol:D
So then AMD and IBM are dead in the water? Somebody better call them and tell them.
Believe it or not, the fact that intel is releasing new chips does not mean that the other companies have given up or that intel has "won." IBM's desktop and server chips have been and will continue to be very competitive. Apple switched because PPC was not cutting it for laptops.
1st of all I said Apple not IBM or AMD. AMD is going to get a through ass kicking for the next 12-18 months till K8L comes out. The Turion X2 is a flop(that's also 6 months late) It's so bad for AMD that they are practically having a fire sale on X2/A64's come the 24th. Let's not even go there with IBM they are too busy making toy CPU's for M$ , and talk about the nightmare IBM/Sony are having with the Cell yields(what are they like 20-30%).lol:D
varera
Apr 20, 10:56 AM
Wonder how long this item will remain here...the one on Engadget managed about 7 minutes. ;)
nope, it is still there, just updated
nope, it is still there, just updated
Rigby
Apr 20, 11:52 AM
Unless I'm missing it in the thread, I didn't see anything on this particular question. Does anyone know if this database on the iPhone is accessible by apps? ie. can you download some app that then scans the database and uploads your information elsewhere behind the scenes?Only if the device is jailbroken. Normally, there is a "sandbox" in place that prevents apps from accessing system files (and files belonging to other apps). Jailbreaking effectively disables this sandbox.
mgguy
Apr 25, 12:09 AM
She should have pulled out her gun and blown your effin head off:p.
Some_Big_Spoon
Sep 10, 11:22 PM
I'm still taken aback by Sun doing what Intel's doing now, but doing it 8-10 years ago. What the heck happened to SUN?
Were you reading propaganda from Sun, or something from an unbiased source?
The P6 systems that you're talking about in the mid '90s were very similar in architecture to today's Intel systems.
The P6 systems had a shared FSB, so memory bandwidth was shared by the two processors. The SPARC systems usually had a crossbar switch, so that in theory each CPU had a private memory path. (The Woodcrest systems have an FSB per socket, to a shared memory controller.)
While the crossbar really shined when you had 32, 64 or more processors with many, many GiB of RAM - for a dual CPU system it really wasn't worth the cost.
Woodcrest, the PPC G5, and AMD aren't using crossbar memory controllers today....
Were you reading propaganda from Sun, or something from an unbiased source?
The P6 systems that you're talking about in the mid '90s were very similar in architecture to today's Intel systems.
The P6 systems had a shared FSB, so memory bandwidth was shared by the two processors. The SPARC systems usually had a crossbar switch, so that in theory each CPU had a private memory path. (The Woodcrest systems have an FSB per socket, to a shared memory controller.)
While the crossbar really shined when you had 32, 64 or more processors with many, many GiB of RAM - for a dual CPU system it really wasn't worth the cost.
Woodcrest, the PPC G5, and AMD aren't using crossbar memory controllers today....
DrDomVonDoom
Apr 20, 11:08 AM
In my experience, I immediately assume that using any electronic device with some kind of attachment to the internet, that what I am doing is splayed across the airways and collected by various agencies, be them Ad agencies, government agencies etc. I already know that I can be tracked, and called listened to, with no warrent. After those two privacies are gone, this doesn't seem like a real big deal to me.
Its gonna sound douchey, but the odds are, astronomical vegas odds, that no one gives a **** who you are and where your at currently. Unless your a criminal, then who gives a ****? People love to heap worth upon themselves that doesn't exist. Your not a political figure, your a ******* with a iPhone working at McDonalds, calm the **** down and stop worrying about the government tracking you down and concentrate on my Hash Browns.
As far as I can see I don't have a problem with law enforcement agencies being able to see into it, I have nothing to hide.
Maybe if we were on a Android open system this might be a problem. :P
Its gonna sound douchey, but the odds are, astronomical vegas odds, that no one gives a **** who you are and where your at currently. Unless your a criminal, then who gives a ****? People love to heap worth upon themselves that doesn't exist. Your not a political figure, your a ******* with a iPhone working at McDonalds, calm the **** down and stop worrying about the government tracking you down and concentrate on my Hash Browns.
As far as I can see I don't have a problem with law enforcement agencies being able to see into it, I have nothing to hide.
Maybe if we were on a Android open system this might be a problem. :P
joeshell383
Sep 26, 09:36 AM
Do any of you whiners realize that Verizon is trying to start their own music service to compete with an "iTunes + iPhone". Go to the Verizon Wireless website and click on Call My Music. Cingular and T-Mobile USA have no such service.
sushi
Sep 13, 03:10 AM
did anyone notice how he called MahJong "May-Hong"?
Yep. Got a little chuckle out of that. Fun game.
Yep. Got a little chuckle out of that. Fun game.
sammyman
Apr 30, 01:11 PM
Time to buy a machine for my wife.
Just hope they don't decide to redesign the iMac the beginning of next year like they plan to do with the Macbooks.
Just hope they don't decide to redesign the iMac the beginning of next year like they plan to do with the Macbooks.
insignificantMB
Apr 25, 02:12 PM
YESSSS after 3 years of waiting!
Popeye206
Apr 20, 01:55 PM
I fall into the "who cares" category.
If someone wants to waste their time figuring out where I've been... have a ball! I might be concerned if I was a drug lord, or cereal murderer (Die! Captain Crunch, die!). :) But since I'm just a software guy... again, who cares?
P.S. Snap, Crackle and Pop... you're next!
If someone wants to waste their time figuring out where I've been... have a ball! I might be concerned if I was a drug lord, or cereal murderer (Die! Captain Crunch, die!). :) But since I'm just a software guy... again, who cares?
P.S. Snap, Crackle and Pop... you're next!
jonnyb
Apr 20, 09:57 AM
When did 'reached out' become a better phrase to use than simply 'contacted'?
munkery
Mar 22, 08:35 PM
Kernel
A privilege checking issue existed in the i386_set_ldt system call's handling of call gates. A local user may be able to execute arbitrary code with system privileges. This issue is addressed by disallowing creation of call gate entries via i386_set_ldt().
Generating a successful malware from that list of vulnerabilities has two requirements:
1) A remote arbitrary code execution vulnerability has to be linked to a local privilege escalation vulnerability.
2) Those vulnerabilities that can be linked together must both be exploitable. Not all vulnerabilities are exploitable.
The only local privilege escalation vulnerability in that update is shown above. To be linked to a remote vulnerability to create a successful malware requires the following:
1) The call function must be used by a process that also has an remote vulnerability so that the vulns can be linked together to install a payload, such as rootkit. It is likely that not all processes will use that call function. Also, that call function is for 32-bit processes and most client side software in Mac OS X that may contain a remote exploit are 64-bit processes.
2) The two vulnerabilities have to be reliably exploitable once linked together as well as being reliably exploitable independently so that they can actually be linked together. Again, not all vulnerabilities are exploitable.
Linking together remote and local exploits is more difficult in Mac OS X than Windows. This is because Windows has far more local privilege escalation exploits than Mac OS X. Another factor is that the different levels of Windows are less insulated from each other than the different levels of Mac OS X. A common method to achieve privilege escalation in Windows is by manipulating registry values.
http://www.exploit-db.com/bypassing-uac-with-user-privilege-under-windows-vista7-mirror/ -> outlines how to exploit win32k.sys vulnerabilities by manipulating registry values.
http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvekey.cgi?keyword=win32k -> list of win32k.sys vulnerabilities.
A privilege checking issue existed in the i386_set_ldt system call's handling of call gates. A local user may be able to execute arbitrary code with system privileges. This issue is addressed by disallowing creation of call gate entries via i386_set_ldt().
Generating a successful malware from that list of vulnerabilities has two requirements:
1) A remote arbitrary code execution vulnerability has to be linked to a local privilege escalation vulnerability.
2) Those vulnerabilities that can be linked together must both be exploitable. Not all vulnerabilities are exploitable.
The only local privilege escalation vulnerability in that update is shown above. To be linked to a remote vulnerability to create a successful malware requires the following:
1) The call function must be used by a process that also has an remote vulnerability so that the vulns can be linked together to install a payload, such as rootkit. It is likely that not all processes will use that call function. Also, that call function is for 32-bit processes and most client side software in Mac OS X that may contain a remote exploit are 64-bit processes.
2) The two vulnerabilities have to be reliably exploitable once linked together as well as being reliably exploitable independently so that they can actually be linked together. Again, not all vulnerabilities are exploitable.
Linking together remote and local exploits is more difficult in Mac OS X than Windows. This is because Windows has far more local privilege escalation exploits than Mac OS X. Another factor is that the different levels of Windows are less insulated from each other than the different levels of Mac OS X. A common method to achieve privilege escalation in Windows is by manipulating registry values.
http://www.exploit-db.com/bypassing-uac-with-user-privilege-under-windows-vista7-mirror/ -> outlines how to exploit win32k.sys vulnerabilities by manipulating registry values.
http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvekey.cgi?keyword=win32k -> list of win32k.sys vulnerabilities.
iBug2
May 3, 01:25 PM
Heck, my new 2.2 i7 quad MacBook Pro beats every one of the last Mac Pro revisions. The Mac Pro line is more and more for a very specialized audience�those who need the utmost performance and expansion (2-3 video cards, an extra I/O card, 4x SSD drives for speed + space for high end production work...
You are kidding right? MBP's Geekbench score is around 11k, where the top end Mac Pro's perform close to 30k, that's almost 3 times as powerful as the fastest MBP.
24 threads > 8 threads. :)
You are kidding right? MBP's Geekbench score is around 11k, where the top end Mac Pro's perform close to 30k, that's almost 3 times as powerful as the fastest MBP.
24 threads > 8 threads. :)
wizard
Sep 9, 01:42 PM
http://guides.macrumors.com/Merom
Yeah it is interesting but in the context of a desktop machine you are not getting a lot for the wait. A new front side bus and a Merom to go with it. AND 64 Bit support which can be very important for some.
I guess what I'[m saying is that if you are willing to wait for this upgrade then you really don't need a new computer even with this rather significant update to the iMac. Maybe that is where our paths diverge as I see this as a significant upgrade. Sure it is a stop gap measure for 64 bit support but it does offer significant performance advantages and should adapt well to Apples move to 64 bit.
You are correct it is a rushed quad core. At least we get more cores out a little faster. Though it's not the best implementation.
That is what I thought but like I said I don't follow Intel deeply. I do know that with Core 2 Intel has the potential for significant upside on clock rates. It looks like we could see both a core race and a clock rate race again. As to AMD I'm not 100% on their quad either but I think it is a single chip implementation. Maybe a few moths slower in coming but the impression is a solid offering.
What I'm wondering is where the optimal number of cores is for the average desktop user. I know that dual has some pretty amazing results on the desktop so how far do we go for core wise. 4, 8, 12 or more? Especially on i86, it is to bad the PPC guys never got their acts together.
Dave
Yeah it is interesting but in the context of a desktop machine you are not getting a lot for the wait. A new front side bus and a Merom to go with it. AND 64 Bit support which can be very important for some.
I guess what I'[m saying is that if you are willing to wait for this upgrade then you really don't need a new computer even with this rather significant update to the iMac. Maybe that is where our paths diverge as I see this as a significant upgrade. Sure it is a stop gap measure for 64 bit support but it does offer significant performance advantages and should adapt well to Apples move to 64 bit.
You are correct it is a rushed quad core. At least we get more cores out a little faster. Though it's not the best implementation.
That is what I thought but like I said I don't follow Intel deeply. I do know that with Core 2 Intel has the potential for significant upside on clock rates. It looks like we could see both a core race and a clock rate race again. As to AMD I'm not 100% on their quad either but I think it is a single chip implementation. Maybe a few moths slower in coming but the impression is a solid offering.
What I'm wondering is where the optimal number of cores is for the average desktop user. I know that dual has some pretty amazing results on the desktop so how far do we go for core wise. 4, 8, 12 or more? Especially on i86, it is to bad the PPC guys never got their acts together.
Dave
jonhaxor
Mar 30, 12:15 PM
Does the general public think of a particular store when someone says Burger Store? I'm pretty sure people do not say "hey lets go to the Burger Store." The term Burger Store has no mindshare from what I know with the general public. No one uses it as a brand name.
you mean macdonalds?
you mean macdonalds?
EagerDragon
Sep 10, 08:40 PM
I understand the need for a mid level consumer tower, but right now
50%+/- of the market is looking at notebooks.
The cluttered, wire infested desktop is also none too popular with many people.
That's why the AOI iMac is so popular.
The MacBook is already more powerful than the majority of desktops MOST
average users have in their home.
The mini does a respectable job filling the affordable hassle free niche.
Heck, if you don't count the extra RAM cost, the Xeon powered Mac Pro 2.66 Quad is priced neck and neck with the mid level MacBook Pro.
That's amazing when you really think about it.
Even so, I do see a place for a Max mini of some sort starting
with at least the power of half a Mac Pro Tower for $999.00
If the iMac would come with a top of the line graphic card or as a BTO, it would be even more popular.
But the top gamers want more than one card with SLI and that means a different form factor.
I agree something is coming, but it does not have to be a mini. It could be a modified Mac Pro enclosure with liquid cooling for the graphic cards, CPU(s) and chip set. Mini or Maxi not sure. The system will also need to support overclocking of the CPU and Graphic cards. We will find out soon (prob October) for the holidays.;)
50%+/- of the market is looking at notebooks.
The cluttered, wire infested desktop is also none too popular with many people.
That's why the AOI iMac is so popular.
The MacBook is already more powerful than the majority of desktops MOST
average users have in their home.
The mini does a respectable job filling the affordable hassle free niche.
Heck, if you don't count the extra RAM cost, the Xeon powered Mac Pro 2.66 Quad is priced neck and neck with the mid level MacBook Pro.
That's amazing when you really think about it.
Even so, I do see a place for a Max mini of some sort starting
with at least the power of half a Mac Pro Tower for $999.00
If the iMac would come with a top of the line graphic card or as a BTO, it would be even more popular.
But the top gamers want more than one card with SLI and that means a different form factor.
I agree something is coming, but it does not have to be a mini. It could be a modified Mac Pro enclosure with liquid cooling for the graphic cards, CPU(s) and chip set. Mini or Maxi not sure. The system will also need to support overclocking of the CPU and Graphic cards. We will find out soon (prob October) for the holidays.;)
erikistired
Sep 19, 04:54 PM
I don't think Apple is aiming for the uber-geek with $25k worth of home entertainment equipment. IMHO, they will never be able to compete in that market.
I think they are reaching for the average joe blow that has a servicable $400 TV that he bought at Wal-mart, and maybe, just maybe, has a stereo hooked up to it. The average Joe doesn't care, and can't tell, that it's Dolby Surround and not Dolby Digital.
you don't need 25k of equipment to notice the difference between dolby surround and dolby digital. contrary to what was posted before, you CAN hear the difference on a $200 htib system. even my half deaf dad has noticed the difference, especially if the soundtrack uses a lot of directional audio. the first time i had my family to my house (at the time my home audio system wasn't that great, but still good) to watch a movie with 5.1 surround they were jumping all over at bullets whizzing over their shoulder from behind. it was neat to watch people who would be considered "joe sixpack" enjoying good A/V. it's amazing how many people underestimate what the average joe has or cares about these days when it comes to home entertainment.
I think they are reaching for the average joe blow that has a servicable $400 TV that he bought at Wal-mart, and maybe, just maybe, has a stereo hooked up to it. The average Joe doesn't care, and can't tell, that it's Dolby Surround and not Dolby Digital.
you don't need 25k of equipment to notice the difference between dolby surround and dolby digital. contrary to what was posted before, you CAN hear the difference on a $200 htib system. even my half deaf dad has noticed the difference, especially if the soundtrack uses a lot of directional audio. the first time i had my family to my house (at the time my home audio system wasn't that great, but still good) to watch a movie with 5.1 surround they were jumping all over at bullets whizzing over their shoulder from behind. it was neat to watch people who would be considered "joe sixpack" enjoying good A/V. it's amazing how many people underestimate what the average joe has or cares about these days when it comes to home entertainment.
Yamcha
Mar 22, 02:10 PM
I'm hoping we don't see Apple adopting the HD Intel Graphics, cuz they are going to suck as far as gaming goes..
cmaier
Nov 13, 04:10 PM
they are using the OS X API in the context it was meant to be used in. as far as i can tell these images aren't loaded into the iPhone application itself and are rather transmitted over-the-air as the application is being used, thus they are being called by the OS while the application is being run and are merely being displayed through the iPhone application, its like saying you can't see any apple trademark icons through a VPN client.
Or like saying that if my app has a UIWebView, I have to prevent the user from navigating to Apple.com lest he be subjected to seeing Apple's trademarked logos and pictures of Apple computers.
Or like saying that if my app has a UIWebView, I have to prevent the user from navigating to Apple.com lest he be subjected to seeing Apple's trademarked logos and pictures of Apple computers.
WiiDSmoker
Apr 22, 07:18 AM
Clean your glasses.
Nice response. :rolleyes:
Nice response. :rolleyes:
TheManOfSilver
Sep 5, 08:49 PM
I'll drink to this club "iWillBuyWhateverCoolAppleGadgetComesOutOnThe12th"
Seconded :D
Seconded :D
iMacZealot
Sep 15, 09:13 PM
If, for example, someone is using Verizon Wireless, would the Apple Phone work for them? In other words, how "universal" would this phone truly be? Would it be able to compete in international markets?
(edited: clarification)
There are two main types of cell phone system: CDMA and GSM. The Global System for Mobile Communications (GSM) was created in France throughout the 80's and the EU endorsed it as their official system, which caused it to spread globally. Meanwhile, across the pond, we were sitting on our little keisters and our brick analog phones and then a company called Quallcomm decided to do something six years after GSM had publically been out and they created a popular version of CDMA. CDMA is currently used by Sprint and Verizon (and I think a few Canadian carriers) and is pretty much only existent here in America. GSM is present in 78% of the world's markets.
With that said, GSM phones will not work on CDMA networks and vice versa. If Apple does make a phone, I think it would be GSM in order to capture most of the international market as well as the US. CDMA is very limited because it is not used anywhere besides a few carriers here in America.
(edited: clarification)
There are two main types of cell phone system: CDMA and GSM. The Global System for Mobile Communications (GSM) was created in France throughout the 80's and the EU endorsed it as their official system, which caused it to spread globally. Meanwhile, across the pond, we were sitting on our little keisters and our brick analog phones and then a company called Quallcomm decided to do something six years after GSM had publically been out and they created a popular version of CDMA. CDMA is currently used by Sprint and Verizon (and I think a few Canadian carriers) and is pretty much only existent here in America. GSM is present in 78% of the world's markets.
With that said, GSM phones will not work on CDMA networks and vice versa. If Apple does make a phone, I think it would be GSM in order to capture most of the international market as well as the US. CDMA is very limited because it is not used anywhere besides a few carriers here in America.
No comments:
Post a Comment