Jump to content


10.5 Where is the hype?


  • Please log in to reply
110 replies to this topic

#41 Ranger_Joe

Ranger_Joe

    Legendary

  • IMG Pro Users
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 682 posts
  • Steam Name:rangerjoe79
  • Location:Ontario
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 17 October 2007 - 09:29 AM

Not only have I pre-ordered, but I have arranged my schedule so that I'll be at home 'working' that day.

#42 G-News

G-News

    Legendary

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 657 posts
  • Location:Bern, Switzerland

Posted 17 October 2007 - 10:05 AM

I preordered as well. Kind of have to, when you're supporting the damn OS for others:)
Now officially the forum idiot

#43 PeopleLikeFrank

PeopleLikeFrank

    Uberspewer

  • IMG Pro Users
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2690 posts
  • Location:The Republic of Soviet Canukistan
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 17 October 2007 - 10:08 AM

I also have preordered. Hooray.
The dork formerly known as nobody
---
MBP: C2D @ 2.66 Ghz | GeForce 9600M GT 256Mb | 8GB RAM | 120GB SSD + 500GB HD | 10.6.2 / W7 x64
PC: Q9550 | 6950 2GB | 8GB RAM | 80GB SSD + 750GB HD | W7 x64

#44 HeadWes

HeadWes

    Legendary

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 652 posts
  • Location:Portland, OR

Posted 17 October 2007 - 11:56 AM

View Postnobody, on October 9th 2007, 05:27 AM, said:

It seems worth my $80-something for a student copy.

Is that through a university or directly from Apple's academic store? I'm only seeing a discount of $13 for the academic version.
"I only ask to be free. The butterflies are free."

#45 Whaleman

Whaleman

    High Priest of Bork

  • IMG Pro Users
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5632 posts
  • Steam ID:holybork
  • Location:The Land of Bork
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 17 October 2007 - 03:48 PM

View PostHeadWes, on October 17th 2007, 07:56 PM, said:

Is that through a university or directly from Apple's academic store? I'm only seeing a discount of $13 for the academic version.

Same... I only get about $15 academic discount here in sweden... which is even more cheap since we pay about $185 for the normal edition...

...it costs just as much as Tiger did for us... the dollar has just gone down popsnizzle creek since, so we pay relatively more than ever :) You guys get is cheaper though! Even if you didn't know it.
You shouldn't ask yourself such worthless questions. Aim higher. Try this: why am I here? Why do I exist, and what is my purpose in this universe?

(Answers: 'Cause you are. 'Cause you do. 'Cause I got a shotgun, and you ain't got one.)

***END MESSAGE***

#46 PeopleLikeFrank

PeopleLikeFrank

    Uberspewer

  • IMG Pro Users
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2690 posts
  • Location:The Republic of Soviet Canukistan
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 17 October 2007 - 04:38 PM

View PostHeadWes, on October 17th 2007, 01:56 PM, said:

Is that through a university or directly from Apple's academic store? I'm only seeing a discount of $13 for the academic version.

I was going by a previous price, I figured since, the retail price was the same, so would the student price be. Guess not, since it was $115 this time. Tiger was $89 with the student discount.
The dork formerly known as nobody
---
MBP: C2D @ 2.66 Ghz | GeForce 9600M GT 256Mb | 8GB RAM | 120GB SSD + 500GB HD | 10.6.2 / W7 x64
PC: Q9550 | 6950 2GB | 8GB RAM | 80GB SSD + 750GB HD | W7 x64

#47 Siriusfox

Siriusfox

    Legendary

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1148 posts
  • Steam Name:opensiriusfox
  • Location:Washington State

Posted 17 October 2007 - 04:53 PM

View PostTesseract, on October 10th 2007, 04:47 PM, said:

No, really, a lot of x86-64 code runs faster than the equivalent IA-32 code on the same hardware. Not because it's 64-bit, but because the x86-64 ISA is different in other ways, with twice as many general-purpose and SIMD registers among other things.
Sssh! Be quiet. We must keep code running for Early Intel Adopters with a 32bit Core Duo.
20'' iMac Intel Core Duo 2GHz, 10.6.5, 2GB RAM, 256MB ATI X1600

"Home computers are being called upon to perform many new functions, including the consumption of homework formerly eaten by the dog." -Doug Larson

#48 Huntn

Huntn

    Verbal Windbag

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4074 posts
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 17 October 2007 - 06:44 PM

Oct 26- Hot dog! Now I can order my MBP...

#49 Tesseract

Tesseract

    Unmanageable Megaweight

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3512 posts
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 18 October 2007 - 12:34 AM

View PostJanichsan, on October 17th 2007, 05:26 AM, said:

The system state is written to disk and re-loaded again when switching to the appropiate OS. So the computer still would had to shut down and restart, but instead of an full re-boot, the saved system state would have been loaded. No virtualisation necessary for that.
I guess it depends on what you call fast. Writing out 2 GB of RAM contents would take at least 34 seconds on a good SATA drive. Then add a little less to read the same amount in, plus system startup time up to the point where the module that defrosts the system state can be loaded.

View PostSiriusfox, on October 18th 2007, 08:53 AM, said:

Sssh! Be quiet. We must keep code running for Early Intel Adopters with a 32bit Core Duo.
Isn't that what 3- and 4-way fat binaries are for? :)

#50 teflon

teflon

    Bastard of the Popeye Analogy

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9589 posts
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 18 October 2007 - 02:00 AM

View PostTesseract, on October 18th 2007, 07:34 AM, said:

I guess it depends on what you call fast. Writing out 2 GB of RAM contents would take at least 34 seconds on a good SATA drive. Then add a little less to read the same amount in, plus system startup time up to the point where the module that defrosts the system state can be loaded.

uh, you realise that all intel macs go to hibernation by default these days?? it wouldnt be as comprehensive as a full system freeze with extra checks to make sure it doesnt go wrong cos of switching to a different OS, but my MBP takes about 10-15 seconds to hibernate as opposed to the 34 youre saying.

of course, my 2Gb of RAM probably isnt full...
Polytetrafluoroethylene to my friends.

Macbook Pro - C2D 2.4Ghz / 4GB RAM / Samsung 830 256GB SSD / Geforce 8600M GT 256Mb / 15.4"
Cube - G4 1.7Ghz 7448 / 1.5GB RAM / Samsung Spinpoint 250GB / Geforce 6200 256Mb
Self-built PC - C2Q Q8300 2.5Ghz / 4GB RAM / Samsung 830 256GB SSD / Radeon 7850 OC 1GB / W7 x64
and a beautiful HP LP2475w 24" H-IPS monitor

#51 Tesseract

Tesseract

    Unmanageable Megaweight

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3512 posts
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 18 October 2007 - 02:29 AM

True, it could be cut down in a number of ways, most of which amount to writing the data out beforehand and not waiting for it all to be read in before continuing.

I went looking for numbers on safe sleep, and found an article that says this: "On my new MacBook Pro with 4 GB of RAM, it takes 49 seconds for the computer to sleep when Safe Sleep is active; with Safe Sleep turned off, it takes only 4 seconds."

That is shorter than my naive calculation, but it's still substantial. Presumably it doesn't write out anything that is already explicitly backed by an object on disk, like clean buffer cache entries. (And if starting the sleep process triggers a sync, then all the buffer cache entries would then be clean.)

#52 megaman

megaman

    Notorious

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 237 posts

Posted 18 October 2007 - 02:55 AM

bah, no DVD play on my 1Ghz ibook?

#53 Tesseract

Tesseract

    Unmanageable Megaweight

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3512 posts
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 18 October 2007 - 03:41 AM

Not with the improved deinterlacing anyway.

#54 teflon

teflon

    Bastard of the Popeye Analogy

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9589 posts
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 18 October 2007 - 10:16 AM

yeah, youll still be able to play DVDs back, just not as pretty (though from a distance you wont really notice on a smaller screen).

going back to safe sleep, there should definitely be an option to do it or not. However, in the context of switching between OSs, it does offer a significant speed up. You dont have to wait the 34 seconds for the OS to park and shut down, and then load the new one (with Vista taking 3 minutes i believe), and then the same in reverse. If youve already done it once, then it would be practically just the time to enter hibernate in one OS, and then exit in another. perhaps 20 seconds if there isnt much RAM usage? but maybe a minute if youve got lots going on (faster HDDs would lessen this further).
so it would definitely be a boon to the high end OS switcher, and the gamers here (isnt that most of us??) who want a comparatively quick fix. you just gotta remember to keep the cling film handy.
Polytetrafluoroethylene to my friends.

Macbook Pro - C2D 2.4Ghz / 4GB RAM / Samsung 830 256GB SSD / Geforce 8600M GT 256Mb / 15.4"
Cube - G4 1.7Ghz 7448 / 1.5GB RAM / Samsung Spinpoint 250GB / Geforce 6200 256Mb
Self-built PC - C2Q Q8300 2.5Ghz / 4GB RAM / Samsung 830 256GB SSD / Radeon 7850 OC 1GB / W7 x64
and a beautiful HP LP2475w 24" H-IPS monitor

#55 yo-mike

yo-mike

    Livin' in 2007

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1031 posts

Posted 18 October 2007 - 10:36 PM

Some people are being left behind. Thats why there may not be as much hype as a lot of particular people would like to see Lowendmac article.

Ted Hodges did a great job on his article! I give him a lot of credit! People, especially the creative movers and shakers, may find it hard to give up their old G3 and G4 friends, that saw them through thick and thin! (I feel for them) They deserve a lot of thanks and appreciation for their creativity and contributions to the Mac user community and many a web surfers and many an many, many clients!!!! (moment of silence)

The Mac community rocks though, no matter what! Any Macintosh computers and any Mac OS are still the best! Love it always, you got the best baby!

AMD Phenom II X4, Win 7 64

Kubuntu Rocks Better


#56 AussieMacGamer

AussieMacGamer

    Owner, 2nd Largest Topic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3087 posts

Posted 19 October 2007 - 01:09 AM

View Postyo-mike, on October 19th 2007, 02:36 PM, said:

Some people are being left behind. Thats why there may not be as much hype as a lot of particular people would like to see Lowendmac article.


that guy honestly needs to go and have a cry.

IMG Resident Crackpot
"What you need is a dog or a girlfriend, or both, or one in the same!" -Gary Simmons Aka. The Battle Cat
15" Macbook Pro C2D 2.16Ghz ATI X1600 3Gb Ram w/Samsung 840 SSD R.I.P

2015 Mbp 13", 256gb SSD

Windows popsnizzlebox with a 5400rpm HD and a GTX 1060

Now Playing: Player Unknown's Battlegrounds/CS:GO/Rising Storm 2/The Witcher 3 Blood and Wine/Shenmue 1


#57 Tesseract

Tesseract

    Unmanageable Megaweight

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3512 posts
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 19 October 2007 - 01:15 AM

I did expect the G3 to hang on for one more major revision.

#58 AussieMacGamer

AussieMacGamer

    Owner, 2nd Largest Topic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3087 posts

Posted 19 October 2007 - 01:17 AM

View PostAussieMacGamer, on October 19th 2007, 05:09 PM, said:

that guy honestly needs to go and have a cry.

A big cry :glare:
But honestly why would he want to upgrade OS when the only apps it is going to advance are the ones that are already power hungry! he wont need these new "Power Hungry" features so why on earth does he care!

IMG Resident Crackpot
"What you need is a dog or a girlfriend, or both, or one in the same!" -Gary Simmons Aka. The Battle Cat
15" Macbook Pro C2D 2.16Ghz ATI X1600 3Gb Ram w/Samsung 840 SSD R.I.P

2015 Mbp 13", 256gb SSD

Windows popsnizzlebox with a 5400rpm HD and a GTX 1060

Now Playing: Player Unknown's Battlegrounds/CS:GO/Rising Storm 2/The Witcher 3 Blood and Wine/Shenmue 1


#59 Huntn

Huntn

    Verbal Windbag

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4074 posts
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 19 October 2007 - 04:28 AM

View Postyo-mike, on October 18th 2007, 11:36 PM, said:

Some people are being left behind. Thats why there may not be as much hype as a lot of particular people would like to see Lowendmac article.

Not trying to sound heartless but it is a fact of life that older technology will not be supported indefinitely. Older machines may not be able to run the latest OS adequately and/or there is the baggage issue with negative implications for an OS update as I guess that is Apple's rational.

#60 Janichsan

Janichsan

    Jugger Bugger

  • Forum Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8075 posts
  • Steam Name:Janichsan
  • Location:over there

Posted 19 October 2007 - 04:44 AM

View Postyo-mike, on October 19th 2007, 06:36 AM, said:

Some people are being left behind. Thats why there may not be as much hype as a lot of particular people would like to see Lowendmac article.
That man really has some problems... 10 year old Macs are not longer supported? Shame...

I can understand that those that have a Mac at the threshold of the minimum specs might be a bit pissed off, but I don't really see that this would be that much of a problem: I could install Tiger without a hitch on my (officially unsupported) G3 iBook and it worked fine. So I don't see why someone with a 2x800 GHz G4 could not install Leopard on their Mac.

The comparison with Vista's system requirements is a joke. Yes, we tend to make fun of the ridiculously high requirements, but not necessarily because of the requirements that M$ gives (800 GHz CPU, 512 MB RAM) but because of Vista's real requirements. Ever tried to run Vista on a 800 GHz computer? It's everything but usable. It's even slow on better equipped computer.

On the other hand, when Apple says, Leopard will run on a 867 GHz G4, it's likely from experiences from the past, that it will run really well on that system. Apple is usually much more realistic with the system requirements they give.

But there is really one bummer with Leopard: Classic is no longer supported.

"We do what we must, because we can."
"Gaming on a Mac is like women on the internet." — "Highly common and totally awesome?"