PhantomPumpkin
Apr 27, 10:55 AM
The difference is a question of access. To get at the records kept by your cell phone provider, you need a subpoena. Any roommate/guest/thief/stalker with access to your computer or iPhone can get the data off your iphone or the backup as it exists right now. I don't mind the former, but I want to do everything I can to prevent the latter.
Keep better tabs on your phone. Encrypt the computer backup. Yeah yeah, I know sometimes we lose things. Hell, I've lost my iphone in my couch and took a half hour to find out WHERE in the couch it went.
Even still, you have to take some responsibility at some point. We can't all rely on Apple/Google/Purina Brand Puppy Chow to keep our data completely 100% safe. As they say in the IT security industry, "Your biggest threats are the end users". Technology can only go so far.
If you're REALLY paranoid, install Where's my Iphone, and if you lose it, remote wipe it.
Keep better tabs on your phone. Encrypt the computer backup. Yeah yeah, I know sometimes we lose things. Hell, I've lost my iphone in my couch and took a half hour to find out WHERE in the couch it went.
Even still, you have to take some responsibility at some point. We can't all rely on Apple/Google/Purina Brand Puppy Chow to keep our data completely 100% safe. As they say in the IT security industry, "Your biggest threats are the end users". Technology can only go so far.
If you're REALLY paranoid, install Where's my Iphone, and if you lose it, remote wipe it.
technicolor
Sep 19, 10:15 PM
Why do you care?
Why shouldnt I?
Why shouldnt I?
WillEH
Mar 26, 06:55 PM
It's this mentality that makes me smile.
Without knowing any of the details as to what the final shipping version will be, mezmerized (hypnotized ?) by Apple, enthusiasts are ready to pay whatever Apple demands for the product.
I get to sit back without any effort, and watch with delight as they pour the money into Apples coffers. In turn, my vast amount of Apple stock climbs higher & higher as they brag about Apples Billions.
Their blind trust pays me well. Thanks Apple !
e-drama :cool:
Without knowing any of the details as to what the final shipping version will be, mezmerized (hypnotized ?) by Apple, enthusiasts are ready to pay whatever Apple demands for the product.
I get to sit back without any effort, and watch with delight as they pour the money into Apples coffers. In turn, my vast amount of Apple stock climbs higher & higher as they brag about Apples Billions.
Their blind trust pays me well. Thanks Apple !
e-drama :cool:
azzurri000
Sep 18, 11:39 PM
I still think it's funny that everyone thinks these Macbook Pros are "long overdue" - when, exactly, did the FIRST Dell laptop with C2D ship? I thought it was supposed to be around tomorrow...but surely it couldn't have been before last Monday or so at the earliest.
So that's, what? A week behind in the worst case scenario? Oh God...
However - if they waited till November, then yeah, I'd agree that they were overdue...:)
I see your point... I think Merom has been really overhyped, and I can say that I have gotten caught up in it all. There has been so much talk about Merom for so long, that it's almost hard to believe that it's brand new. Perhaps Santa Rosa will be the same later on...
So that's, what? A week behind in the worst case scenario? Oh God...
However - if they waited till November, then yeah, I'd agree that they were overdue...:)
I see your point... I think Merom has been really overhyped, and I can say that I have gotten caught up in it all. There has been so much talk about Merom for so long, that it's almost hard to believe that it's brand new. Perhaps Santa Rosa will be the same later on...
Mike84
Apr 25, 03:29 PM
As I pointed out in my earlier blog posting (LINK (http://markshangout.com/blog/2011/4/25/apple-gets-sued-yes-again.html)), until somebody proves that Apple is both collecting the to their servers AND using the data in a manner that allows them to personally identify a specific user, this lawsuit is meritless and a waste of the court's time.
Mark
The lawsuit would still be meritless unless Apple was violating some act of Congress or state law. It seems these two idiot lawyers have not alleged that, therefore the lawsuit would still be meritless.
Mark
The lawsuit would still be meritless unless Apple was violating some act of Congress or state law. It seems these two idiot lawyers have not alleged that, therefore the lawsuit would still be meritless.
arkitect
Mar 1, 05:13 AM
...
...
...
...
...
...
Fascinating as this insight into a mediaeval mind is, please do remember to use the multi-quote.
http://images.macrumors.com/vb/images/buttons/multiquote_off.gif
...
...
...
...
...
Fascinating as this insight into a mediaeval mind is, please do remember to use the multi-quote.
http://images.macrumors.com/vb/images/buttons/multiquote_off.gif
littleman23408
Dec 6, 03:00 PM
but at least you don't have to watch it
Its hard for me to watch, because I want to race, I don't want to watch the driver race for me, lol. I was very tempted to exit the race and go back to a-spec. I will definately have to not watch the next time I try one.
Its hard for me to watch, because I want to race, I don't want to watch the driver race for me, lol. I was very tempted to exit the race and go back to a-spec. I will definately have to not watch the next time I try one.
epitaphic
Aug 18, 09:06 PM
Do you think a Conroe iMac will beat a Mac Pro due to lower memory latency alone? Do you have real experience or data regarding how horrendous a problem this is? Extra dual-core processor aside, the Mac Pro has a higher speed FSB, higher memory bus bandwidth, higher RAM capacity, and ability to set up internal RAID amongst other advantages over a Conroe iMac.
Obviously, inherently the iMac design is inferior to the Mac Pro/Powermac. But I think there's a bigger reason why Apple chose to go all quad with the Mac Pro: Apple chose all quad because a duo option would have had the same performance in professional apps (again, excluding handbrake and toast which are the only two examples touted about). A single processor Woodcrest or Conroe option will have the same obtainable CPU power for 90-95% of the professional market for another 6-12 months at the very least.
Here's some data regarding the Mac Pro's FSB:
the Mac Pro (...) actually takes longer to access main memory than the Core Duo processor in the MacBook Pro. This is much worse than it sounds once you take into account the fact that the MacBook Pro features a 667MHz FSB compared to the 1333MHz FSB (per chip) used in the Mac Pro.
What can we take from this? Because of the use of FB-DIMMs, the Mac Pro's effective FSB is that of ~640MHz DDR2 system.
And how does it fare in memory latency?
It's not Apple's fault, but FB-DIMMs absolutely kill memory latency; even running in quad channel mode, the FB-DIMM equipped Mac Pro takes 45% more time to access memory than our DDR2 equipped test bed at the same memory frequency.
As for bandwidth, although the Mac Pro has a load of theoretical bandwidth, the efficiency is an abysmal 20%. In real use a DDR2 system has 72% more usable bandwidth. (source here (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2816&p=11))
I don't know bout you, but if I were a heavy user of memory intensive apps such as Photoshop, I'd be worried. Worried in the sense that a Conroe would be noticeably faster.
Memory issues aside, Woodcrests are faster than Conroes, 2.4% on average (source here (http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2795&p=6))
Obviously, inherently the iMac design is inferior to the Mac Pro/Powermac. But I think there's a bigger reason why Apple chose to go all quad with the Mac Pro: Apple chose all quad because a duo option would have had the same performance in professional apps (again, excluding handbrake and toast which are the only two examples touted about). A single processor Woodcrest or Conroe option will have the same obtainable CPU power for 90-95% of the professional market for another 6-12 months at the very least.
Here's some data regarding the Mac Pro's FSB:
the Mac Pro (...) actually takes longer to access main memory than the Core Duo processor in the MacBook Pro. This is much worse than it sounds once you take into account the fact that the MacBook Pro features a 667MHz FSB compared to the 1333MHz FSB (per chip) used in the Mac Pro.
What can we take from this? Because of the use of FB-DIMMs, the Mac Pro's effective FSB is that of ~640MHz DDR2 system.
And how does it fare in memory latency?
It's not Apple's fault, but FB-DIMMs absolutely kill memory latency; even running in quad channel mode, the FB-DIMM equipped Mac Pro takes 45% more time to access memory than our DDR2 equipped test bed at the same memory frequency.
As for bandwidth, although the Mac Pro has a load of theoretical bandwidth, the efficiency is an abysmal 20%. In real use a DDR2 system has 72% more usable bandwidth. (source here (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2816&p=11))
I don't know bout you, but if I were a heavy user of memory intensive apps such as Photoshop, I'd be worried. Worried in the sense that a Conroe would be noticeably faster.
Memory issues aside, Woodcrests are faster than Conroes, 2.4% on average (source here (http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2795&p=6))
mr.steevo
Apr 28, 04:51 PM
This thread is Still rattling on about this?
The Titanic is still sinking...
The Titanic is still sinking...
WildCowboy
Aug 17, 01:43 AM
lol you mac folk and your photoshop :D
let's get some game benchmarks :rolleyes:
A lot of folks are waiting for game benchmarks...bring 'em on!
let's get some game benchmarks :rolleyes:
A lot of folks are waiting for game benchmarks...bring 'em on!
hob
Apr 5, 07:20 PM
- Major revamp of asset cataloguing system with integrated final cut server, something similiar to what Aperture does with photos. This will be it's biggest feature
- Core image fx with integrated Shake-style fx compositing
and the usual obvious things (64 bit, new formats, updated quicktime, etc..)
I would /kill/ for better asset management. The "Aperture" for video is what I've been needing for a while now...
- Core image fx with integrated Shake-style fx compositing
and the usual obvious things (64 bit, new formats, updated quicktime, etc..)
I would /kill/ for better asset management. The "Aperture" for video is what I've been needing for a while now...
wnurse
Aug 26, 09:49 AM
Dude. You bought Rev. A machines. I've bought -- EIGHTEEN Macs over the past two years and -- nope NO problems. Granted, they are all PowerPc Macs. Just bought the final Rev. PowerPC 12" Powerbook G4 last week. I'm pleased as punch.
Sorry about your luck but you bought Rev. A machines. The only Rev A machine I ever bought from Apple was the Titanium (tibook) 400mhz G4 Powerbook in August of 2001. Three years later, almost to the day the warranty ended, Apple replaced almost the whole machine under Applecare. That was about my only trouble with Apple, and the problem with the machine was that I was really scared and all thumbs when it came to putting in a stick of memory -- broke the holders and they sent a whole new logic board. That machine is still going strong, with a DayStar CPU upgrade, in a friend's office, and it's got years left in her.
Three of my friends still are on 1998 and 1999 iMacs, going strong with new harddrives only. Two of my other friends are on 2001 and 2000 year iMacs -- one with the same hard drive. Two friends are on 2001/2000 iBooks, going strong. My sister and two other friends are on year 2002 iMacs. All kicking butt. Personally, I prefer my year 2002 667mhz VGA Titanium Powerbook (on it right now) to my other machines and will be upgrading the CPU to 1.2ghz in a few months at Daystar. All to say that Apple makes kickbutt machines. Sorry about your luck. Oh, and again, forgot to mention that since i've been on Apple since 1989, I never had a virus. I bought NOrton Anti Virus out of ignorance once inthe 90's and once in but promptly took it off the puters, unnecessary.
If I were you, I'd have started off with the top of the line G5 2.1ghz 20" iMac (with iSight) and a 14" 1.42ghz iBook. You understand, these are the top of the line of the great PowerPC line of Apple products. It's like buying a 1989 560SL Mercedes (last year) or a 1968 Mustang convertible. I'd ask Apple for a trade 'em in for your rev a machines at least until Rev C Mactels.
California, it's replies like this that pisses switchers off, even seasones mac users get upset with these replies. What the hell is Rev A?. What idiot argument is this?. That's it ok for apple to make a ****ed-up product cause it's the first version?. What?.. apple just started making computers that they don't know how to make quality products until they already made the first version?. Apple should be horrified at your suggestion. Imagine if no one bought Rev A (whatever the **** that means) machines from Apple. APPLE WOULD GO BROKE!!. There's always Rev A machines when it comes to computers dude. The next mac pro upgrade will use a new processor, faster, new video, more ram, newer harddrive and becomes rev A cause THEY ARE THE FIRST APPLE PRODUCTS TO USE THE NEW UPGRADED PROCESSOR, NEW HARDDIVE, ETC. Really, stop with this nonsense. You are like the 10th idiotic apple fan I have read using this dumb argument.
Sorry about your luck but you bought Rev. A machines. The only Rev A machine I ever bought from Apple was the Titanium (tibook) 400mhz G4 Powerbook in August of 2001. Three years later, almost to the day the warranty ended, Apple replaced almost the whole machine under Applecare. That was about my only trouble with Apple, and the problem with the machine was that I was really scared and all thumbs when it came to putting in a stick of memory -- broke the holders and they sent a whole new logic board. That machine is still going strong, with a DayStar CPU upgrade, in a friend's office, and it's got years left in her.
Three of my friends still are on 1998 and 1999 iMacs, going strong with new harddrives only. Two of my other friends are on 2001 and 2000 year iMacs -- one with the same hard drive. Two friends are on 2001/2000 iBooks, going strong. My sister and two other friends are on year 2002 iMacs. All kicking butt. Personally, I prefer my year 2002 667mhz VGA Titanium Powerbook (on it right now) to my other machines and will be upgrading the CPU to 1.2ghz in a few months at Daystar. All to say that Apple makes kickbutt machines. Sorry about your luck. Oh, and again, forgot to mention that since i've been on Apple since 1989, I never had a virus. I bought NOrton Anti Virus out of ignorance once inthe 90's and once in but promptly took it off the puters, unnecessary.
If I were you, I'd have started off with the top of the line G5 2.1ghz 20" iMac (with iSight) and a 14" 1.42ghz iBook. You understand, these are the top of the line of the great PowerPC line of Apple products. It's like buying a 1989 560SL Mercedes (last year) or a 1968 Mustang convertible. I'd ask Apple for a trade 'em in for your rev a machines at least until Rev C Mactels.
California, it's replies like this that pisses switchers off, even seasones mac users get upset with these replies. What the hell is Rev A?. What idiot argument is this?. That's it ok for apple to make a ****ed-up product cause it's the first version?. What?.. apple just started making computers that they don't know how to make quality products until they already made the first version?. Apple should be horrified at your suggestion. Imagine if no one bought Rev A (whatever the **** that means) machines from Apple. APPLE WOULD GO BROKE!!. There's always Rev A machines when it comes to computers dude. The next mac pro upgrade will use a new processor, faster, new video, more ram, newer harddrive and becomes rev A cause THEY ARE THE FIRST APPLE PRODUCTS TO USE THE NEW UPGRADED PROCESSOR, NEW HARDDIVE, ETC. Really, stop with this nonsense. You are like the 10th idiotic apple fan I have read using this dumb argument.
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 11, 03:42 PM
A good chunk of the remaining 19% is CDMA.
Ever heard of DoCoMo?
Ever heard of DoCoMo?
SlavKO
Jun 9, 08:20 PM
Thx for the info. Would it be possible to call and preorder from the store I want to pick it up from even if it isnt in my state?
Anyone?
THx
Anyone?
THx
rdowns
Mar 24, 12:43 PM
The right pro-war machine is all but gone. The policies haven't changed, but the party color of the president has.
Fixed that for you.
Fixed that for you.
theBB
Aug 11, 07:28 PM
Confused.
Can somebody explain me the differences between the cellphone market between the US and Europe.
Will a 'iPhone' just be marketed to the US or worldwide (as the iPod does)?
Well, let's see, about 20 years ago, a lot of countries in Europe, Asia and elsewhere decided on a standard digital cell phone system and called it GSM. About 15 years ago GSM networks became quite widespread across these countries. In the meantime US kept on using analog cell phones. Motorola did not even believe that digital cell phone had much of a future, so it decided to stay away from this market, a decision which almost bankrupted the company.
US started rolling out digital service only about 10 years ago. As US government does not like to dictate private companies how to conduct their business, they sold the spectrum and put down some basic ground rules, but for the most part they let the service providers use any network they wished. For one reason or another, these providers decided go with about 4 different standards at first. Quite a few companies went with GSM, AT&T picked a similar, but incompatible TDMA (IS=136?) standard, Nextel went with a proprietary standard they called iDEN and Sprint and Verizon went with CDMA, a radically different standard (IS-95) designed by Qualcomm. At the time, other big companies were very skeptical, so Qualcomm had to not only develop the underlying communication standards, but manufacture cell phones and the electronics for the cell towers. However, once the system proved itself, everybody started moving in that direction. Even the upcoming 3G system for these GSM networks, called UMTS, use a variant of CDMA technology.
CDMA is a more complicated standard compared to GSM, but it allows the providers to cram more users into each cell, it is supposedly cheaper to maintain and more flexible in some respects. However, anybody in that boat has to pay hefty royalties to Qualcomm, dampening its popularity. While creating UMTS, GSM standards bodies did everything they could to avoid using Qualcomm patents to avoid these payments. However, I don't know how successful they got in these efforts.
Even though Europeans here on these forums like to gloat that US did not join the worldwide standard, that we did not play along, that ours is a hodge podge of incompatible systems; without the freedom to try out different standards, CDMA would not have the opportunity to prove its feasibility and performance. In the end, the rest of the world is also reaping the benefits through UMTS/WCDMA.
Of course, not using the same standards as everybody else has its own price. The components of CDMA cell phones cost more and the system itself is more complicated, so CDMA versions of cell phones hit the market six months to a year after their GSM counterparts, if at all. The infrastructure cost of a rare system is higher as well, so AT&T had to rip apart its network to replace it with GSM version about five years after rolling it out. Sprint is probably going to convert Nextel's system in the near future as well.
I hope this answers your question.
Can somebody explain me the differences between the cellphone market between the US and Europe.
Will a 'iPhone' just be marketed to the US or worldwide (as the iPod does)?
Well, let's see, about 20 years ago, a lot of countries in Europe, Asia and elsewhere decided on a standard digital cell phone system and called it GSM. About 15 years ago GSM networks became quite widespread across these countries. In the meantime US kept on using analog cell phones. Motorola did not even believe that digital cell phone had much of a future, so it decided to stay away from this market, a decision which almost bankrupted the company.
US started rolling out digital service only about 10 years ago. As US government does not like to dictate private companies how to conduct their business, they sold the spectrum and put down some basic ground rules, but for the most part they let the service providers use any network they wished. For one reason or another, these providers decided go with about 4 different standards at first. Quite a few companies went with GSM, AT&T picked a similar, but incompatible TDMA (IS=136?) standard, Nextel went with a proprietary standard they called iDEN and Sprint and Verizon went with CDMA, a radically different standard (IS-95) designed by Qualcomm. At the time, other big companies were very skeptical, so Qualcomm had to not only develop the underlying communication standards, but manufacture cell phones and the electronics for the cell towers. However, once the system proved itself, everybody started moving in that direction. Even the upcoming 3G system for these GSM networks, called UMTS, use a variant of CDMA technology.
CDMA is a more complicated standard compared to GSM, but it allows the providers to cram more users into each cell, it is supposedly cheaper to maintain and more flexible in some respects. However, anybody in that boat has to pay hefty royalties to Qualcomm, dampening its popularity. While creating UMTS, GSM standards bodies did everything they could to avoid using Qualcomm patents to avoid these payments. However, I don't know how successful they got in these efforts.
Even though Europeans here on these forums like to gloat that US did not join the worldwide standard, that we did not play along, that ours is a hodge podge of incompatible systems; without the freedom to try out different standards, CDMA would not have the opportunity to prove its feasibility and performance. In the end, the rest of the world is also reaping the benefits through UMTS/WCDMA.
Of course, not using the same standards as everybody else has its own price. The components of CDMA cell phones cost more and the system itself is more complicated, so CDMA versions of cell phones hit the market six months to a year after their GSM counterparts, if at all. The infrastructure cost of a rare system is higher as well, so AT&T had to rip apart its network to replace it with GSM version about five years after rolling it out. Sprint is probably going to convert Nextel's system in the near future as well.
I hope this answers your question.
jeanlain
Apr 5, 05:16 PM
I'm not trolling, this is an honest question. But isn't a Final Cut pretty much worthless for commercial use without a way to put the results on Blu-Ray?
Final Cut does a bit more than disc authoring.
Final Cut does a bit more than disc authoring.
Aleco
Apr 8, 01:23 AM
Best Buy made reservations on the iPad. When I went in and said they have several instock, he checked on the computer. They said they had 5 but it was all for reserved customers that put $100 down in the first place.
starflyer
Mar 22, 03:07 PM
The iPad 2 is nice, but it needs more RAM. Multitasking is just terrible with few RAM and bad OS processes handling.
Says the man who doesn't even own one.
Next months will be crucial for me to decide the successor of my iPad 1.
Says the man who doesn't even own one.
Next months will be crucial for me to decide the successor of my iPad 1.
chubad
Aug 11, 07:37 PM
If Apple makes a phone, I will order one on the spot. If the interface is as well thought out and simple as the iPod, then it will be a smash hit.:D
jmsait19
Aug 26, 05:39 PM
This is interesting, BUT, from what I know, Intel announced the desktop (Conroe) Core 2 Duo proccessor on July 27, and as far as I know, no Conroe systems are shipping right now, almost a month later.
Dell has announced some Conroe systems that you can order, but as far as I know they aren't readily shipping yet.
that's because conroe wouldn't have been an upgrade compared to what apple already had out (maybe the imac, but merom waiting for merom would keep it cooler inside). The only thing left to change at that point was the PowerMac and they put Woodcrest in it and that one IS shipping.
Dell has announced some Conroe systems that you can order, but as far as I know they aren't readily shipping yet.
that's because conroe wouldn't have been an upgrade compared to what apple already had out (maybe the imac, but merom waiting for merom would keep it cooler inside). The only thing left to change at that point was the PowerMac and they put Woodcrest in it and that one IS shipping.
Intarweb
Apr 27, 08:04 AM
I wonder if this is why I can no longer get more than a days charge on my iPhone 4 with minimal use since it seems like it's an always on thing.
brianus
Sep 14, 10:23 PM
AnandTech is putting a lot of emphasis on this FB-DIMM issue. Their Conroe vs Xeon comparisons are poor given that they maximize the FB-DIMM latency "problem" by using a Mac Pro with only two RAM slots occupied. Seems as though they have an agenda to exaggerate the importance of this technical issue.
I have noticed this emphasis as well; not being an expert on this issue myself though, would you care to shed light on how their coverage is an exaggeration and why we shouldn't be worried about it?
The comments about separate platforms in the NT era I took to refer to NT3.x/4 vs Win9x.
Yes, this is what I was getting at. ("arse about face"? What is that, Swedish? :rolleyes: ). Noone other than a vintage Windows IT person would know there were further differences between versions of NT itself. Also when making comparisons I never mentioned Server 2003 (about which I know almost nothing); I was talking about XP and 2000 being relatively similar whereas, for example NT and 98 were not.
New micro-arch -- Nehalem is due 2008.
Really, completely new? As in, to Core 2 what the G5 was to G4? In just two years?? I guess they're really ramping things up... Core 3 Hexa Mac Pros, anyone?
I have noticed this emphasis as well; not being an expert on this issue myself though, would you care to shed light on how their coverage is an exaggeration and why we shouldn't be worried about it?
The comments about separate platforms in the NT era I took to refer to NT3.x/4 vs Win9x.
Yes, this is what I was getting at. ("arse about face"? What is that, Swedish? :rolleyes: ). Noone other than a vintage Windows IT person would know there were further differences between versions of NT itself. Also when making comparisons I never mentioned Server 2003 (about which I know almost nothing); I was talking about XP and 2000 being relatively similar whereas, for example NT and 98 were not.
New micro-arch -- Nehalem is due 2008.
Really, completely new? As in, to Core 2 what the G5 was to G4? In just two years?? I guess they're really ramping things up... Core 3 Hexa Mac Pros, anyone?
lasuther
Apr 6, 03:34 PM
The integrated Intel HD 3000 seems to be about equal to the integrated GeForce 320M when Barefeets did their tests on vidoe games.
On Portal, the HD3000 was 68FPS and the 320M was 65FPS.
On X-Plane, the HD3000 was 38FPS and the 320M was 43FPS.
Certainly worth moving to SB processors.
http://www.barefeats.com/mbps04.html
The 4Gig RAM limit is more critical than the change in graphics.
On Portal, the HD3000 was 68FPS and the 320M was 65FPS.
On X-Plane, the HD3000 was 38FPS and the 320M was 43FPS.
Certainly worth moving to SB processors.
http://www.barefeats.com/mbps04.html
The 4Gig RAM limit is more critical than the change in graphics.
No comments:
Post a Comment