rdowns
Apr 21, 11:38 AM
How do I +2 Waloshin's posts?
lordonuthin
Apr 28, 10:23 PM
well, 2 systems would be better than one, if you can afford it.
let's see
dual cpu:
- 2 x i7 980x - $2,000
- motherboard - $600
- 12 GB of RAM - about $300
- powersupply - about $120
total - about $3,020
single cpu:
- i7 980x - $1,000
- motherboard - $200
- 6 GB of RAM - about $150
- powersupply - about $80
total - about $1430 x 2 = $2,860
so 2 systems might actually be cheaper. i didn't put a case, since with the big $600 motherboard, it won't fit in most cases. and i assume you already have gpus
I already have 2 4u cases and 650 psu's for them, no gpu's right now I just ssh into them. Would a 650 psu be enough power for a single GTX480 on one of these? I have 1200 watt psu's running the 2 machines with 3 gpu's each. I could swap out one of the GT260's for the 480 and put it (the 260) on the new board; when I have the change for the GTX480 that is.
This of course will delay the purchase of a new Mac Pro somewhat, maybe... but I couldn't wait any longer for the Mac Pro's...:o
Our team output is up again to just under 2 mil pts for the last week.
let's see
dual cpu:
- 2 x i7 980x - $2,000
- motherboard - $600
- 12 GB of RAM - about $300
- powersupply - about $120
total - about $3,020
single cpu:
- i7 980x - $1,000
- motherboard - $200
- 6 GB of RAM - about $150
- powersupply - about $80
total - about $1430 x 2 = $2,860
so 2 systems might actually be cheaper. i didn't put a case, since with the big $600 motherboard, it won't fit in most cases. and i assume you already have gpus
I already have 2 4u cases and 650 psu's for them, no gpu's right now I just ssh into them. Would a 650 psu be enough power for a single GTX480 on one of these? I have 1200 watt psu's running the 2 machines with 3 gpu's each. I could swap out one of the GT260's for the 480 and put it (the 260) on the new board; when I have the change for the GTX480 that is.
This of course will delay the purchase of a new Mac Pro somewhat, maybe... but I couldn't wait any longer for the Mac Pro's...:o
Our team output is up again to just under 2 mil pts for the last week.
unlinked
Mar 29, 02:22 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; 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)
They rummaged through non-App Store apps two years ago, but back then there wasn't a 30% cut in it for them.
That never happened.
They rummaged through non-App Store apps two years ago, but back then there wasn't a 30% cut in it for them.
That never happened.
saunders45
Sep 8, 08:32 AM
That term should be reserved for one person and one person only:
http://www.hollywoodimages.net/Michael_Bolton.jpg
Why should I change? He's the one who sucks.
http://www.thecobrasnose.com/images3/OSM&Ssm.jpg
:D
HAHAHAHAHAHAAAHAHAHAHA
wait, your name is michael bolton?
http://www.hollywoodimages.net/Michael_Bolton.jpg
Why should I change? He's the one who sucks.
http://www.thecobrasnose.com/images3/OSM&Ssm.jpg
:D
HAHAHAHAHAHAAAHAHAHAHA
wait, your name is michael bolton?
more...
lordonuthin
Apr 5, 05:24 PM
2 months ago it was zero degrees f outside in Iowa... cooling wasn't so much of a problem then :p
The 2 systems I moved to the basement seem to be ok and the basement is staying within a tolerable temp range. All of that concrete is keeping the air cool enough for now. I think my folding power bill is higher than I thought it was; like maybe $150-$200 a month. Despite the extra cold winter my heating bill may have been quite low with all of the extra heat from the folding systems. I should have a better idea in a couple of months :eek:
Kind of makes me appreciate the reasons why a data center would go with more cores per system and multiple virtual servers per system to reduce the electric bill.
The 2 systems I moved to the basement seem to be ok and the basement is staying within a tolerable temp range. All of that concrete is keeping the air cool enough for now. I think my folding power bill is higher than I thought it was; like maybe $150-$200 a month. Despite the extra cold winter my heating bill may have been quite low with all of the extra heat from the folding systems. I should have a better idea in a couple of months :eek:
Kind of makes me appreciate the reasons why a data center would go with more cores per system and multiple virtual servers per system to reduce the electric bill.
Rodimus Prime
Jul 30, 11:20 AM
I completely agree.
Perhaps - but maybe that would just cause us to burn more fuel at power plants rather than look for alternative fuels...and who knows what that would do to the price and availability of electricity? To me, it feels like we'd just be exchanging one problem for another.
While that part is true that we would burn more fuel at power planets one advantage you are forgetting about is the power planets are by far much more efficient at producing power than the internal combustion engine on your car. On top of that it is much easier to capture and clean the pollution the power planet produces over what the cars produce. On top of that we can easily most our power over to other renewable choices.
I think we should be less worried (in the short term) about hybrids and electric cars and more concerned with just lowering per capita fuel consumption.
more...
andy roddick and rooklyn
andy roddick and rooklyn
more...
andy roddick and rooklyn
Brooklyn Decker; andy roddick
more...
andy roddick and rooklyn
andy roddick and rooklyn
more...
Well, Andy Roddick is playing
andy roddick and rooklyn
more...
andy roddick and rooklyn decker kiss. andy roddick and rooklyn; andy roddick and rooklyn. AppleMatt. Mar 5, 04:03 AM. Do we really need more rules,
andy roddick and rooklyn
more...
Andy Roddick and Brooklyn
andy roddick kiss
andy roddick and rooklyn
Perhaps - but maybe that would just cause us to burn more fuel at power plants rather than look for alternative fuels...and who knows what that would do to the price and availability of electricity? To me, it feels like we'd just be exchanging one problem for another.
While that part is true that we would burn more fuel at power planets one advantage you are forgetting about is the power planets are by far much more efficient at producing power than the internal combustion engine on your car. On top of that it is much easier to capture and clean the pollution the power planet produces over what the cars produce. On top of that we can easily most our power over to other renewable choices.
I think we should be less worried (in the short term) about hybrids and electric cars and more concerned with just lowering per capita fuel consumption.
more...
adrian.oconnor
Apr 26, 03:35 AM
Why is there multiple vanishing points!?! I believe it is a fake.
The whole image looks wrong to me too. When I saw it my first split-second reaction was 'That's a Badly Photoshopped Image'. I still think it is. The proportions feel wrong and the screen doesn't look natural.
The whole image looks wrong to me too. When I saw it my first split-second reaction was 'That's a Badly Photoshopped Image'. I still think it is. The proportions feel wrong and the screen doesn't look natural.
dicklacara
Jul 21, 01:25 PM
But Apple admitted that it DOES drop more calls than 3GS.
They spun it as "less than 1 per 100", but assuming all 3,000,000 iPhone 4 users make about 5 calls per day, that's over ONE MILLION dropped calls per week MORE than iPhone 3GS.
It's a problem.
It's been reproduced by CNET, Consumer Reports, NYT, and many others.
The debate here is not whether there's a problem, but why Apple is obfuscating, rather than fixing it, pretending that bridging the gap of their electrically exposed antenna is equivalent to attenuating an antenna by completely covering it with one's meaty hand.
(seems like moving this gap to the bottom edge of the phone where it's far less likely to be touched, would be an easy fix).
Couple of things:
1) What isn't factored into your calculations is that because of its more-sensitive antenna, the iP4 was able to make calls, in marginal signal areas, where the 3GS showed no signal and was not able to attempt or receive a call... dropping any of these "never-before-possible" calls would reflect poorly on the iP4, and be included in the "< 1 call per hundred" more dropped calls by the iP4.
2) <1 per 100 more dropped calls by the iP4 than the 3GS. "< 1" can mean anything from, say, .0000000001 to .9999999999. Without knowing the real delta fraction it is difficult to base calculations on it.
3) The 3GS came into being with a plethora of available cases-- the iP4 with 1 case, that was in so short supply as to be non-available. Apple stated that 80% of the 3GSs left their store with a case. So, many 3Gs had 2 layers of antenna shielding, the 3GS plastic housing and an external case. The bulk of iP4s had neither-- 0 levels of antenna shielding.
All of this has been widely reported (or obvious) to those who care to objectively examine the facts. So it is a bit disingenuous to make your assertions, without qualification.
.
They spun it as "less than 1 per 100", but assuming all 3,000,000 iPhone 4 users make about 5 calls per day, that's over ONE MILLION dropped calls per week MORE than iPhone 3GS.
It's a problem.
It's been reproduced by CNET, Consumer Reports, NYT, and many others.
The debate here is not whether there's a problem, but why Apple is obfuscating, rather than fixing it, pretending that bridging the gap of their electrically exposed antenna is equivalent to attenuating an antenna by completely covering it with one's meaty hand.
(seems like moving this gap to the bottom edge of the phone where it's far less likely to be touched, would be an easy fix).
Couple of things:
1) What isn't factored into your calculations is that because of its more-sensitive antenna, the iP4 was able to make calls, in marginal signal areas, where the 3GS showed no signal and was not able to attempt or receive a call... dropping any of these "never-before-possible" calls would reflect poorly on the iP4, and be included in the "< 1 call per hundred" more dropped calls by the iP4.
2) <1 per 100 more dropped calls by the iP4 than the 3GS. "< 1" can mean anything from, say, .0000000001 to .9999999999. Without knowing the real delta fraction it is difficult to base calculations on it.
3) The 3GS came into being with a plethora of available cases-- the iP4 with 1 case, that was in so short supply as to be non-available. Apple stated that 80% of the 3GSs left their store with a case. So, many 3Gs had 2 layers of antenna shielding, the 3GS plastic housing and an external case. The bulk of iP4s had neither-- 0 levels of antenna shielding.
All of this has been widely reported (or obvious) to those who care to objectively examine the facts. So it is a bit disingenuous to make your assertions, without qualification.
.
more...
BJB Productions
Mar 17, 10:57 AM
I feel bad for the kid who's not going to have a job because a costumer was too American to be honest and tell him that he did not pay the correct amount.
What is American coming to? I think I'll move to Japan.
What is American coming to? I think I'll move to Japan.
Russell L
Aug 15, 01:21 AM
This is getting very messy.
Another purchaser of the 23" contacted AppleCare and reported this in Apple's Monitor Forum:
"I just talked to an AppleCare specialist and he said that this is still the old model based on my serial number. 2A6241XXXXX and manufactured June 2006"
"I called the apple store online on the phone and asked them how I would get the new one that is as the one they sell now. They said, it is guaranteed 100% that I would get the new one online, but through their retail stores, it is very likely to get the previous model, because they still have the old ones."
So both of us (mine made in May ( 2A6211XXXXX) and yours in June 2006 (2A6241XXXXX) have the old model with the following specs according to his report:
Brightness 270cd/m2
contrast ratio 400:1
So I guess no one can be sure of what they are getting, no matter how or where they buy it.
Well, I sprung for a new 23" at the Apple Store in SF last Friday (along with a new Mac Pro!). I asked the salesman to find me one with the highest serial number, which was 2A6251xxxxx (also June 2006). FWIW, the display was set at its highest brightness setting and was just too bright--I've now got it set at about 25% and it looks terrific. No obvious dead pixels, no pink cast. I also purchased the AppleCare warranty, so I should be covered over the next 3 years.
Russell
Another purchaser of the 23" contacted AppleCare and reported this in Apple's Monitor Forum:
"I just talked to an AppleCare specialist and he said that this is still the old model based on my serial number. 2A6241XXXXX and manufactured June 2006"
"I called the apple store online on the phone and asked them how I would get the new one that is as the one they sell now. They said, it is guaranteed 100% that I would get the new one online, but through their retail stores, it is very likely to get the previous model, because they still have the old ones."
So both of us (mine made in May ( 2A6211XXXXX) and yours in June 2006 (2A6241XXXXX) have the old model with the following specs according to his report:
Brightness 270cd/m2
contrast ratio 400:1
So I guess no one can be sure of what they are getting, no matter how or where they buy it.
Well, I sprung for a new 23" at the Apple Store in SF last Friday (along with a new Mac Pro!). I asked the salesman to find me one with the highest serial number, which was 2A6251xxxxx (also June 2006). FWIW, the display was set at its highest brightness setting and was just too bright--I've now got it set at about 25% and it looks terrific. No obvious dead pixels, no pink cast. I also purchased the AppleCare warranty, so I should be covered over the next 3 years.
Russell
more...
lordonuthin
May 16, 02:04 PM
Thought I would post here instead of starting a new thread. How do I get bonus points, all I am reading is -advmethods and setting up a passkey. Would it be worth it on a i7 720qm at 1.66ghz? Would it complete a wu in 4 days?
This passkey sounds like a big deal should I be using it on all me machines?
With the console client for windows, is there a way I can close the window with out it stopping folding, kind of pointless having the window constantly open. Surely it can fold in the background?
Thanks guys :)
On an i7 720 you won't get bigadv units done in time to get bonus points also I have an i7 980x that hasn't gotten any bigadv units even though I have it set up to get them. I suspect some recent changes on the server end are allowing only certain cpu's to get bigadv units and i7's probably aren't getting them. as far as the passkey I'm not sure it makes any difference for someone like you, I don't think there are any other wu's that get a bonus...
You can minimize the window and it will keep folding...
This passkey sounds like a big deal should I be using it on all me machines?
With the console client for windows, is there a way I can close the window with out it stopping folding, kind of pointless having the window constantly open. Surely it can fold in the background?
Thanks guys :)
On an i7 720 you won't get bigadv units done in time to get bonus points also I have an i7 980x that hasn't gotten any bigadv units even though I have it set up to get them. I suspect some recent changes on the server end are allowing only certain cpu's to get bigadv units and i7's probably aren't getting them. as far as the passkey I'm not sure it makes any difference for someone like you, I don't think there are any other wu's that get a bonus...
You can minimize the window and it will keep folding...
paradox00
May 3, 03:23 PM
Shocking that carriers would take steps to stop people from stealing service from them.
You did not pay for tethering data. That is a separate charge. By circumventing the system you are stealing. There are no ifs, ands or buts about it.
It is not a gray area.. it is black and white. The contracts specifically say the data you pay for does not include tethering. Tethering costs extra.
Contract terms require "consideration" from both parties to be legally binding. Consideration is something you provide to the other party (i.e., money from you, data services from your carrier).
What consideration are the carriers offering you for tethering? You're already paying $X for Y GB of data used on your phone. It doesn't matter to the carrier if your Netflix app is using it, or your tethering app is sending the data to your laptop. Nothing changes on their end, they just send the data that you've already paid for to your phone, and your phone handles the rest.
You're right, it is black and white. It's a scam aimed at exploiting consumers like yourself who don't know any better, with an illegal contract term. I hope this goes to court soon, before the carriers in Canada (where I am) try to pull the same BS.
You did not pay for tethering data. That is a separate charge. By circumventing the system you are stealing. There are no ifs, ands or buts about it.
It is not a gray area.. it is black and white. The contracts specifically say the data you pay for does not include tethering. Tethering costs extra.
Contract terms require "consideration" from both parties to be legally binding. Consideration is something you provide to the other party (i.e., money from you, data services from your carrier).
What consideration are the carriers offering you for tethering? You're already paying $X for Y GB of data used on your phone. It doesn't matter to the carrier if your Netflix app is using it, or your tethering app is sending the data to your laptop. Nothing changes on their end, they just send the data that you've already paid for to your phone, and your phone handles the rest.
You're right, it is black and white. It's a scam aimed at exploiting consumers like yourself who don't know any better, with an illegal contract term. I hope this goes to court soon, before the carriers in Canada (where I am) try to pull the same BS.
more...
jowie
Apr 29, 03:53 PM
Great news. Glad to see Apple taking a leaf out of their own guidelines... A touch OS has a different interface for a reason.
MagnusVonMagnum
May 1, 07:46 PM
Wow, at no time in this rant did you come close to a point. You actually argued both for and against my point at various times in your incoherent ramble.
Sure, right...and you managed to say exactly NOTHING in ANY of your posts other than flames and insults, always with some lame excuse why you cannot be bothered to give any kind of lucid or even logical reply. I've concluded you're nothing but a TROLL and therefore belong on the ignore list. Goodbye troll. :p
Sure, right...and you managed to say exactly NOTHING in ANY of your posts other than flames and insults, always with some lame excuse why you cannot be bothered to give any kind of lucid or even logical reply. I've concluded you're nothing but a TROLL and therefore belong on the ignore list. Goodbye troll. :p
more...
slabbius
Sep 25, 09:28 PM
OMFG OMFG! Apple didn't just do Macbook/Pro silent update to Merom!
xappeal
Sep 12, 06:18 AM
I don't think we'll see imedia or any weird name for the new movie store, but rather an expanded version of quicktime will be launched.
Think about it:
Already included with itunes
Established brand name
Already made for mac and pc
Plus the app already is a pretty good player, just needs non-pro fullscreen.
Think about it:
Already included with itunes
Established brand name
Already made for mac and pc
Plus the app already is a pretty good player, just needs non-pro fullscreen.
more...
dscuber9000
Apr 5, 04:34 PM
I'm going to start a TV channel that only shows commercials.
They already have it and it's actually quite popular. :D
They already have it and it's actually quite popular. :D
Dunepilot
Nov 22, 03:46 AM
the current 17" C2D iMac is 6.8 inches thick
The Apple site quotes that as the 'depth' of the iMac (presumably the space needed to situate it on a desk, including the depth of the stand. I seem to remember the actual iMac 'screen' itself being around 2 inches thick when they introduced the G5 version. Have a look at the C2D iMac in a shop - it's certainly not 6.8" thick.
Back OT - there's really no reason why Apple would look at AMD now. They have a good relationship with Intel, are getting the supply of chips that they need, and they've very much fallen into bed with the company for the lower-end machines (integrated graphics etc). At present they're doing well with one supplier where they had mixed success with dealing with two in the past (IBM and Freescale).
The Apple site quotes that as the 'depth' of the iMac (presumably the space needed to situate it on a desk, including the depth of the stand. I seem to remember the actual iMac 'screen' itself being around 2 inches thick when they introduced the G5 version. Have a look at the C2D iMac in a shop - it's certainly not 6.8" thick.
Back OT - there's really no reason why Apple would look at AMD now. They have a good relationship with Intel, are getting the supply of chips that they need, and they've very much fallen into bed with the company for the lower-end machines (integrated graphics etc). At present they're doing well with one supplier where they had mixed success with dealing with two in the past (IBM and Freescale).
iJohnHenry
Apr 18, 07:43 PM
Likewise with the Jews perhaps? :rolleyes:
Without any doubt, whatsoever.
You face the likelihood of extinction, and see how you respond.
Jews are the best example of 'survivors' on the planet at the moment.
IMNSHO.
Without any doubt, whatsoever.
You face the likelihood of extinction, and see how you respond.
Jews are the best example of 'survivors' on the planet at the moment.
IMNSHO.
Eidorian
May 3, 11:13 PM
If I could only find a personal use beyond web browsing.
ezekielrage_99
Jan 14, 11:26 PM
I think they'll be barred after this....
http://gizmodo.com/344673/do-you-really-think-the-macworld-keynotes-leaked-on-wikipedia
http://gizmodo.com/344673/do-you-really-think-the-macworld-keynotes-leaked-on-wikipedia
Christian247
Apr 15, 01:26 PM
"Christian Likes This!"
Amazing Iceman
May 4, 09:04 AM
Does anybody know what apps are featured in this commercial? I was able to identify a few of them, but not all, and are not yet listed in the AppStore.
-hh
Oct 19, 10:16 AM
The market share (and Princeton report) are favorable news for the Mac platform and for Apple.
But it is interesting to read this from Gartner, in the light that this very same Company is also in the news right now for their "Macs should be made by Dell" splash (actual paper was "Apple Should License the Mac to Dell")
In conjunction with this articles observation that Dell's PC marketshare has been sliding (lost worldwide #1 to HP, etc), along with business reports that aren't rosey on Dell's margins (nor their get well plan, which isn't working), the newsfolk who picked up on Gartner really got their headline wrong. It really should have been IMO:
"Dell sliding bad - needs rescue in form of Mac licence from Apple".
In said report (the other one, not this one) Gartner suggested that 'Apple should concentrate on what it does best - create software - and make use of Dell's production and distribution infrastructure.' In this report, there's not a peep of such 'black clouds on the horizon' for Apple ... must be two different guys in the Gartner shop :)
Quite interesting, since the bottom line right now is that the Mac Pro is known to be less expensive than the Dell equivalent, for what does that suggest about expertise in cutting deals with Intel, and efficiently running production & distrubution?
The reality is that Apple generally contracts out much of their manufacturing, true. However, so does Dell. As such, why should Apple bother to pay to go through Dell? That's called using a "Middle Man" and this intermediate step would increase costs, which would then either lower Apple's unit profits, or force them to raise prices ... which hearkens the 'Macs cost more' paradigm.
This is why Gartner's suggestion seems to be more aimed to help Dell through their current fiscal troubles but does not help Apple in any meaningful way at this time.
Perhaps Apple will need Dell for access to Dell's assemblers, but that would only occur when Apple's total market share gets huge - say exceeds 33%. Barring a Vista-catastrophy, at the current rate of market share growth, we're still more than a year or two away from having to cross that bridge, which ironically gives Michael Dell plenty of time to become more retrospective and apologetic about inflammatory comments he has made of Apple in the past.
-hh
PS: if you look more closely at Apple's 3Q numbers, you'll see that desktop sales were relatively flat: the growth was in laptops.
But it is interesting to read this from Gartner, in the light that this very same Company is also in the news right now for their "Macs should be made by Dell" splash (actual paper was "Apple Should License the Mac to Dell")
In conjunction with this articles observation that Dell's PC marketshare has been sliding (lost worldwide #1 to HP, etc), along with business reports that aren't rosey on Dell's margins (nor their get well plan, which isn't working), the newsfolk who picked up on Gartner really got their headline wrong. It really should have been IMO:
"Dell sliding bad - needs rescue in form of Mac licence from Apple".
In said report (the other one, not this one) Gartner suggested that 'Apple should concentrate on what it does best - create software - and make use of Dell's production and distribution infrastructure.' In this report, there's not a peep of such 'black clouds on the horizon' for Apple ... must be two different guys in the Gartner shop :)
Quite interesting, since the bottom line right now is that the Mac Pro is known to be less expensive than the Dell equivalent, for what does that suggest about expertise in cutting deals with Intel, and efficiently running production & distrubution?
The reality is that Apple generally contracts out much of their manufacturing, true. However, so does Dell. As such, why should Apple bother to pay to go through Dell? That's called using a "Middle Man" and this intermediate step would increase costs, which would then either lower Apple's unit profits, or force them to raise prices ... which hearkens the 'Macs cost more' paradigm.
This is why Gartner's suggestion seems to be more aimed to help Dell through their current fiscal troubles but does not help Apple in any meaningful way at this time.
Perhaps Apple will need Dell for access to Dell's assemblers, but that would only occur when Apple's total market share gets huge - say exceeds 33%. Barring a Vista-catastrophy, at the current rate of market share growth, we're still more than a year or two away from having to cross that bridge, which ironically gives Michael Dell plenty of time to become more retrospective and apologetic about inflammatory comments he has made of Apple in the past.
-hh
PS: if you look more closely at Apple's 3Q numbers, you'll see that desktop sales were relatively flat: the growth was in laptops.
