Mord
Apr 25, 03:15 AM
While no one deserving to be rape or rob no matter what they are doing/ wearing and the person who did said things should be punished to the full extent of the law it does not remove a factor that some people do a very poor job and managing their risk profil.
We can not control how others will act but we can control our risk profile and our behavior.
Examples of managing our risk profile is saying out of bad parts of town if possible and avoid it at night. Girls avoiding wearing clothing that gets them to be a target and travel in well lite places and have a male escort.
It is about managing the risk profile. Now if someone gets raped I am not going to blame the victim but people should try to avoid being an easy target because even though legally and morally you are complete in the write still does not remove the fact that you have to live with the results of what was done to you.
Think about this. Lets say you get in an auto accident and T-Bone some dumb ass who ran a red light and nothing you could really do to avoid it and sad dumb ass is killed. Even though you could not do anything to avoid it you still have to live with that guilt that you killed another human being and many people that is really hard on them even though there was nothing they could of done to avoid it.
You're well meaning Rodimus so I'll tone down my response. Do you not think it's a little misogynistic to suggest women stay under the protection of a man? I also don't think that clothing even makes all that much difference as a rapist would typically forcibly remove it anyway. I've been the victim of a few sexual assaults in the past and I wasn't dressed particularly noteworthily at the time. Though every time I go out clubbing I don't really wear much at all, yet have never had trouble walking back through leeds at 5AM.
If I wished to take every precaution against such things happening again it would utterly devastate my social life, where do you draw the line? Personally I'd rater be an occasional victim of unwanted attention than a constant victim of my own fear.
I do though take your point, but only upon the condition that victim blaming is utterly unacceptable in any form and that encouraging people take such precautions should never ever mean that we should stop every effort to bring such people to justice and make every effort to stop these things from happening.
I would beat the hell out of any dude that was in the same bathroom as my daughter.
I'm curious as to what exactly you think any such person would do exactly? You ignoring your obvious prejudice here on a pragmatic level where on earth is the harm? They'll see your daughter wash her hands? Maybe touch up some makeup?
If someone was set on molesting your daughter they'd do it, they wouldn't dress up as a woman to make their way into the female toilets to do so, they'd just do it. Besides, do you like beating up cleaners? Plenty of female loos have male attendees.
If you don't have a daughter, then you don't have a clue.
I have seen some transgenders, and I have nothing to say to them.
So, you've seen some people who fall under the very broad category of "transgender", a category that includes various people who dress as female who don't and quite rightly don't use the female loos and thus you feel entitled to judge them all out of hand, and you're not going to admit that this is anything but prejudiced bigotry. Because you've "seen some"
I'd bet you've also seen and talked to a couple too just without knowing it. I know I have over the years only to find out later on. One of the great PR issues for transgender people is that whenever they start to blend with regular society they become invisible, though I guess with people like you around it's more of a blessing than an issue.
the fact is nobody knows the facts ... it could have been a Man trying to disguise himself as a Woman to gain access to the Woman's washroom.
maybe he was not a transgender and was a threat to young girls in the bathroom.
I don't think anybody has all the facts ... he was hardly beaten to the point where this thread is labeled "almost killed"
Not that I accept that surgery even matters but how do you expect to tell exactly? A mandatory full body scanner before entering? I'm going to refer you to my earlier question, where's the harm?
Why on earth would a potential rapist bother "disguising" himself as a woman? I challenge you to cite a single case where this has actually occurred.
If he still has "parts" down there ... he belongs in the Men's washroom
Her parts are none of your business, or anyone's really.
IMO the Men's washroom ... until he finishes with the transformation ... he is still just a cross dresser
Ignoring the fact that she by her own omission has finished with it, even if she had not she would not be a crossdresser. There's more to sex and gender than an inny or an outy.
We can not control how others will act but we can control our risk profile and our behavior.
Examples of managing our risk profile is saying out of bad parts of town if possible and avoid it at night. Girls avoiding wearing clothing that gets them to be a target and travel in well lite places and have a male escort.
It is about managing the risk profile. Now if someone gets raped I am not going to blame the victim but people should try to avoid being an easy target because even though legally and morally you are complete in the write still does not remove the fact that you have to live with the results of what was done to you.
Think about this. Lets say you get in an auto accident and T-Bone some dumb ass who ran a red light and nothing you could really do to avoid it and sad dumb ass is killed. Even though you could not do anything to avoid it you still have to live with that guilt that you killed another human being and many people that is really hard on them even though there was nothing they could of done to avoid it.
You're well meaning Rodimus so I'll tone down my response. Do you not think it's a little misogynistic to suggest women stay under the protection of a man? I also don't think that clothing even makes all that much difference as a rapist would typically forcibly remove it anyway. I've been the victim of a few sexual assaults in the past and I wasn't dressed particularly noteworthily at the time. Though every time I go out clubbing I don't really wear much at all, yet have never had trouble walking back through leeds at 5AM.
If I wished to take every precaution against such things happening again it would utterly devastate my social life, where do you draw the line? Personally I'd rater be an occasional victim of unwanted attention than a constant victim of my own fear.
I do though take your point, but only upon the condition that victim blaming is utterly unacceptable in any form and that encouraging people take such precautions should never ever mean that we should stop every effort to bring such people to justice and make every effort to stop these things from happening.
I would beat the hell out of any dude that was in the same bathroom as my daughter.
I'm curious as to what exactly you think any such person would do exactly? You ignoring your obvious prejudice here on a pragmatic level where on earth is the harm? They'll see your daughter wash her hands? Maybe touch up some makeup?
If someone was set on molesting your daughter they'd do it, they wouldn't dress up as a woman to make their way into the female toilets to do so, they'd just do it. Besides, do you like beating up cleaners? Plenty of female loos have male attendees.
If you don't have a daughter, then you don't have a clue.
I have seen some transgenders, and I have nothing to say to them.
So, you've seen some people who fall under the very broad category of "transgender", a category that includes various people who dress as female who don't and quite rightly don't use the female loos and thus you feel entitled to judge them all out of hand, and you're not going to admit that this is anything but prejudiced bigotry. Because you've "seen some"
I'd bet you've also seen and talked to a couple too just without knowing it. I know I have over the years only to find out later on. One of the great PR issues for transgender people is that whenever they start to blend with regular society they become invisible, though I guess with people like you around it's more of a blessing than an issue.
the fact is nobody knows the facts ... it could have been a Man trying to disguise himself as a Woman to gain access to the Woman's washroom.
maybe he was not a transgender and was a threat to young girls in the bathroom.
I don't think anybody has all the facts ... he was hardly beaten to the point where this thread is labeled "almost killed"
Not that I accept that surgery even matters but how do you expect to tell exactly? A mandatory full body scanner before entering? I'm going to refer you to my earlier question, where's the harm?
Why on earth would a potential rapist bother "disguising" himself as a woman? I challenge you to cite a single case where this has actually occurred.
If he still has "parts" down there ... he belongs in the Men's washroom
Her parts are none of your business, or anyone's really.
IMO the Men's washroom ... until he finishes with the transformation ... he is still just a cross dresser
Ignoring the fact that she by her own omission has finished with it, even if she had not she would not be a crossdresser. There's more to sex and gender than an inny or an outy.
entatlrg
Apr 22, 02:46 AM
Even more entertaining is the fact that Apple is so arrogant they fail to realize how stupid they look.
Suing their biggest vendor.
It doesn't get any more stupid than that.
And you're the know it all because?
Suing their biggest vendor.
It doesn't get any more stupid than that.
And you're the know it all because?
Intell
Apr 25, 10:35 PM
You need my approval to sell the sandwhich shop which I (in God-form) have given you. Consider it denied.
Overruled.
Overruled.
halledise
Feb 26, 01:43 PM
the guy's an overpaid idiot.
and at least Mel Gibson can act �
and at least Mel Gibson can act �
more...
Eidorian
May 3, 07:53 AM
5 years in the making...
6970!? Yes!They are the Mobility versions. That would be the HD 6570 to the HD 6850 on the desktop side. Also, they admit mobility graphics.
6970!? Yes!They are the Mobility versions. That would be the HD 6570 to the HD 6850 on the desktop side. Also, they admit mobility graphics.
ARF900
Jan 1, 05:01 PM
I feel bad for her kids, who are eventually going to have to bring her food when she cant fit out the front door or behind the wheel of a car.
more...
puma1552
Apr 22, 07:58 PM
That phone is disgusting.
I hope they keep the IP4 design, with maybe a little better antenna and faster internals.
I hope they keep the IP4 design, with maybe a little better antenna and faster internals.
lifeofart
Jul 12, 05:48 PM
Some people (mainly people who don't need a proffesional app) don't want a professional app.:
Well thats fine and I understand many people don't need a professional app. But this person was complaining about a consumer app "Pages" not having all the features that he needed. Yet he claims vehemently that Pages can fully replace Word
Yeah, too bad Word isn't as good as that unprofessional pages at aligning images properly:rolleyes::
Says who? I have used both and frankly I like Word better for handling graphics. Pages is great if your images work with your templates but if they don't you have to fart around with locking and unlocking, grouping and ungrouping, and it is extremely tedious.
Good thing all printshops accept .pdf files!:
You must not be able to read. Snowy clearly states that .pdf doesn't work for him because it doesn't allow double sided printing.
Look, I am not trying to say Pages is useless. It is a very nice "Consumer level" app. Yes, some pros could make use of it but some pros could also use VI in the terminal window too. Does that mean that it is as useful or has the same features as the "Pro App" MS Word. No.:rolleyes:
Well thats fine and I understand many people don't need a professional app. But this person was complaining about a consumer app "Pages" not having all the features that he needed. Yet he claims vehemently that Pages can fully replace Word
Yeah, too bad Word isn't as good as that unprofessional pages at aligning images properly:rolleyes::
Says who? I have used both and frankly I like Word better for handling graphics. Pages is great if your images work with your templates but if they don't you have to fart around with locking and unlocking, grouping and ungrouping, and it is extremely tedious.
Good thing all printshops accept .pdf files!:
You must not be able to read. Snowy clearly states that .pdf doesn't work for him because it doesn't allow double sided printing.
Look, I am not trying to say Pages is useless. It is a very nice "Consumer level" app. Yes, some pros could make use of it but some pros could also use VI in the terminal window too. Does that mean that it is as useful or has the same features as the "Pro App" MS Word. No.:rolleyes:
more...
Moyank24
Apr 28, 01:08 PM
What kind of story kills the main character a quarter of the way through???
A tragedy?
A tragedy?
bondsbw
Sep 30, 10:03 AM
Um.... I am pretty sure that Apple gets a higher subsidy from having an exclusive carrier agreement, lowering the cost to their customers, yet still keeping margins on the device high.
Someone to correct me if I am wrong.
So you're saying that AT&T gives Apple money...but that does nothing for Apple's business?
:rolleyes: Wow, both of you missed it entirely. My point is the same as yours.
The poster I replied to suggested that Apple could have split their contract so that both AT&T and Verizon would have the iPhone (meaning better overall service today). But in the end, that would mean less profit for Apple.
I was explaining that Apple would not have made an exclusive agreement had there been no extra money involved. That's my point.
Someone to correct me if I am wrong.
So you're saying that AT&T gives Apple money...but that does nothing for Apple's business?
:rolleyes: Wow, both of you missed it entirely. My point is the same as yours.
The poster I replied to suggested that Apple could have split their contract so that both AT&T and Verizon would have the iPhone (meaning better overall service today). But in the end, that would mean less profit for Apple.
I was explaining that Apple would not have made an exclusive agreement had there been no extra money involved. That's my point.
more...
Brien
Apr 22, 06:57 PM
That mockup is hideous, but I imagine that the rumor is in line with what you could expect. A thinner iPhone with slightly upgraded internals , e.g. 64GB of storage, A5, 1080p/8MP rear camera, FaceTime HD front camera, larger (3.7-4") screen, and presumably the same or better battery life are almost expected at this point.
I could see the gestures and a tapered design. I think they're going to ditch the ice cream sandwich design for sure.
I could see the gestures and a tapered design. I think they're going to ditch the ice cream sandwich design for sure.
JAT
Apr 25, 10:15 AM
why do people believe this is possible? Apple will not allow one carrier to undersell the other on the SAME DEVICE...just won't happen it's bad for sales...which is why there is no competition between AT&T and Verizon...similar plans on voice text and data...otherwise everyone would play carrier swap every few month to get the best deal...if Tmobile gets the iPhone while still independent from AT&T you better believe you won't get unlimited everything for 70 bucks
Why wouldn't it be possible? Apple in no way dictates the plan pricing, just the hardware pricing. (although I believe they have fought for better data pricing, and mostly been ignored by ATT on that) Tmob is clearly cheaper in most standard calling plans. Data is the same price, more or less (the GB limits can differ), across all carriers, so that's not in question. Text plans are pretty similar, too. It's the phone plans that differ.
For instance, the base family plan from Tmob is $50, $60 from ATT and Verizon.
Not to mention that Sprint does offer unlimited everything for a single line for $70. That is for any smartphone, some of which cost more than the iPhone, so why would the iPhone change that part of the pricing?
Why wouldn't it be possible? Apple in no way dictates the plan pricing, just the hardware pricing. (although I believe they have fought for better data pricing, and mostly been ignored by ATT on that) Tmob is clearly cheaper in most standard calling plans. Data is the same price, more or less (the GB limits can differ), across all carriers, so that's not in question. Text plans are pretty similar, too. It's the phone plans that differ.
For instance, the base family plan from Tmob is $50, $60 from ATT and Verizon.
Not to mention that Sprint does offer unlimited everything for a single line for $70. That is for any smartphone, some of which cost more than the iPhone, so why would the iPhone change that part of the pricing?
more...
br0adband
Nov 4, 10:43 PM
Hmmm, and I thought it was down to me running it on a MacBook ( 2Ghz,2GB ). For the money I paid for it, it's a useful ( but not great ) product. However, I've found the support to be abysmal, and that's as important to me, as how it runs.
I've only had a quick scan of this thread, but does anyone with a C2D based machine have it running? Any problems? ( thinking of Parallels C2D debacle, here ).
I have a 20" iMac Core 2 Duo with 2GB and the stock 250GB hard drive. I'm running Parallels 24/7 with XP on a second 20" LCD monitor - OSX on the left on the iMac itself, XP on the right with the second LCD dedicated to running XP fullscreen.
I've rebooted twice in 3 weeks just because some software on the OSX side required a reboot.
To be honest, I've had more application crashes and restarts on OSX than I have under XP/Windows in the past 3 years. So much for "crash resistant" - and yes, I've had 4 kernel panics since I got this iMac home; that's more than the number of BSODs I've had under XP in 4 years.
So, in the next day or so I'll be doing the following test batch and making a thread here for the results:
- I'll be installing Parallels build 1970 clean
- I'll be installing the current beta build of VMWare Fusion clean
- I'll be installing XP SP2 *only* in default VMs under each of those two applications
- I will not be updating the SP2 at all, in fact neither VM will have Internet access to keep that aspect out of the testing
- I will install Windows Media Player 10 and Windows Media Encoder 9 as supplied by Microsoft for testing (see the next step)
- I will be installing PCMark05 from Futuremark into each VM for comprehensive testing under both applications (WMP10 and WME9 are required components of PCMark05, hence me installing them in the prior step)
I will then run the default benchmark in PCMark05 with the following stipulations:
selena gomez long hair 2011.
more...
selena gomez new hair 2011.
selena gomez short hair 2011.
more...
selena gomez short hair 2011.
selena gomez hair 2011.
selena gomez short hair 2011.
I've only had a quick scan of this thread, but does anyone with a C2D based machine have it running? Any problems? ( thinking of Parallels C2D debacle, here ).
I have a 20" iMac Core 2 Duo with 2GB and the stock 250GB hard drive. I'm running Parallels 24/7 with XP on a second 20" LCD monitor - OSX on the left on the iMac itself, XP on the right with the second LCD dedicated to running XP fullscreen.
I've rebooted twice in 3 weeks just because some software on the OSX side required a reboot.
To be honest, I've had more application crashes and restarts on OSX than I have under XP/Windows in the past 3 years. So much for "crash resistant" - and yes, I've had 4 kernel panics since I got this iMac home; that's more than the number of BSODs I've had under XP in 4 years.
So, in the next day or so I'll be doing the following test batch and making a thread here for the results:
- I'll be installing Parallels build 1970 clean
- I'll be installing the current beta build of VMWare Fusion clean
- I'll be installing XP SP2 *only* in default VMs under each of those two applications
- I will not be updating the SP2 at all, in fact neither VM will have Internet access to keep that aspect out of the testing
- I will install Windows Media Player 10 and Windows Media Encoder 9 as supplied by Microsoft for testing (see the next step)
- I will be installing PCMark05 from Futuremark into each VM for comprehensive testing under both applications (WMP10 and WME9 are required components of PCMark05, hence me installing them in the prior step)
I will then run the default benchmark in PCMark05 with the following stipulations:
hulugu
May 2, 12:53 AM
If you want to go that route, milk it for all it's worth. Preserve him, decorate him as a pi�ata, and have anyone who wants take three whacks on primetime worldwide TV. Families of 9/11 victims get to be first in line.
I'm not sure stuffing a corpse with candy is very hygienic. ;)
Seriously, though, we're going to treat him like Hector? Like he was some great hero worthy of our wrath and opprobrium?
I disagree, we should wrap him in an army blanket and bury Bin Laden in an unmarked grave; the man's had enough celebrity already.
I'm not sure stuffing a corpse with candy is very hygienic. ;)
Seriously, though, we're going to treat him like Hector? Like he was some great hero worthy of our wrath and opprobrium?
I disagree, we should wrap him in an army blanket and bury Bin Laden in an unmarked grave; the man's had enough celebrity already.
more...
digitalbiker
Jul 11, 12:58 AM
Apple never intended for iWork to compete with MS Office. Apple merely wanted to fill a niche for those AppleWorks users who didn't need a full blown behemoth Office Suite like MS Office.
It is only the die-hard Apple users that detest MS Office who are suggesting that iWork is a replacement for MS Office.
I have been using Pages and Keynote since Day One. Pages One was almost worthless in my book. Apple should have given away Pages v2 to those who suffered through version 1. Keynote was interesting and useful from version one but still lags significantly behind PowerPoint.
Both Pages 2 and Keynote now make a nice little package at $79.00 for those users who don't need to work in an MS Office environment and don't need all of the revision, collaboration, and integration tools of MS Office.
But come on, let's get real. iWork doesn't really come close to what is offered by a professional business suite like MS Office. It's like saying, Photshop Elements is a replacement for Creative Suite 2.:eek:
It is only the die-hard Apple users that detest MS Office who are suggesting that iWork is a replacement for MS Office.
I have been using Pages and Keynote since Day One. Pages One was almost worthless in my book. Apple should have given away Pages v2 to those who suffered through version 1. Keynote was interesting and useful from version one but still lags significantly behind PowerPoint.
Both Pages 2 and Keynote now make a nice little package at $79.00 for those users who don't need to work in an MS Office environment and don't need all of the revision, collaboration, and integration tools of MS Office.
But come on, let's get real. iWork doesn't really come close to what is offered by a professional business suite like MS Office. It's like saying, Photshop Elements is a replacement for Creative Suite 2.:eek:
steadysignal
May 3, 08:44 AM
nice new specs on these. miss my imac!
more...
Wozza2010
Apr 14, 05:22 PM
Exactly - when I got my iphone 4 I couldn't believe how smooth/fluid it all was. I just wasn't used to it having only used windoze products where stuttering and lag is quite common.
Up to version 4.2.1 the iphone 4 was very smooth, with 4.3.x some of that feel has been lost.
Same thing happened on iPad going from os 3 to os 4.
The smooth feel was lost forever.
Up to version 4.2.1 the iphone 4 was very smooth, with 4.3.x some of that feel has been lost.
Same thing happened on iPad going from os 3 to os 4.
The smooth feel was lost forever.
Yamcha
Apr 13, 01:54 PM
I don't mind as long as the pricing is competitive, if its over-priced no way I'll be getting one..
Puulihuna
Apr 10, 11:40 AM
Does this picture depict the combination of old and new, restored and ruins or is it just a touristy picture with too much in it? You be my judges.
View from Casco Viejo to the skyscrapers in Panama City.
View from Casco Viejo to the skyscrapers in Panama City.
irishv
Apr 26, 12:44 PM
I would happily pay the current fee for MobileMe if Apple offered some better options for hosting a website. Right now I pay for web hosting for a family blog and a flickr pro account. If I could host my wordpress blog on my idisk space with my own domain name, I would sign up right now.
RacerX
Dec 2, 10:31 AM
Funny thing is that I don't see anyone in this forum going into hysteria about this other than the people saying that "this is a load of FUD." Why is it such a shock that MacOSX can be vulnerable?It isn't a shock that Mac OS X is vulnerable. What is shocking is that it is front page news to people.
Why is this even note worthy? Why is this even NEWS WORTHY?
Why cover what are (to most Mac users) non-issues? More importantly, why aid the PC press in making cracking a Mac a limelight subject?
Misery may love company, but do we really need to add to the frenzied coverage that this subject currently has?
And oddly (or maybe not), the people most likely to fall for the hype on all this are former PC users who (wrongly) believe that any level of malicious software is equivalent to what ever the current level is for Windows (where malicious software is actually a profession).
You aren't a former (current) PC user, are you longofest? It would explain a lot.
No, it hasn't been exploited to any large extent, but vulnerabilities open up the door to exploits, and the only thing that is keeping us away from having exploits happen is our market share. You may not want to hear that, but as long as we are below 10% of the market, people simply aren't going to target our vulnerabilities, but are going to target MS's vulnerabilities.
Why is this even note worthy? Why is this even NEWS WORTHY?
Why cover what are (to most Mac users) non-issues? More importantly, why aid the PC press in making cracking a Mac a limelight subject?
Misery may love company, but do we really need to add to the frenzied coverage that this subject currently has?
And oddly (or maybe not), the people most likely to fall for the hype on all this are former PC users who (wrongly) believe that any level of malicious software is equivalent to what ever the current level is for Windows (where malicious software is actually a profession).
You aren't a former (current) PC user, are you longofest? It would explain a lot.
No, it hasn't been exploited to any large extent, but vulnerabilities open up the door to exploits, and the only thing that is keeping us away from having exploits happen is our market share. You may not want to hear that, but as long as we are below 10% of the market, people simply aren't going to target our vulnerabilities, but are going to target MS's vulnerabilities.
Le Big Mac
Oct 23, 11:28 AM
So this is true?? I suppose this isn't any different than Apple saying that you can't run Mac OS X on non-Apple hardware, is it?
That's what makes all the rancor about this so funny. Depending on the reading of this EULA provision, Apple's limits are still as, or more, restrictive than Microsoft's.
That's what makes all the rancor about this so funny. Depending on the reading of this EULA provision, Apple's limits are still as, or more, restrictive than Microsoft's.
iTattoo
May 4, 10:19 AM
I suspect that there are a couple of reasons for the change.
1 - there's a huge spike in sales with the release of any iOS device, having the iPad in the first half of the year and the iPhone in the second half of the year better levels the demand, the time required by the Apple team, and better levels traffic patterns in the stores.
2 - The iPod is becoming less and less important to Apple. Every iPhone includes and iPod, every iPad includes an iPod. In the past year we've seen something like a 17% decrease in sales of the iPod, with over 50% of them being the iPod Touch. The iPod classic is on it's last legs, the shuffle is the only click wheel iPod left, and a 2GB iPod Nano would be a compelling option, and then Apple is done with the traditional click wheels, and just have touch screen iPods across the board, with the "ultimate iPod" being the iPhone - all updated in September.
1 - there's a huge spike in sales with the release of any iOS device, having the iPad in the first half of the year and the iPhone in the second half of the year better levels the demand, the time required by the Apple team, and better levels traffic patterns in the stores.
2 - The iPod is becoming less and less important to Apple. Every iPhone includes and iPod, every iPad includes an iPod. In the past year we've seen something like a 17% decrease in sales of the iPod, with over 50% of them being the iPod Touch. The iPod classic is on it's last legs, the shuffle is the only click wheel iPod left, and a 2GB iPod Nano would be a compelling option, and then Apple is done with the traditional click wheels, and just have touch screen iPods across the board, with the "ultimate iPod" being the iPhone - all updated in September.
Eidorian
May 3, 08:12 AM
The way they've been able to keep the price low while using quad-cores in EVERY iMac has been by downgrading the GPUs. The Graphics Cards in EVERY model are now mobile. In the last line of iMacs they were full powered desktop GPUs.
So, you see, while there's an upside (the processors), it doesn't come without a down (the GPUs). At first glance I was really annoyed as the �999 one (which is what I got before the refresh) had an i5 quad core, then I saw the graphics memory and got even more annoyed, but THEN I noticed the large shiny M at the end of the GPU name. THAT's how they've been able to bring us them processors and still keep the price down. They've downgraded the GPUs. As my i3 processor practically acts like a quad core anyway and is virtually never pushed to it's limits I think I'm more than happy with what I have. The GPU may only have 256MB dedicated memory but at least it's not mobile.They have been mobile since the switch to Intel. Though the 24" with 7300/7600GT does stand out.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Core_i5_microprocessors#.22Sandy_Bridge.22_.2832_nm.29_2
The 2.5GHz and 2.7GHz models look to be Low-Voltage 65W Core i5, which is why Apple is able to fit quad cores in the 21.5" enclosure. But does that actually mean the 3.1GHz Core i5 in the 27" is actually cheaper than the slower 2.7GHz Core i5 in the 27"? Intel doesn't sell a 2.7GHz standard voltage Core i5 unless its a custom model or Apple is underclocking the 2.8GHz Core i5, which seems like an unnecessary waste of free clock speed room.Underclock and relabel is not anything new.
So, you see, while there's an upside (the processors), it doesn't come without a down (the GPUs). At first glance I was really annoyed as the �999 one (which is what I got before the refresh) had an i5 quad core, then I saw the graphics memory and got even more annoyed, but THEN I noticed the large shiny M at the end of the GPU name. THAT's how they've been able to bring us them processors and still keep the price down. They've downgraded the GPUs. As my i3 processor practically acts like a quad core anyway and is virtually never pushed to it's limits I think I'm more than happy with what I have. The GPU may only have 256MB dedicated memory but at least it's not mobile.They have been mobile since the switch to Intel. Though the 24" with 7300/7600GT does stand out.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Core_i5_microprocessors#.22Sandy_Bridge.22_.2832_nm.29_2
The 2.5GHz and 2.7GHz models look to be Low-Voltage 65W Core i5, which is why Apple is able to fit quad cores in the 21.5" enclosure. But does that actually mean the 3.1GHz Core i5 in the 27" is actually cheaper than the slower 2.7GHz Core i5 in the 27"? Intel doesn't sell a 2.7GHz standard voltage Core i5 unless its a custom model or Apple is underclocking the 2.8GHz Core i5, which seems like an unnecessary waste of free clock speed room.Underclock and relabel is not anything new.
0 comments:
Post a Comment