balamw
Apr 11, 08:28 AM
If someone in my group had sent me a quick email with this equation I would expect to see-
(48/2)(9+3) or 48/[2(9+3)]
This is even more important when the equations I was using were a lot more complex!
Step back a bit. Someone in your group would actually send you an expression that was full of constant numbers rather than reducing that to the answer?
As s a physicist by training I hate it when the meaning is bled out of an expression, by rote plugging in of numbers. Engineers love to do this kind of thing and take a perfectly nice equation, lump a bunch of stuff together and take a few implied logs for good measure and think it still has meaning. :p
I'd expect anyone who knows what they are doing to send something like x/y(a+b) rather than 48/2(9+3). Preferably with an extra pair of parens/brackets to improve clarity. Or send you TeX $\frac{x}{y}(a+b)$ or even code if this was a numerical exercise. This would assist in your sanity checking if, for example, you saw that x was a distance, y was a time and a and b were also times and you knew the expected answer was a distance you'd know that (x/y)*(a+b) was meant. If you were looking for acceleration you might go back to the author and ask, "did you mean (x/[y*(a+b)])?" instead of taking the original expression at its face value.
In the absence of context and any other information the answer is 288.
B
(48/2)(9+3) or 48/[2(9+3)]
This is even more important when the equations I was using were a lot more complex!
Step back a bit. Someone in your group would actually send you an expression that was full of constant numbers rather than reducing that to the answer?
As s a physicist by training I hate it when the meaning is bled out of an expression, by rote plugging in of numbers. Engineers love to do this kind of thing and take a perfectly nice equation, lump a bunch of stuff together and take a few implied logs for good measure and think it still has meaning. :p
I'd expect anyone who knows what they are doing to send something like x/y(a+b) rather than 48/2(9+3). Preferably with an extra pair of parens/brackets to improve clarity. Or send you TeX $\frac{x}{y}(a+b)$ or even code if this was a numerical exercise. This would assist in your sanity checking if, for example, you saw that x was a distance, y was a time and a and b were also times and you knew the expected answer was a distance you'd know that (x/y)*(a+b) was meant. If you were looking for acceleration you might go back to the author and ask, "did you mean (x/[y*(a+b)])?" instead of taking the original expression at its face value.
In the absence of context and any other information the answer is 288.
B
ChrisA
Aug 4, 12:19 PM
My best gues is that Apple will make their entire lineup 64 bit. This should be easy for them to do and at the same time will give them a way to distance themselves from all the other PC makers. Apple would have a very easy to understand advertizing statment "All macs are 64 bit" Easy to understand is key.
iScott428
Mar 28, 10:39 AM
I can not wait any longer, I need a new Iphone this summer! Please Apple do not make me wait any longer, my white 3gs is beginning to turn gray and the back is destroyed by my standards. Please bring back the metal backing, the mock up that looks like a mini ipad 3g would be outstanding!
oscarmacca
Apr 24, 03:45 AM
I'm not impressed if this is where the iMac display is potentially going , the current GPUs can barely drive the resolutions they have now in anything other than simple desktop apps . , can you imagine what video card you would need to drive a game (say portal 2 which has low to modest requirements) at 30fps + on a screen with 3200 or higher resloution ? Well whatever that GPU is , apple will ship with the one released 2 years ago and half the RAM it shipped with on the PC .
I love the mac OS , I love the mac design , I hate the "last years tech with a shiney shell" we seem to have to put up with , super high res screens and faster I/O ports are all well and good , but put a decent GPU in now the mac is becoming a contender as a home gaming platform .
Think I ranted a bit then , sorry :rolleyes:
Good post.
I love the mac OS , I love the mac design , I hate the "last years tech with a shiney shell" we seem to have to put up with , super high res screens and faster I/O ports are all well and good , but put a decent GPU in now the mac is becoming a contender as a home gaming platform .
Think I ranted a bit then , sorry :rolleyes:
Good post.
vmachiel
May 6, 03:33 AM
Not this again! welcome back stupid universal binaries and "rosetta" :(
Ganymede
Sep 15, 06:26 PM
I have a MBP now, but would consider upgrading if they offered some nice redesign goodies. I love the MB's magnetic latch, but i love the MBP's keyboard (especially the backlight, though when I bought it I thought I'd disable that feature). The design elements that Apple (in my opinion) has to include are the easily swappable HDD and RAM like in the MB. The feature that i would love to see, but probably won't, is and eSATA port instead of FW800. I guess now i just wait and see....
jayducharme
Apr 24, 03:06 PM
Uhmm, how about 640x480? Or less, with the vic 20.
I had an early PC that sported an amazing 16 color resolution at 320x240. When I later upgraded to 256 colors, I was convinced that computers were the ultimate multimedia machine.
I had an early PC that sported an amazing 16 color resolution at 320x240. When I later upgraded to 256 colors, I was convinced that computers were the ultimate multimedia machine.
KnightWRX
Apr 23, 06:30 PM
Bogus story because Apple would never fit graphics cards capable of outputting at that res in the iMacs or laptops
3200x2000 requires 6,400,000 pixels. At 32 bit per pixel, we're talking 25,600,000 bytes of data. Considering modern framebuffers are double buffered, this requires 51,200,000 bytes of memory to hold. That fits into 48.82 MB of RAM. GPUs have had that much since ... hum... 2004 ? So we're good on framebuffer RAM.
Now, bandwidth. In order to refresh the screen 60 times, we need to push out those 25,600,000 pixels. That's going to require 11718 Mbps of bandwidth. Let's see... Display port 1.1a has 10.8 Gbps so it's a no go (though it could almost do it). If only there was a DP 1.2 spec that had a 21.6 Gbps cap... Oh wait there is. :D
So we're good on RAM and bandwidth. Now, what ATI family introduces DP 1.2 so that we can use this new standard ? Oh right, the Radeon HD 6000 series, AMD's current shipping tech! Now if only Apple would release some kind of support for these GPUs, like they did back in 10.6.7 ;) :
http://appleheadlines.com/2011/03/24/10-6-7-update-brings-native-graphic-acceleration-for-amd-5000-and-6000-series-video-cards/
So let's see if I got all of this right. We're good on RAM (have been for quite a few years). We're good on bandwidth for 60 hz 3200x2000 resolution. We're good on hardware (AMD 6000 series) and we're good on OS X support (with 10.6.7).
What exactly is missing here ? Oh right, a hardware refresh with said hardware included, which is probably a formality seeing all of these news and facts :cool:
3200x2000 requires 6,400,000 pixels. At 32 bit per pixel, we're talking 25,600,000 bytes of data. Considering modern framebuffers are double buffered, this requires 51,200,000 bytes of memory to hold. That fits into 48.82 MB of RAM. GPUs have had that much since ... hum... 2004 ? So we're good on framebuffer RAM.
Now, bandwidth. In order to refresh the screen 60 times, we need to push out those 25,600,000 pixels. That's going to require 11718 Mbps of bandwidth. Let's see... Display port 1.1a has 10.8 Gbps so it's a no go (though it could almost do it). If only there was a DP 1.2 spec that had a 21.6 Gbps cap... Oh wait there is. :D
So we're good on RAM and bandwidth. Now, what ATI family introduces DP 1.2 so that we can use this new standard ? Oh right, the Radeon HD 6000 series, AMD's current shipping tech! Now if only Apple would release some kind of support for these GPUs, like they did back in 10.6.7 ;) :
http://appleheadlines.com/2011/03/24/10-6-7-update-brings-native-graphic-acceleration-for-amd-5000-and-6000-series-video-cards/
So let's see if I got all of this right. We're good on RAM (have been for quite a few years). We're good on bandwidth for 60 hz 3200x2000 resolution. We're good on hardware (AMD 6000 series) and we're good on OS X support (with 10.6.7).
What exactly is missing here ? Oh right, a hardware refresh with said hardware included, which is probably a formality seeing all of these news and facts :cool:
Dr_Maybe
Aug 2, 03:38 PM
In Apple will withdraw the iPod. Nobody needs it any more. Nobody wants it. A huge, useless, glowing apple will be all anyone will want.
Funny :D
<confused applause />
Funny :D
<confused applause />
derbothaus
Apr 28, 11:54 AM
Wow. You brought actual stats to the table. I stand corrected on the melting bit:o
darrens
Aug 4, 07:42 AM
I did not think that Intel has released
the general availablity for the merom and woodcrest chips yet??
Woodcrest was announced at least two weeks before Conroe. Woodcrest is supposedly available now - Apple's just waiting for WWDC...
Xeon (Woodcrest) chips are not generally used by PC manufacturers for desktops, so Apple doesn't have the same level of pressure to release a Mac Pro based on it. At least in my opinion.
the general availablity for the merom and woodcrest chips yet??
Woodcrest was announced at least two weeks before Conroe. Woodcrest is supposedly available now - Apple's just waiting for WWDC...
Xeon (Woodcrest) chips are not generally used by PC manufacturers for desktops, so Apple doesn't have the same level of pressure to release a Mac Pro based on it. At least in my opinion.
3N16MA
May 6, 12:25 AM
I can't think of a worse idea!
Apple licensing Mac OS X to Dell.
Apple licensing Mac OS X to Dell.
MatthewAMEL
May 6, 12:46 AM
This is about the dumbest thing I have ever seen on MacRumors.
It's not April Fools, right?
It's not April Fools, right?
Multimedia
Sep 11, 01:27 PM
We'll find out tomorrow
BTW...what is the high end Merom processor? Is there a lower end processor? If there is the higher, faster one would go into the MBP while the lower end C2D is in the MB so you still have a discrepancy that warrants a higher price point. :cool:Top Merom is 2.33GHz and should be standard on both top 15" and 17" models - def the 17". Bottom of Merom is 1.66GHz and 1.83GHz with a 2MB shared L2 cache. 2GHz, 2.16GHz and 2.33GHz models have a 4MB shared L2 cache.
That's why the 2GHz Merom MacBook will be such a strategicly positioned superior product for the money and why the mini will still be crippled even when it switches to C2D at the same speeds. 2.33GHz is only 16.5% faster - not so much that you would even notice most of the time.
Only reason Merom MBP may not be announced tomorrow is for marketing reasons - not because it isn't ready. While they continue to manufacture them and build up a large inventory, we may have to endure these other product announcements so Apple can get all the heat focused on them until later this month when they can have the new MBP deployed worldwide in large quantities and be able to say "on sale today." and "Let the feeding frenzy begin."
On the other hand, because of Apple-Expo Paris, I think the MBP still has a better than 50% chance of being introduced tomorrow. Three years ago they introduced the revoluitonary Aluminium 15" PowerMac G4's @1.25GHz with USB 2 and FW 800 for the first time in a mobile Mac. I bought one a month later when Panther was introduced.
BTW...what is the high end Merom processor? Is there a lower end processor? If there is the higher, faster one would go into the MBP while the lower end C2D is in the MB so you still have a discrepancy that warrants a higher price point. :cool:Top Merom is 2.33GHz and should be standard on both top 15" and 17" models - def the 17". Bottom of Merom is 1.66GHz and 1.83GHz with a 2MB shared L2 cache. 2GHz, 2.16GHz and 2.33GHz models have a 4MB shared L2 cache.
That's why the 2GHz Merom MacBook will be such a strategicly positioned superior product for the money and why the mini will still be crippled even when it switches to C2D at the same speeds. 2.33GHz is only 16.5% faster - not so much that you would even notice most of the time.
Only reason Merom MBP may not be announced tomorrow is for marketing reasons - not because it isn't ready. While they continue to manufacture them and build up a large inventory, we may have to endure these other product announcements so Apple can get all the heat focused on them until later this month when they can have the new MBP deployed worldwide in large quantities and be able to say "on sale today." and "Let the feeding frenzy begin."
On the other hand, because of Apple-Expo Paris, I think the MBP still has a better than 50% chance of being introduced tomorrow. Three years ago they introduced the revoluitonary Aluminium 15" PowerMac G4's @1.25GHz with USB 2 and FW 800 for the first time in a mobile Mac. I bought one a month later when Panther was introduced.
zoran
Aug 2, 04:01 PM
??
Ryth
Apr 25, 10:15 AM
It's not a big deal at all.
As soon as you get any electronic device that uses the internet in some way shape or form, you are leaving a trail. You are leaving a electronic paper trail all the damn time.
Deal with it or ditch your devices.
As soon as you get any electronic device that uses the internet in some way shape or form, you are leaving a trail. You are leaving a electronic paper trail all the damn time.
Deal with it or ditch your devices.
skellener
Aug 7, 08:07 PM
How about a 23" or 30" iMac?
DavidCar
Sep 16, 01:46 PM
If there IS an upgrade/redesign/whatever do you think there will be a 12" MacbookPro or do you guys think Apple is not going for that on the Pro line?
(also are both 15" and 17" upgrades to be expected or just 15"??)
I'll guess 12", 15" and 17". I read somewhere they're expecting a 12".
(also are both 15" and 17" upgrades to be expected or just 15"??)
I'll guess 12", 15" and 17". I read somewhere they're expecting a 12".
SirHaakon
Mar 29, 05:47 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
Holy wow. iTunes is officially dead to me.
Holy wow. iTunes is officially dead to me.
RebeccaL
Apr 5, 06:56 PM
Leave the jailbreak community alone Apple!! What is your ****ing problem??? Can't we just coexist???:mad:
The problem is jailbreking violates the iOS end user license agreement. Apple is just defending themselves. Just as if any person violates an agreement.
The problem is jailbreking violates the iOS end user license agreement. Apple is just defending themselves. Just as if any person violates an agreement.
Glideslope
Mar 28, 10:55 AM
You can update hardware silently on a different day and still dedicate time to the two major OSes. I don't see the big deal. The MacBook Pros got Quad Core/Thunderbolt treatment but there was only a press release. Shame the iPhone cycle will be slightly extended this year though but oh well.
Sept 2011.
iPhone 5 / iPad HD/Wi-Fi/3G/ New iMacs with SandyBridge Quads.
Sept 2012
iPhone 6 LTE / iPad 3 HD/LTE / Tinted/Smoke Transparent Aluminum. :apple:
Sept 2011.
iPhone 5 / iPad HD/Wi-Fi/3G/ New iMacs with SandyBridge Quads.
Sept 2012
iPhone 6 LTE / iPad 3 HD/LTE / Tinted/Smoke Transparent Aluminum. :apple:
ten-oak-druid
Apr 21, 02:46 PM
Good idea to make it dual purpose as standalone computer or rack mounted server. If the server option takes off, that's good for business but while waiting for that to happen, the product has another purpose.
Now get rid of macbooks and have two lines: macbook pro and air.
Now get rid of macbooks and have two lines: macbook pro and air.
marcosscriven
May 6, 02:37 AM
Moving to a different architecture doesn't mean the death of Mac OS - all they need to do is compile it to the new target. Obviously not *quite* that simple, but ARM Mac != iOS Mac
What I'm interested in though is how well any proposed ARM chip could emulate the Core i3/5/7s of today?
If a future MacBook had an 8-core 64-bit ARM chip in that was twice as fast as Intel's offerings, and used half the power (say), but was the same price, the only thing that would stop me buying is if x86 emulation was poor.
Basically, I don't care what processor is used, if older programs can be run *reasonably* well, for a year or so, before they are compiled for the new arch, or superseded by others. I'd be prepared to take a 20 - 30% hit on x86 apps in any interim changeover period.
What I'm interested in though is how well any proposed ARM chip could emulate the Core i3/5/7s of today?
If a future MacBook had an 8-core 64-bit ARM chip in that was twice as fast as Intel's offerings, and used half the power (say), but was the same price, the only thing that would stop me buying is if x86 emulation was poor.
Basically, I don't care what processor is used, if older programs can be run *reasonably* well, for a year or so, before they are compiled for the new arch, or superseded by others. I'd be prepared to take a 20 - 30% hit on x86 apps in any interim changeover period.
aldejesus
Mar 30, 08:28 PM
Can someone confirm if this preview can be installed on MBP 2011?
Thanks
Thanks
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar