Alxvasqz12
Jun 14, 06:09 PM
no white iphone preorder at radioshack! i just called my local radio shack and they said they are only preordering black ones. i think apple is the only one :eek:
Mattie Num Nums
Mar 31, 02:42 PM
If anything this is Google telling the manufacturers to get their crap together. All of the custom UI's need to be updates in some sort of a Google approved Roadmap.
IE: Google releases Android 2.3.3. All manufacturers have X amount of time to port their Custom UI's (HTC Sense, TouchWiz, etc.). What this will do is take the pressure off of the "fragmentation" of Android and place it in the hands of the real culprits... the manufactures, HTC, Samsung, et al.
It's because of the Buy One Get One option. Nothing more. People choose that option because it makes financial sense and if they don't really care about the OS or the phone, they will choose the one that fits their check books. If Apple was to OK ATT and VZ to do a Buy One Get One on the iPhone, there would be no comparison. It would be game over for Android.
-LanPhantom
Thats not true. Me and my gf both switched because we hated AT&T and Verizon. We went to Sprint and are very happy. I have an EVO she has an EVO-Shift. Almost everyone I know with Android phones have high end phones.
IE: Google releases Android 2.3.3. All manufacturers have X amount of time to port their Custom UI's (HTC Sense, TouchWiz, etc.). What this will do is take the pressure off of the "fragmentation" of Android and place it in the hands of the real culprits... the manufactures, HTC, Samsung, et al.
It's because of the Buy One Get One option. Nothing more. People choose that option because it makes financial sense and if they don't really care about the OS or the phone, they will choose the one that fits their check books. If Apple was to OK ATT and VZ to do a Buy One Get One on the iPhone, there would be no comparison. It would be game over for Android.
-LanPhantom
Thats not true. Me and my gf both switched because we hated AT&T and Verizon. We went to Sprint and are very happy. I have an EVO she has an EVO-Shift. Almost everyone I know with Android phones have high end phones.
Thinine
Apr 10, 01:21 AM
Interesting news, but the bit about booting competitors is downright disgusting.
It's not like they threatened anyone. They likely went to the organizers and said "We'd like to make a really cool announcement at your event but we'd need most of your presentation and sponsorship space to do it." SuperMeet said sure, Apple paid, and here we are. It's not like the other sponsors didn't get their money back (I'm assuming.)
It's not like they threatened anyone. They likely went to the organizers and said "We'd like to make a really cool announcement at your event but we'd need most of your presentation and sponsorship space to do it." SuperMeet said sure, Apple paid, and here we are. It's not like the other sponsors didn't get their money back (I'm assuming.)
Bob Knob
Nov 28, 06:47 PM
While I usually don't go for boycotts this time I would make an exception, if this was to go through I'd boycott buying anything from Universal. It wouldn't matter if it was an artist I had listened to for years, I'd simply never buy anything they release from that point on.
OceanView
Apr 11, 01:46 PM
I can live with it if they include a larger screen, 4G, Larger Capacity and the A5. Possibly 1GB RAM. That would be sweet :)
OhEsTen
Jul 14, 02:34 PM
I figured Apple didn't change the cases for the powerbooks (MBP) MacBook's and mini's and iMac's for a reason...
It reminds people that nothing has really changed about them other than their brains (which is a big deal for sure - it just keep people from thinking Apple's going out of business...)
I remember when Apple made their announcement a year ago about the Intel switch - Macworld running an article about "what it all means" and "is this death for Apple?" - some people were a bit freaked out (which was completely understandable from the netburst point of view) - but keeping the same enclosures for the first round of intel boxes helps people not freak out.... maybe.
It reminds people that nothing has really changed about them other than their brains (which is a big deal for sure - it just keep people from thinking Apple's going out of business...)
I remember when Apple made their announcement a year ago about the Intel switch - Macworld running an article about "what it all means" and "is this death for Apple?" - some people were a bit freaked out (which was completely understandable from the netburst point of view) - but keeping the same enclosures for the first round of intel boxes helps people not freak out.... maybe.
dethmaShine
Apr 19, 02:57 PM
For Q1/11 aprox. 15% for Apple.
Q4/10 numbers were:
http://www.canalys.com/pr/images/r2011013.gif
Again: Apple sold 3 million more devices in Q4/10 than they did in Q3/10 (16 million compared to 13 million in total numbers) but they lost 0.7% marketshare in that 3 month (Q3/10: 16.7% marketshare, see first graph, Q4/10: 16.0%, see above).
Hmm.
What about this:
http://www.comscore.com/Press_Events/Press_Releases/2011/4/comScore_Reports_February_2011_U.S._Mobile_Subscriber_Market_Share
http://www.comscore.com/Press_Events/Press_Releases/2011/3/comScore_Reports_January_2011_U.S._Mobile_Subscriber_Market_Share
Q4/10 numbers were:
http://www.canalys.com/pr/images/r2011013.gif
Again: Apple sold 3 million more devices in Q4/10 than they did in Q3/10 (16 million compared to 13 million in total numbers) but they lost 0.7% marketshare in that 3 month (Q3/10: 16.7% marketshare, see first graph, Q4/10: 16.0%, see above).
Hmm.
What about this:
http://www.comscore.com/Press_Events/Press_Releases/2011/4/comScore_Reports_February_2011_U.S._Mobile_Subscriber_Market_Share
http://www.comscore.com/Press_Events/Press_Releases/2011/3/comScore_Reports_January_2011_U.S._Mobile_Subscriber_Market_Share
~Shard~
Jul 14, 02:37 PM
To charge $1800 for a system that only has 512MB is a real disappoitment. 1GB RAM oughta be standard, especially with Leopard being on the horizon.
Agreed. I can make an argument for the consumer machines, where perhaps 512 MB is sufficient for basic users. Specifically, why force them to pay more for 1 GB if they don't need it. But when it comes to the Pro machines, as if anyone buying one of these beasts is not going to require at least 2 GB of RAM, let alone 1 GB. No one buys a quad Xeon Powermac to just surf the Internet and check their e-mail. :cool:
Agreed. I can make an argument for the consumer machines, where perhaps 512 MB is sufficient for basic users. Specifically, why force them to pay more for 1 GB if they don't need it. But when it comes to the Pro machines, as if anyone buying one of these beasts is not going to require at least 2 GB of RAM, let alone 1 GB. No one buys a quad Xeon Powermac to just surf the Internet and check their e-mail. :cool:
georgi0
Sep 19, 01:08 AM
i agree and i believe that Apple should keep at least for 1 year the same models before updating, except when a new tech comes out like true 64 bit support.
let's see now....
let's see now....
gorgeousninja
Mar 23, 08:21 AM
Complete BS "iphone" lookalikes date back to ebfore the iphone was anounced. So either some companys have people who can predict the future, or the design and tech behind the iphone was aused BEFORe it was released and apple just changed excisting designs.
Ipad is basicly a large smartphone.
History revisionist ahoy!
Please name us one single phone that the original iPhone is a direct copy of....
That's right, there isn't one....
Oh, and if the iPad is really just a smartphone, it's rather lacking in 'phone' features don't you think?...
So you don't continue to make too big a fool of yourself, the iPhone is in actual fact just a small iPad.
The iPad concept predates the iPhone, though they needed the rest of the world to catch up to them before they could release it.
Feel free to stick your fingers in your ears and scream so you can't hear..
but it's still the truth...
Ipad is basicly a large smartphone.
History revisionist ahoy!
Please name us one single phone that the original iPhone is a direct copy of....
That's right, there isn't one....
Oh, and if the iPad is really just a smartphone, it's rather lacking in 'phone' features don't you think?...
So you don't continue to make too big a fool of yourself, the iPhone is in actual fact just a small iPad.
The iPad concept predates the iPhone, though they needed the rest of the world to catch up to them before they could release it.
Feel free to stick your fingers in your ears and scream so you can't hear..
but it's still the truth...
laurim
Apr 25, 02:47 PM
If the chicken littles had any idea how transparent and documented their lives already are, they would never leave the house. It amazes me how many people think "other people" are trying to find out what they do in their mundane lives. Some egos!
I hate to think that a decent way to track potential terrorist movements was ruined by all of this bs. Imagine how much good information could have been had if a terrorist was arrested and his cell phone record scanned to find out where other terrorists are meeting. But no, you people have to tell them to delete the file. Thanks!
I hate to think that a decent way to track potential terrorist movements was ruined by all of this bs. Imagine how much good information could have been had if a terrorist was arrested and his cell phone record scanned to find out where other terrorists are meeting. But no, you people have to tell them to delete the file. Thanks!
jonnyb
Mar 22, 03:01 PM
Hopefully Apple will take a cue from that.
Playbook . . . as in what sport coaches use to hold their plays . . . e.g. their next moves, their plans on winning the game.
A term that's barely used outside of north America. I wonder if RIM even thought of that?
Playbook . . . as in what sport coaches use to hold their plays . . . e.g. their next moves, their plans on winning the game.
A term that's barely used outside of north America. I wonder if RIM even thought of that?
jephrey
Jul 14, 11:47 PM
I assume that the PS move is due to heat. That thing generates heat, and if it can vent in a different location or through a different air channel than the processors, the I think that's good... And 2 drive bays is effin spectacular. I myself am fine with 1, but if I can get a bracket and put a couple HDs in that spot then cool. It'd be cool if apple made it usable that way. I would sure like more bays, but just having that real estate for them, and a solution to cleanly mount them would be nice.
Jephrey
Jephrey
SevenInchScrew
Aug 12, 11:00 PM
but you do care. you are pointing out that you care by what you just typed. if you count the prologues, you get over 57M sold.
You originally said...
so either way, there's only 4 versions of the game out. at over 57 million copies sold, i'd say they sold a fair few.
...which as I've said, a few times now, is incorrect. If you only count 4 games, as you originally said in that quote, that only totals 46M. And besides, if you check that link I originally provided, which is FROM POLYPHONY THEMSELVES, you would see that the total worldwide is only 56M. At least if you're going to quote the number in the wrong context, use the right number.
i disagree. let's bring math into the equation, since you seem to have missed it.
100,000,000/15 = 6,666,667.
57,000,000/8 = 7,125,000.
so GT has sold more copies per game.
Yay, let's play the "Twist The Numbers To Fit Our Needs" game....
100M / 15 years = 6.66M per year (Need for Speed)
56M / 13 years = 4.31M per year (Gran Turismo)
So yea, Need for Speed sells 50% more per year. YAY, math is fun!!!
well again this is your opinion...
It is. I don't like the direction Polyphony has taken the game. A game that used to be my favorite game. It disappoints me. Thus my frustration. I bought my PS3 with the hopes
but the intention of the car was for the game. how do you not see that? specifically for the game. in fact, it's named GT after the game
Can I buy one and drive it to work? No? Then it isn't real, intentions or not.
how does sales have no relevance if something is great?
Then according to you, Wii Play is the "greatest" video game of all time. Just reading that sentence should show you exactly why sales have very little to do with the quality of a game.
I keep saying this, but it seems people don't really understand it. Sales, which deal with numbers, are an objective measure of something. Greatness, which deals with personal preferences, is a subjective measure. You can think GT, or the iPhone, or Star Wars, or whatever, is great. That is fine, and a personal opinion. But, the sales of those things can't be "great". They can be large, and they are, but they can't be great.
And really, if someone uses the sales of something to qualify the greatness of it to themselves, that is kind of sad. Quite a few of my favorite things, which I consider great, didn't sell very well. That doesn't make them any less great to me.
But anyway, I don't even know why I'm arguing about this. I'm not even going to be buying this game. I'm done with this thread now. I'll just tip my hat, and bid you adieu.
You originally said...
so either way, there's only 4 versions of the game out. at over 57 million copies sold, i'd say they sold a fair few.
...which as I've said, a few times now, is incorrect. If you only count 4 games, as you originally said in that quote, that only totals 46M. And besides, if you check that link I originally provided, which is FROM POLYPHONY THEMSELVES, you would see that the total worldwide is only 56M. At least if you're going to quote the number in the wrong context, use the right number.
i disagree. let's bring math into the equation, since you seem to have missed it.
100,000,000/15 = 6,666,667.
57,000,000/8 = 7,125,000.
so GT has sold more copies per game.
Yay, let's play the "Twist The Numbers To Fit Our Needs" game....
100M / 15 years = 6.66M per year (Need for Speed)
56M / 13 years = 4.31M per year (Gran Turismo)
So yea, Need for Speed sells 50% more per year. YAY, math is fun!!!
well again this is your opinion...
It is. I don't like the direction Polyphony has taken the game. A game that used to be my favorite game. It disappoints me. Thus my frustration. I bought my PS3 with the hopes
but the intention of the car was for the game. how do you not see that? specifically for the game. in fact, it's named GT after the game
Can I buy one and drive it to work? No? Then it isn't real, intentions or not.
how does sales have no relevance if something is great?
Then according to you, Wii Play is the "greatest" video game of all time. Just reading that sentence should show you exactly why sales have very little to do with the quality of a game.
I keep saying this, but it seems people don't really understand it. Sales, which deal with numbers, are an objective measure of something. Greatness, which deals with personal preferences, is a subjective measure. You can think GT, or the iPhone, or Star Wars, or whatever, is great. That is fine, and a personal opinion. But, the sales of those things can't be "great". They can be large, and they are, but they can't be great.
And really, if someone uses the sales of something to qualify the greatness of it to themselves, that is kind of sad. Quite a few of my favorite things, which I consider great, didn't sell very well. That doesn't make them any less great to me.
But anyway, I don't even know why I'm arguing about this. I'm not even going to be buying this game. I'm done with this thread now. I'll just tip my hat, and bid you adieu.
aquanutz
Aug 16, 10:47 PM
all if have to say is: I want one (along with everyone else on this forum.) :D
BWhaler
Aug 26, 06:49 PM
Only if you have no sense of humour! :p
It's not really that.
It's just that the joke is soooo done. Played out.
It's time to turn the page.
It's not really that.
It's just that the joke is soooo done. Played out.
It's time to turn the page.
Denarius
Mar 22, 07:36 PM
Don't tell me a flagship armed with 100 Tomahawk missiles and full targeting information just happened to be passing.
I think if military action of this scale is even a possibility, whether you've made a decision, it's pretty normal to put the necessary pieces on standby. I believe keeping strategic targeting information regularly up to date is pretty normal military practise even when you're not at war.
I think if military action of this scale is even a possibility, whether you've made a decision, it's pretty normal to put the necessary pieces on standby. I believe keeping strategic targeting information regularly up to date is pretty normal military practise even when you're not at war.
Amazing Iceman
Apr 7, 10:49 PM
Weird... I think there's more involved in this than we can imagine.
One thing that comes to my mind is the possibility they were holding their stock to sell it outside the country, as there's been a high demand and higher value to sell overseas.
Or... a competitor made an arrangement with Be$t Buy to sell a minimum quota a day (well... very odd, but possible) for who knows what reason.
It's a strange concept on BB's part, but if I had a store I would sell all my stock if there's a demand for it. If I hold off, my customers would be driven away to a competitor and I would loose both present and future sales.
One thing that comes to my mind is the possibility they were holding their stock to sell it outside the country, as there's been a high demand and higher value to sell overseas.
Or... a competitor made an arrangement with Be$t Buy to sell a minimum quota a day (well... very odd, but possible) for who knows what reason.
It's a strange concept on BB's part, but if I had a store I would sell all my stock if there's a demand for it. If I hold off, my customers would be driven away to a competitor and I would loose both present and future sales.
Digital Skunk
Apr 7, 07:27 AM
Everything depends on your work and needs right? For me...I'm short format and tweak every frame.
In terms of full disclosure I own FCP 4 suite and CS 5 master suite and own all the major Apple products (hardware and software). I also run Windows 7 in bootcamp.
Short format work is all about After Effects. Motion is 5 years behind and offers an incomplete feature set in comparison. After Effects marries up well with the tools from big 3d players, like Maxon and C4D. Its a great pipeline.
I'll watch with interest the announcements next week, but the release of an "iMovie Pro" won't interest me...and it seems like that's where Apple is headed. They now are fixated on Consumers Lite and Consumers Plus.
Apple is also doing everything to push me away from it's platform, with it's anti-Flash crusade, and it's complete inability to support Any (I mean ANY of the top 5-7) professional GPUs.
For the serious Pro Apple is living on borrowed time and the Steve Jobs reality-distortion field is weakening. Redmond is calling. Increasingly serious content professionals are listening. I never imagined these words coming from my mouth. But it's the truth.
Coming from a full-time, multimedia/journalism/photography/etc professional I have to totally and completely
AGREE!
I've seen a huge decline in Apple's interest in the professional market, and I don't even mean high end pro, we're talking SMB and SOHO type stuff here. The last revision of FCP was just not worth it unless you were buying new or buying to ensure you didn't have any left over bugs.
Avid Media Composer and Premier have gained massive leads on FCP in terms of workflow and speed. Once the younger college students start seeing how fast they can delivery a product with Adobe or Avid, they'll start wondering why the small houses switched to FCP in the first place, and start wanting to learn what the industry is working with . . . Avid, After Effects, ProTools, etc. And the iMovie Pro will be left to indie filmmakers and consumers with deep pockets
** disclaimer ** I have nothing against the indie segment . . . I am in it and love it. But Apple makes it harder with every update to justify staying with a company that has too much on it's plate, and not enough staff to keep up with the rest of the market.
Apple will always claim that "no one's buying it" rather than, "we didn't make it marketable and desirable" when they go to axe some hardware or software title.
In terms of full disclosure I own FCP 4 suite and CS 5 master suite and own all the major Apple products (hardware and software). I also run Windows 7 in bootcamp.
Short format work is all about After Effects. Motion is 5 years behind and offers an incomplete feature set in comparison. After Effects marries up well with the tools from big 3d players, like Maxon and C4D. Its a great pipeline.
I'll watch with interest the announcements next week, but the release of an "iMovie Pro" won't interest me...and it seems like that's where Apple is headed. They now are fixated on Consumers Lite and Consumers Plus.
Apple is also doing everything to push me away from it's platform, with it's anti-Flash crusade, and it's complete inability to support Any (I mean ANY of the top 5-7) professional GPUs.
For the serious Pro Apple is living on borrowed time and the Steve Jobs reality-distortion field is weakening. Redmond is calling. Increasingly serious content professionals are listening. I never imagined these words coming from my mouth. But it's the truth.
Coming from a full-time, multimedia/journalism/photography/etc professional I have to totally and completely
AGREE!
I've seen a huge decline in Apple's interest in the professional market, and I don't even mean high end pro, we're talking SMB and SOHO type stuff here. The last revision of FCP was just not worth it unless you were buying new or buying to ensure you didn't have any left over bugs.
Avid Media Composer and Premier have gained massive leads on FCP in terms of workflow and speed. Once the younger college students start seeing how fast they can delivery a product with Adobe or Avid, they'll start wondering why the small houses switched to FCP in the first place, and start wanting to learn what the industry is working with . . . Avid, After Effects, ProTools, etc. And the iMovie Pro will be left to indie filmmakers and consumers with deep pockets
** disclaimer ** I have nothing against the indie segment . . . I am in it and love it. But Apple makes it harder with every update to justify staying with a company that has too much on it's plate, and not enough staff to keep up with the rest of the market.
Apple will always claim that "no one's buying it" rather than, "we didn't make it marketable and desirable" when they go to axe some hardware or software title.
rjohnstone
Apr 25, 03:00 PM
ya.. not like it's on right on the "features" page of iphone's website, ( http://www.apple.com/iphone/features/ .) It isn't like they have a whole page about it, ( http://www.apple.com/iphone/features/maps-compass.html .)
Who would think the an electronic device such as an iPhone would know your exactly location? And why would any cache information locally when the same exactly information can be gotten over a slow, inconsistent connection?
Location services is not the same as storing every place you've ever been.
Why does the db never get cleared?
If location info is required for an app, why would I want to use info from possibly over a year ago that may no longer be accurate?
I won't put on a tinfoil hat just yet. For now I'll just chalk this issue up to sloppy programming. ;)
Same on the iPhone... this is not what we're talking about here. Application tracking has always been opt in or out.
This is just a database of cell tower pings. That's all. it's shared with NO ONE and goes nowhere except on your phone. It's like your web browser cache.
Apple still fails to answer the question of "why?"
Why do they need it if it is not used?
I know why a web browser has a cache. At least the web browser is smart enough to clean that up after a while.
Who would think the an electronic device such as an iPhone would know your exactly location? And why would any cache information locally when the same exactly information can be gotten over a slow, inconsistent connection?
Location services is not the same as storing every place you've ever been.
Why does the db never get cleared?
If location info is required for an app, why would I want to use info from possibly over a year ago that may no longer be accurate?
I won't put on a tinfoil hat just yet. For now I'll just chalk this issue up to sloppy programming. ;)
Same on the iPhone... this is not what we're talking about here. Application tracking has always been opt in or out.
This is just a database of cell tower pings. That's all. it's shared with NO ONE and goes nowhere except on your phone. It's like your web browser cache.
Apple still fails to answer the question of "why?"
Why do they need it if it is not used?
I know why a web browser has a cache. At least the web browser is smart enough to clean that up after a while.
Northgrove
Mar 26, 11:16 AM
Since the release of Leopard, the subsequent releases haven't had the wow factor of before.
Just what I think anyway.
Releases? There's just been one release since Leopard. :p
Just what I think anyway.
Releases? There's just been one release since Leopard. :p
drsmithy
Sep 13, 08:41 PM
Mac OS X distributes threads and processes across cores/CPUs to optimize performance already. (Subject to some limitations, as noted already.)
[...]
(Note: I keep specifying 'Mac' here. There is a reason. Windows isn't as good at multithreading/processing yet...)
Uh, no. Windows NT is better at multithreading - and particularly multiprocessor scheduling - largely because it's been doing it for a lot longer and on a lot more powerful hardware. NT was running on quad-processor machines a decade ago.
Prior to 10.4, OS X had roughly the same level of SMP support Windows NT had back around the 1993 - 95 timeframe, with Windows NT 3.x.
The improvements in 10.4 start to put it in the ballpark of NT 4.0, ca. 1996.
10.5 will probably put it on par with Windows 2000, maybe XP.
[...]
(Note: I keep specifying 'Mac' here. There is a reason. Windows isn't as good at multithreading/processing yet...)
Uh, no. Windows NT is better at multithreading - and particularly multiprocessor scheduling - largely because it's been doing it for a lot longer and on a lot more powerful hardware. NT was running on quad-processor machines a decade ago.
Prior to 10.4, OS X had roughly the same level of SMP support Windows NT had back around the 1993 - 95 timeframe, with Windows NT 3.x.
The improvements in 10.4 start to put it in the ballpark of NT 4.0, ca. 1996.
10.5 will probably put it on par with Windows 2000, maybe XP.
tortoise
Aug 23, 03:04 PM
Do you have a reference showing that this translates to better performance in real-world application tests in a head to head competition?
Not handy, since a lot of this happened on mailing lists.
The short version is that the memory performance scales in a very sub-linear fashion as a function of the number of cores being used, whereas Opteron scalability is almost linear up to a large number of cores. The good news is that for single dual-core processors the memory performance is on par with dual-core Opterons and their in-cache performance can be better. The bad news is that this performance does not hold as you scale cores in a system. So for some applications (e.g. those that live mostly in cache) the Woodcrest processors will be mildly faster than Opterons, but for most the performance is about even in real app benchmarks.
I've seen fairly comprehensive benchmarks for both databases and scientific computing applications, both of which thoroughly exercise the memory subsystem. Even though a single Intel core theoretically has more bandwidth, the high latency means that the real bandwidth is about the same as the slower Opterons (which have real bandwidth that approaches theoretical) and the cross-sectional bandwidth of Opterons when you get up to 4 cores and higher is much higher since the scaling is almost linear with the number of cores. For Intel, I think it was the case that a bigger cache was a cheaper design choice than a truly scalable memory subsystem. As a result, they will have different competencies. Some types of floating point codes should run very well on Intel.
Not handy, since a lot of this happened on mailing lists.
The short version is that the memory performance scales in a very sub-linear fashion as a function of the number of cores being used, whereas Opteron scalability is almost linear up to a large number of cores. The good news is that for single dual-core processors the memory performance is on par with dual-core Opterons and their in-cache performance can be better. The bad news is that this performance does not hold as you scale cores in a system. So for some applications (e.g. those that live mostly in cache) the Woodcrest processors will be mildly faster than Opterons, but for most the performance is about even in real app benchmarks.
I've seen fairly comprehensive benchmarks for both databases and scientific computing applications, both of which thoroughly exercise the memory subsystem. Even though a single Intel core theoretically has more bandwidth, the high latency means that the real bandwidth is about the same as the slower Opterons (which have real bandwidth that approaches theoretical) and the cross-sectional bandwidth of Opterons when you get up to 4 cores and higher is much higher since the scaling is almost linear with the number of cores. For Intel, I think it was the case that a bigger cache was a cheaper design choice than a truly scalable memory subsystem. As a result, they will have different competencies. Some types of floating point codes should run very well on Intel.
ncook06
Sep 13, 09:50 AM
I'm just wondering if I can drop one of these into an iMac... Are they pin-compatible? Also sort of wondering about a heat issue.
0 comments:
Post a Comment