lordonuthin
Apr 19, 07:59 PM
There was a study a bit ago that showed that complexity drastically reduced participation in altruistic activities, while simplicity -- especially exact instructions on how to participate -- drastically increased participation.
I think that's applies here. Using a Mac is so simple, generally speaking, that the folding@home pages seem obtuse in comparison. The pages are all ugly, and instructions are unclear, and files seem to be missing that instruction pages reference.
Well put, the instructions are way out of date, hard to follow for beginners and make references that are no longer valid.
To increase participation I recommend that a very clear communicator make a new thread (perhaps a sticky) with *dead simple* step by step instructions w/screenshots on how to install and turn it on (circa 2010). Maybe even a screen flow that just shows exactly how to it, hosted on a service with crystal clear video like vimeo.com. Get our mirror neurons goin', yaknow?
Case in point, I'm having my own issues. Where exactly is the screen saver? On http://www.stanford.edu/group/pandegroup/folding/OSX/OSX.html, it talks about it, and say to grab it off the download page, but I just can't find it. Makes me feel dumb, which is hardly what you want in a social endeavor.
As far as the screen saver, it no longer exists, which is why you can't find it. Sometime in the past it was deemed detrimental to folding because it was using up valuble resources the could be used for folding. And we all go through a 'feeling dumb' stage after which you go through an 'oh well I'll do the best I can' stage, which lasts as long as you continue to fold.
Beyond my notebooks, I also have 2 8 Core Mac Pro's I'd like to put into the game, but I really only want the processor power being used when they're idle. I need that power to myself at the other times. Screen saver or idle time processing is perfect.
It would be great to have your Mac Pros folding and I understand your concern. The clients are supposed to ease up as other process use more cpu power but I have read where this doesn't always seem to work as for someone using video software etc. I suppose you could try and see if it works for you and if not... There should be new cpu software sometime in the future that "may" work better, but we will have to see.
Second, I did install just the basic install of http://www.stanford.edu/group/pandegroup/folding/release/Folding@home-OSX10.5-6.29.3.pkg.zip in the meantime. Activated the client in System Preferences, and hit the enable button. When does this thing activate? It's not showing any activity in Activity Monitor yet. I guess maybe this does idle time processing w/o any visual feedback?
It sounds like it might not be running properly, did you set up a username and team? I'm running a different client that doesn't work through the prefs pane but I'll try to get back to you with something that might help, in the meantime try here (http://foldingforum.org/viewforum.php?f=6&sid=14fc4044e9c0e1c8ce9bbf6bba791c1b). Good luck! Oh I forget to mention that they are having trouble getting enough work units out for everyone to crunch, maybe that is why your client isn't running...
I think that's applies here. Using a Mac is so simple, generally speaking, that the folding@home pages seem obtuse in comparison. The pages are all ugly, and instructions are unclear, and files seem to be missing that instruction pages reference.
Well put, the instructions are way out of date, hard to follow for beginners and make references that are no longer valid.
To increase participation I recommend that a very clear communicator make a new thread (perhaps a sticky) with *dead simple* step by step instructions w/screenshots on how to install and turn it on (circa 2010). Maybe even a screen flow that just shows exactly how to it, hosted on a service with crystal clear video like vimeo.com. Get our mirror neurons goin', yaknow?
Case in point, I'm having my own issues. Where exactly is the screen saver? On http://www.stanford.edu/group/pandegroup/folding/OSX/OSX.html, it talks about it, and say to grab it off the download page, but I just can't find it. Makes me feel dumb, which is hardly what you want in a social endeavor.
As far as the screen saver, it no longer exists, which is why you can't find it. Sometime in the past it was deemed detrimental to folding because it was using up valuble resources the could be used for folding. And we all go through a 'feeling dumb' stage after which you go through an 'oh well I'll do the best I can' stage, which lasts as long as you continue to fold.
Beyond my notebooks, I also have 2 8 Core Mac Pro's I'd like to put into the game, but I really only want the processor power being used when they're idle. I need that power to myself at the other times. Screen saver or idle time processing is perfect.
It would be great to have your Mac Pros folding and I understand your concern. The clients are supposed to ease up as other process use more cpu power but I have read where this doesn't always seem to work as for someone using video software etc. I suppose you could try and see if it works for you and if not... There should be new cpu software sometime in the future that "may" work better, but we will have to see.
Second, I did install just the basic install of http://www.stanford.edu/group/pandegroup/folding/release/Folding@home-OSX10.5-6.29.3.pkg.zip in the meantime. Activated the client in System Preferences, and hit the enable button. When does this thing activate? It's not showing any activity in Activity Monitor yet. I guess maybe this does idle time processing w/o any visual feedback?
It sounds like it might not be running properly, did you set up a username and team? I'm running a different client that doesn't work through the prefs pane but I'll try to get back to you with something that might help, in the meantime try here (http://foldingforum.org/viewforum.php?f=6&sid=14fc4044e9c0e1c8ce9bbf6bba791c1b). Good luck! Oh I forget to mention that they are having trouble getting enough work units out for everyone to crunch, maybe that is why your client isn't running...
jadam
Sep 15, 07:30 PM
Originally posted by MacManiac1224
Can the G4 beat the Pentium 5? You are probably scratching your heads on this one. Yep, the Pentium 5 is very real, and it is coming soon. 2nd quarter of the Pentium 5 debuting at 3.2GHZ is going to come out. It will have 100 million transistors on it and it will be manufactured at .09 microns. Also, here is the doozy, it will have 1 mb of L2 on die cache, and it will support 333mhz bus speeds, with the addition of DDR, that is a possible 667mhz bus speeds. By the way, if you were wondering, the Pentium 4 has 42 million transistors.
Now, for the G4: I am not sure how many transistors the G4 has, but I imagine it is way less then 100 million, or even 42 million, considering the P4 came out after the G4. Anyway, the cache on the G4 is higher on the high-end, 2mb of cache. But: the speed: 1.25Ghz? Can that really stand up to a P5 with 333mhz bus, and 3.2Ghz clock speeds? My opinion: most likely not.
Let's be honest, the P4 basically can beat the G4 in most tasks today, so a new faster version of the P4, the P5 can easily beat the G4, most likely in 95-99% of all tasks.
Ok, we have established that the G4 is, well, to slow against the P5, even though we don't know about it yet, I imagine it will be. Well, Apple just pulled the plug on OS 9 for January, what could this mean? I am not sure, only Steve knows. But Apple better come out with something that can at least compete with the Pentium 5, and it better come soon. I would not be surprised if Apple comes out with the G5 in January, just to say they were the first to have a generation 5 possessor, but I could be wrong.
Ok, I made my case, now, what do you guys think? By the way: I got this information about the Pentium 5 from eWeek, so it is reputable.
dumb ass, no theres no P5, P5 wont come out for a LOOOONG Time, PIV is expected to Scale up to 10ghz, this is just an upgraded PIV f00
Can the G4 beat the Pentium 5? You are probably scratching your heads on this one. Yep, the Pentium 5 is very real, and it is coming soon. 2nd quarter of the Pentium 5 debuting at 3.2GHZ is going to come out. It will have 100 million transistors on it and it will be manufactured at .09 microns. Also, here is the doozy, it will have 1 mb of L2 on die cache, and it will support 333mhz bus speeds, with the addition of DDR, that is a possible 667mhz bus speeds. By the way, if you were wondering, the Pentium 4 has 42 million transistors.
Now, for the G4: I am not sure how many transistors the G4 has, but I imagine it is way less then 100 million, or even 42 million, considering the P4 came out after the G4. Anyway, the cache on the G4 is higher on the high-end, 2mb of cache. But: the speed: 1.25Ghz? Can that really stand up to a P5 with 333mhz bus, and 3.2Ghz clock speeds? My opinion: most likely not.
Let's be honest, the P4 basically can beat the G4 in most tasks today, so a new faster version of the P4, the P5 can easily beat the G4, most likely in 95-99% of all tasks.
Ok, we have established that the G4 is, well, to slow against the P5, even though we don't know about it yet, I imagine it will be. Well, Apple just pulled the plug on OS 9 for January, what could this mean? I am not sure, only Steve knows. But Apple better come out with something that can at least compete with the Pentium 5, and it better come soon. I would not be surprised if Apple comes out with the G5 in January, just to say they were the first to have a generation 5 possessor, but I could be wrong.
Ok, I made my case, now, what do you guys think? By the way: I got this information about the Pentium 5 from eWeek, so it is reputable.
dumb ass, no theres no P5, P5 wont come out for a LOOOONG Time, PIV is expected to Scale up to 10ghz, this is just an upgraded PIV f00
Lord Blackadder
Feb 18, 04:58 PM
Or how about the lack of pictures? This had photo op written all over it, but we the taxpayer only get one picture? I think the number of pictures were limited due to Steve Jobs current condition.
It could be a body double. Or even Photoshopped, with the rest of the people at the table sworn to secrecy on pain of death.
It could be a body double. Or even Photoshopped, with the rest of the people at the table sworn to secrecy on pain of death.
japanime
Nov 12, 01:09 AM
Therefore the average Japanese would pronounce 'lobster' with an 'L' but 'rabbit' would be pronounced 'labbit'.
Actually, the English word "rabbit" is pronounced "rabitto" in Japanese, without any hint of an "l" sound.
The Japanese "r" sound is not an "l" sound, but rather a short, rolled-tongue, nasal "dr" sound. (Imagine "drabbito," with the "dr" sound coming off the tongue very lapidly, er, rapidly.)
Actually, the English word "rabbit" is pronounced "rabitto" in Japanese, without any hint of an "l" sound.
The Japanese "r" sound is not an "l" sound, but rather a short, rolled-tongue, nasal "dr" sound. (Imagine "drabbito," with the "dr" sound coming off the tongue very lapidly, er, rapidly.)
more...
iSimx
Mar 28, 08:23 AM
Hoping Lion will be launched then! :)
TheMacBookPro
Apr 24, 01:55 AM
see this youtube video and you will be able to determine whether CPU affects the overall speed more than GPU. This guy compared 11" MBA(with 320M graphics) and 13" sandy bridge MBP with SSD(with Intel 3000HD graphics )
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qp720fEnuRs
Of course sandy bridge MBA won't use full power sandy bridge. But you will know that MBA's performance is just overpraised by SSD, not by GPU. Once other notebooks get SSD, MBA's benefit is only limited to small form factor and weight.(maybe + high resolution)
I just don't understand people overpraising 320M on MBA, this made me to join here.
2GB RAM = Apps will probably have to use the paging file = slower.
But yes, the additional power of the i-series CPU will inevitably beat the GPU's power for most tasks. Gaming is another question altogether.
People who want to keep the 320M are mostly people who want to do light gaming on their Airs.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qp720fEnuRs
Of course sandy bridge MBA won't use full power sandy bridge. But you will know that MBA's performance is just overpraised by SSD, not by GPU. Once other notebooks get SSD, MBA's benefit is only limited to small form factor and weight.(maybe + high resolution)
I just don't understand people overpraising 320M on MBA, this made me to join here.
2GB RAM = Apps will probably have to use the paging file = slower.
But yes, the additional power of the i-series CPU will inevitably beat the GPU's power for most tasks. Gaming is another question altogether.
People who want to keep the 320M are mostly people who want to do light gaming on their Airs.
more...
ready2switch
Aug 14, 04:03 PM
I know some Mac haters and I know some PC haters, and I don't believe the ads are focused on either. I think the ads are focused on people like myself, PC users who know the ins and outs and pitfalls of a life with Windows and understand just how frustrating and "un-fun" they can be. While they may seem condescending from some standpoints, I see it as being closer to self-depricating humor. Everyone knows that Windows has its quirks (or bugs or flaws, depending on which camp you are in), and that's what the ads play off of. What the ads do for me is make me want to research the OS alternative to Windows, and really find out if Mac is all it's cracked up to be.
The fact that Justin Long is getting caught up in the buzz and mistakenly thought of as a Mac Nerd just shows how idiotic the tv-watching public can be. If they don't understand that these are actors, how are they ever going to understand the commercial's premise: that Macs may be just what you, the frustrated Windows user, have been looking for.
The fact that Justin Long is getting caught up in the buzz and mistakenly thought of as a Mac Nerd just shows how idiotic the tv-watching public can be. If they don't understand that these are actors, how are they ever going to understand the commercial's premise: that Macs may be just what you, the frustrated Windows user, have been looking for.
Defender2010
Apr 19, 11:06 AM
From the video there looks like there is a lot of space between the front and back plates and the metal part....perhaps this is a converted iPhone 4 as this is not present on black ones,,,,a bad conversion at that.......:(
more...
eobet
Apr 30, 10:14 AM
I get a 403 when I try to download it... :mad:
dasmb
Apr 5, 09:04 AM
So I guess this means there's nothing wrong with the antenna?
more...
SeaFox
Oct 27, 04:44 PM
- No spam management
- No full data set for the Address Book (still can't note bdays, etc.)
- No iCal integration with a fully editable calendar
Yup, I mirror those complaints. There is spam filtering, but I personally have no way to change the settings, I'd like to make them a little more restrictive. One thing I notice about the Address Book is the way it ranks phone numbers for display. This was a problem in the old Webmail as well.
The new Address Book search in the mailbox window is cool, but when it displays the phone number, it only shows one of the phone numbers for the contact, and it doesn't let you choose which one. It ranks the numbers as 1. Mobile, 2. Home, and 3. Work. So if I want the work number to display for a contact, the only option is to not list a mobile or home number for them! Even worse, it doesn't tell you which one it's using, either. All them would need to do is add a faint (m), (h), or (w) notation like they do other places in Webmail.
I'd also like to see screen real estate used a little better. The bar with "Feedback" "Prefrences" and the language is a waste, moving those to buttons on the main toolbar would be better, and I don't need the top with the Apple site tabs, or the links to the other .Mac areas, either. I tried to remove them with Firefox but I got a blank area at the bottom of the window the same size then, so I didn't gain any usuable space, also this removed the only Logout button on the page.
I do really like the new webmail overall in the end. Much less clicking needed to get things done. But it does need some polishing.
And the lack of a web-editable calendar function is just dumb. I sometimes think of just paying the $20 a year fee for Yahoo Mail Plus to get rid of the ads and transfer everything over ot that. Their calandar is a real must have for me. And I would get more reliable email service, but I want IMAP access.
Edit: The bar separating the message list from the preview pane can be moved up and down, but the position is not remembered and resets after you log out or go to the address book.
There's a "Get Mail" button. I hope I don't have to push that to check for new messages anymore. I would expect an webmail system using "the latest technologies" to have an AJAX interface and retrieve new messages periodically on it's own without having to reload the entire page.
- No full data set for the Address Book (still can't note bdays, etc.)
- No iCal integration with a fully editable calendar
Yup, I mirror those complaints. There is spam filtering, but I personally have no way to change the settings, I'd like to make them a little more restrictive. One thing I notice about the Address Book is the way it ranks phone numbers for display. This was a problem in the old Webmail as well.
The new Address Book search in the mailbox window is cool, but when it displays the phone number, it only shows one of the phone numbers for the contact, and it doesn't let you choose which one. It ranks the numbers as 1. Mobile, 2. Home, and 3. Work. So if I want the work number to display for a contact, the only option is to not list a mobile or home number for them! Even worse, it doesn't tell you which one it's using, either. All them would need to do is add a faint (m), (h), or (w) notation like they do other places in Webmail.
I'd also like to see screen real estate used a little better. The bar with "Feedback" "Prefrences" and the language is a waste, moving those to buttons on the main toolbar would be better, and I don't need the top with the Apple site tabs, or the links to the other .Mac areas, either. I tried to remove them with Firefox but I got a blank area at the bottom of the window the same size then, so I didn't gain any usuable space, also this removed the only Logout button on the page.
I do really like the new webmail overall in the end. Much less clicking needed to get things done. But it does need some polishing.
And the lack of a web-editable calendar function is just dumb. I sometimes think of just paying the $20 a year fee for Yahoo Mail Plus to get rid of the ads and transfer everything over ot that. Their calandar is a real must have for me. And I would get more reliable email service, but I want IMAP access.
Edit: The bar separating the message list from the preview pane can be moved up and down, but the position is not remembered and resets after you log out or go to the address book.
There's a "Get Mail" button. I hope I don't have to push that to check for new messages anymore. I would expect an webmail system using "the latest technologies" to have an AJAX interface and retrieve new messages periodically on it's own without having to reload the entire page.
mdntcallr
Sep 25, 10:55 AM
apple just updated their page to aperture 1.5.
all the details there now
http://www.apple.com/aperture/overview/
all the details there now
http://www.apple.com/aperture/overview/
more...
manic
Sep 25, 10:38 AM
wow. iPod integration. Now thats nice
optophobia
Nov 17, 04:46 PM
Does he at least put them on for you or do you just get a kit and have to do it yourself?
DIY.
Instructions (fixits) are linked on his site.
DIY.
Instructions (fixits) are linked on his site.
more...
Full of Win
Feb 18, 04:52 PM
could just be coincidence....i wouldn't read to much into that....
Or how about the lack of pictures? This had photo op written all over it, but we the taxpayer only get one picture? I think the number of pictures were limited due to Steve Jobs current condition.
Or how about the lack of pictures? This had photo op written all over it, but we the taxpayer only get one picture? I think the number of pictures were limited due to Steve Jobs current condition.
Hattig
Oct 10, 11:39 AM
Is this an extra MacBook model in addition to the other MacBooks?
If so, then maybe it is a MacBook with discrete graphics, but still 13.3". I.e., something between the MacBook and the MacBook Pro. It might be replacing the current Black MacBook which isn't a great deal for what you get.
Otherwise it's a redesign to address all the current MacBook issues, and will be used across the range.
Merom may come to the original MacBook sooner, but it's pretty much guaranteed that this MacBook will utilise it.
If so, then maybe it is a MacBook with discrete graphics, but still 13.3". I.e., something between the MacBook and the MacBook Pro. It might be replacing the current Black MacBook which isn't a great deal for what you get.
Otherwise it's a redesign to address all the current MacBook issues, and will be used across the range.
Merom may come to the original MacBook sooner, but it's pretty much guaranteed that this MacBook will utilise it.
more...
GGJstudios
May 5, 01:34 PM
Seriously? A few MB's of RAM saved is worth over double the price?
I've said nothing about prices. The "tax" I mentioned isn't a financial tax. You simply can't say that Computer A has x components and Computer B has the same x components, therefore, they should cost the same. A Rolls-Royce has an engine, doors, a steering wheel, windows, wheels and tires, just like a Subaru. Based on components, there shouldn't be such a wide disparity in prices between the two. Obviously, there are other factors involved that have nothing to do with the price of components.
Microsoft is trying to get buyers to think of computers as a commodity, priced only by the cost of the components involved. The reality is that computers are, for many buyers, quite personal and involve factors beyond RAM and hard drive capacity. Apple charges what it does for Macs because it can, and because people are willing to pay their prices. If that weren't the case, they would be forced to price them in line with Windows PCs in order to maintain sales.
The question shouldn't be, "Why does Apple charge so much more for Macs?", but rather, "Why are people willing to pay so much more for Macs?". It's not a tax at all, but rather a premium that Apple can successfully charge because people consider Macs to be worth the money they cost. If people didn't feel that way, they wouldn't buy them.
I've said nothing about prices. The "tax" I mentioned isn't a financial tax. You simply can't say that Computer A has x components and Computer B has the same x components, therefore, they should cost the same. A Rolls-Royce has an engine, doors, a steering wheel, windows, wheels and tires, just like a Subaru. Based on components, there shouldn't be such a wide disparity in prices between the two. Obviously, there are other factors involved that have nothing to do with the price of components.
Microsoft is trying to get buyers to think of computers as a commodity, priced only by the cost of the components involved. The reality is that computers are, for many buyers, quite personal and involve factors beyond RAM and hard drive capacity. Apple charges what it does for Macs because it can, and because people are willing to pay their prices. If that weren't the case, they would be forced to price them in line with Windows PCs in order to maintain sales.
The question shouldn't be, "Why does Apple charge so much more for Macs?", but rather, "Why are people willing to pay so much more for Macs?". It's not a tax at all, but rather a premium that Apple can successfully charge because people consider Macs to be worth the money they cost. If people didn't feel that way, they wouldn't buy them.
.jpg "Miss You Quotes And Sayings.")
toddybody
Apr 14, 01:31 PM
i-Phone? i-Pad? your opinion is worthy.
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha hah a haha haha hah aha haha ha hah a hah aha hah a ha haha hah a ha! You are seriously like the funniest person here!
Dont pick on him. :mad:
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha hah a haha haha hah aha haha ha hah a hah aha hah a ha haha hah a ha! You are seriously like the funniest person here!
Dont pick on him. :mad:
WannaGoMac
Apr 5, 05:08 PM
I don't understand this. Could you or someone explain this to me please?
Headset jack was removed, so had to buy a USB headset for example.
Headset jack was removed, so had to buy a USB headset for example.
PODshady
Nov 21, 04:28 PM
This is a really cool idea
Mac OS X Ocelot
Mar 26, 04:07 PM
STEVE: Do you have any idea how badly I wanna kill you?
ERIC: Yes.
Lost? Brilliant.
ERIC: Yes.
Lost? Brilliant.
SuperCachetes
Mar 26, 12:45 PM
Why not just have high fuel taxes ala Europe?
This.
If you do a mileage-based tax, it seems like there will need to be a way to log and report miles traveled. The report seems to address a couple of ways of doing this, but they are both systems which are additive to all of our existing tolls, taxes, and metering. Why not just increase the federal taxes on gas and use the existing "metering" we have... the gas pump.
In CT we are taxed I believe 50 cents on every gallon. The problem is that as gas prices rise people buy less of it and the taxes dry up.
Seems like if the mileage tax is successful at one of its apparent goals - reducing unnecessary trips - mileage traveled will also go down, drying up taxes. What's the diff? In either case, less gas used or less miles traveled, the burden on the infrastructure is reduced, so in theory less taxes are needed, anyway.
This.
If you do a mileage-based tax, it seems like there will need to be a way to log and report miles traveled. The report seems to address a couple of ways of doing this, but they are both systems which are additive to all of our existing tolls, taxes, and metering. Why not just increase the federal taxes on gas and use the existing "metering" we have... the gas pump.
In CT we are taxed I believe 50 cents on every gallon. The problem is that as gas prices rise people buy less of it and the taxes dry up.
Seems like if the mileage tax is successful at one of its apparent goals - reducing unnecessary trips - mileage traveled will also go down, drying up taxes. What's the diff? In either case, less gas used or less miles traveled, the burden on the infrastructure is reduced, so in theory less taxes are needed, anyway.
Multimedia
Sep 27, 10:54 AM
I checked the update pace for Mac OS X 10.4.
29/04/2005: 10.4.0
17/05/2005: 10.4.1 (+ 18 days)
12/07/2005: 10.4.2 (+ 26 days)
31/10/2005: 10.4.3 (+ 111 days)
11/01/2006: 10.4.4 (+ 72 days)
14/02/2006: 10.4.5 (+ 34 days)
03/04/2006: 10.4.6 (+ 48 days)
27/06/2006: 10.4.7 (+ 85 days)
27/09/2006 (today) + 92 days
Soon we'll have 10.4.8, and then probably around 3 months later 10.4.9 (January?). I doubt Apple will release 10.4.10, they could but I don't think they ever did it with another OS.
I thought first that it could mean that Leopard would be early, but I don't think so (spring 2007 is March 21 - June 21).They Can Aways Resort To 10.4.9.1, 10.4.9.2 Etc.
29/04/2005: 10.4.0
17/05/2005: 10.4.1 (+ 18 days)
12/07/2005: 10.4.2 (+ 26 days)
31/10/2005: 10.4.3 (+ 111 days)
11/01/2006: 10.4.4 (+ 72 days)
14/02/2006: 10.4.5 (+ 34 days)
03/04/2006: 10.4.6 (+ 48 days)
27/06/2006: 10.4.7 (+ 85 days)
27/09/2006 (today) + 92 days
Soon we'll have 10.4.8, and then probably around 3 months later 10.4.9 (January?). I doubt Apple will release 10.4.10, they could but I don't think they ever did it with another OS.
I thought first that it could mean that Leopard would be early, but I don't think so (spring 2007 is March 21 - June 21).They Can Aways Resort To 10.4.9.1, 10.4.9.2 Etc.
bartelby
Nov 14, 08:47 AM
"Mummy, why is that man watching those naked people doing things to each other." :p
It will happen.
I thought iGary had trouble getting on flights!
It will happen.
I thought iGary had trouble getting on flights!