Not very useful thought:) (But I do really hate typing with number keys so, and the T28 was before T9 aswell, not that I don't even know how T9 works so I don't use it anyway:D)
Yeah, I didn't like the "must have formed in exactly this way"-part either. They make a theory and it MUST be true? And it MUST have happened in that way only? Right..
How does the age of the OS affect anything? Shouldn't we only care about the usability / what the OS supports in that case? Why would we want a new OS if all it is is bloat?
Can you run ANY current OS X software on OS X 10.0? Most people run XP, who cares how old it is as long as it can do anything you want? The only kind of missing point in it which I can think of is lacking 64-bit drivers and DirectX 10. What more prevents anyone from using it?
I think it's ok to compare Vista with Leopard to thought. I would assume Vista would work ok aswell, have never used it. But I would have no need for it either since sort of no games supports Direct X 10 either so who cares? It's not like I'd miss out on much if I installed XP.
I don't see your point? So one add additional bloat on the OS just to make it heavy on the latest and greatest hardware or what? What does Leopard offer which XP don't? What makes it more acceptable?
If anything I can only see an old less resource intensive OS which does all you want as something GOOD, not as something bad.
Do so many countries buy corn from USA then? Maybe it will help instead because you can make your fuel within USA instead of buying etanol from Brasil and then they can make food instead of sugar canes?
Regarding CFL most of my light in my appartment are those, I live in Sweden but I just have them here at home so far and would never throw them with regular garbage, and I hope most other people wouldn't either. I don't know about the non-swedes living here thought, maybe they don't understand (or care) where to throw it. Most of them don't seem to understand that where to throw the garbage at all but just leaves their bag on the ground at random locations...
But I have only had the graphics glitches twice, this was the second time. And yes, my guess for why switching rows in a text area took like a few second was that core image / opengl / the graphics hardware did something weird.
The problem with a repair is that there are no Apple stores in Sweden so I may be without computer for like a month or something, which suck of course.
I think that maybe Opera run flash in the background, because in Opera I tend to always have much higher CPU usage than in Safari, but lower memory usage. But it makes my fans kick in and since it's a laptop it's annoying. So therefor I often close Opera with a bunch of tabs and use Safari but then I have to restart Safari every now and then because it have used up all my RAM.
I don't think the sites are anything special, www.stylesearch.se, www.youtube.com and earlier www.spraydate.se and such. They do have a couple of flash banners as all other webpage does, and I know flash on OS X (and in general, completely useless as it is) suck. But if it's because of flash that doesn't really help me since I'm stuck in the situation anyway and can't do shit about it.
(Well, except uninstalling flash / run an old version of Safari with pithelmet / block flash in some other way.)
I still don't get it. If I share the RAM I was expecting all the things which shared it to have the same "knowledge" about it. Like say it's representing an ingame map of the environment and everything knows what things are. No matter if it's the own-unit-have-moved, others-units-have-moved or the thread which draws the map.
I don't see what the difference is in synching shared memory access between threads or synching shared (partitioned) memory between programs runnong on stream processors would be thought.
Leopard requires a G4 1GHz+ from system requirements I belive, so no, Leopard don't support those machines. It do support PPC, which would be very bad if they didn't considering they are just like 1.5 year old or something.
A G3 _IS_ outdated, OS X is the most heavy OS I've ever used, Windows XP would live very happy on this 2.2GHz C2D, 2GB ram MBP. I don't say there is anything weird or wrong with G3 being outdated, 1GHz P3s is aswell. It's just the "omg macs live forever"-bs which is wrong. And even more so "omg Windows is like teh lol, it's so heavy on my machinery, OS X are like a canary bird on a football field!"
But I don't hate OS X either, and I accept that it's heavy, it's just all the bullshit I can't handle. And I would prefer to be able to do simple stuff as browsing the web on a new computer! But maybe that is impossible nowadays considering the fucking bloat the web have become.
XP SP2 was very stable for me, I don't remember if I ran it on my Athlon64 aswell but I think I did, I for sure did on my Athlon-XP. But I had new BIOS and the latest drivers for everything, maybe that helped, I have no idea.
I would want to call this integrate-stuff BS aswell because I know that: 1) I sort of know noone who has problems with XP SP2. 2) Hacks run OS X more or less just as good as real macs. But I won't because I know some people over here on Slashdot use to say that drivers cause most of the crashes, and maybe they are correct and I'm wrong. So maybe it's a benefit, not as huge one as people say thought.
My browser and whole computer experience get absurb once I run out of free RAM, I have no idea why, maybe it's because the machine have to start swapping around some virtual memory as soon as I want to do something, using my 5400rpm 2.5" 160GB HDD. And honestly I don't care, I just know what happens. Maybe I should just live with it, but if most stuff are caches I would prefer the OS not to cache so much and spare more free RAM so it doesn't have to swap around virtual memory as much.
I would assume the memory you are speaking about which aren't really needed would count under VSIZE? And even if real memory column in activity monitor lists shared ram multiple times (of which I have no idea), the system free memory should be correct, right?
Currently my Safari have been running for 7 hours, I know I run plenty of tabs, and Pithelmet doesn't work with latest Safari, but currently it says: CPU: 55%, real memory: 965MB, VSIZE: 1.85GB. System free: 58.78MB, Resident: 236MB, Active: 1.13GB, Inactive: 589MB.
I guess the inactive is that my machine should be able to use for other stuff? So in reality I should have like 640MB of RAM which are usable for loading "active" memory? That seems more ok but the swapping would kill me way before that. Maybe I just need a deskop with a much faster drive instead... I will get 4GB of RAM aswell but I wanted to complain on Apple because my case have losen up a little around the button you use to open the lid and I have something which looks like a scratch/dent in the backlightning of the LCD (if you move your head the brighter "dent" will move around beneath the pixels.) I waited to RMA it because I wanted the new models to be released just in case... And now I'm to lazy because I don't want to live without my computer for like a month and have to backup my harddrive. And if I had changed harddrive I would eventuelly lose my warranty and if I had bought new RAM I would still have to keep the old ones if I wanted to send the machine back I guess.
I guess those SSD drives may help a lot with handling swap? Since it's probably lots of small areas which need to be read/written. But a better start are probably to max the RAM first.
Yeah, please, please tell me someone would run Photoshop with 512MB (for some serious work), even more so with XP and all other bullshit running aswell. Yeah! Great! Magic at work!
Hopefully you block flash banners and they don't have a bunch of youtube tabs running in the background. If not I have no idea what the difference is. Feel free to tell me.
Even if I close all tabs in Safari the piece of crap use even MORE ram, and for what? What is cached? There is no undo for closed tabs in Safari. What is it storing in my RAM? Except memory leaks? Please tell me!
Yeah Mr Bigshot, please tell me what I'm doing wrong.
Here you have a screenshot from my MBP 16:25 today, I had my browser running and had run Google Earth, quit it and I got this kind of graphics glitches, the stuff to the right is spotlight. The machine was very slow as soon as there was a line switch in a text area and in the end it halted completely so I cold rebooted. http://img291.imageshack.us/img291/8727/bild82ch6.png
I do understand that some of the allocated RAM probably are file caches or something, that doesn't mean Safari doesn't run as shit as soon as I have no free RAM left.
But I know mac fanatics always tell how their crap machines run the latest and greatest Apple software with no issues at all...
Maybe I just haven't catched up with all the magic yet.
This is 5 days old news, and it's not that big news anyway.
I guess it could be a reason which makes it 64-bit only aswell, or they just considered the other platforms to old to care, but that kind of suck. Pretty normal in Apple-land to consider old OS versions obsulete thought so maybe it's true for hardware aswell?
(Never mind the Apple fanboys which says that a G3 are still future proof.... Or how macs don't crash (mine crashed today for instance, I can somewhat understand it since Safari usually pick up like 800 MB of ram and I only have 2GB and I had run Google Earth aswell. And if the machine runs out of ram you get issues. But what I can't understand is why Safari and Flash on OS X has to be such pile of shit so it needs 2GB to begin with.))
ZFS supports compression (and on average I assume that they belive it will speed up the data fetching since compression/decompression are faster than the additional read/writes for most data.)
Say what? Any vegan who doesn't supplement vitamine B12 is an idiot, and the people which do (such as myself) probably don't have low levels, why would we?
Yeah, I had prefered if the summary mentioned some short little information about how CUDA helps and does it better. Because as the summary is written now it's like "Maybe a video card dude will fix it because they need to run more threads", not "This video card dude came up with a new language which made it much easier to handle multiple threads", or whatever.
HOW does CUDA make it easier? I'm very confident it's not because Nvidia hardware contains lots of stream processors.
Ohwell, guess I need to RTFA, and maybe Wikipedia aswell..
Exactly, I can't see why it couldn't last? What's so bad with offering free network connection at some locations? And as soon as one read that people "logged in" by typing in their phone number this was very obvious. I doubt they will care. And it's not like every person on the planet will know about it or care either (as you point out.)
Slashdot Mirror
http://www.thebestsupply.com/Ericsson_T28_T60_T68_T616_Chatboard_p/pcs-dpy-90119901.htm
:) :D)
Not very useful thought
(But I do really hate typing with number keys so, and the T28 was before T9 aswell, not that I don't even know how T9 works so I don't use it anyway
But since this was about torrents you will indeed upload parts of or the whole work yourself aswell.
Yeah, I didn't like the "must have formed in exactly this way"-part either. They make a theory and it MUST be true? And it MUST have happened in that way only? Right ..
I just thought it was core image fucking up due to the low amount of RAM I had, but maybe not then.
How does the age of the OS affect anything? Shouldn't we only care about the usability / what the OS supports in that case? Why would we want a new OS if all it is is bloat?
Can you run ANY current OS X software on OS X 10.0? Most people run XP, who cares how old it is as long as it can do anything you want? The only kind of missing point in it which I can think of is lacking 64-bit drivers and DirectX 10. What more prevents anyone from using it?
I think it's ok to compare Vista with Leopard to thought. I would assume Vista would work ok aswell, have never used it. But I would have no need for it either since sort of no games supports Direct X 10 either so who cares? It's not like I'd miss out on much if I installed XP.
I don't see your point? So one add additional bloat on the OS just to make it heavy on the latest and greatest hardware or what? What does Leopard offer which XP don't? What makes it more acceptable?
If anything I can only see an old less resource intensive OS which does all you want as something GOOD, not as something bad.
Do so many countries buy corn from USA then? Maybe it will help instead because you can make your fuel within USA instead of buying etanol from Brasil and then they can make food instead of sugar canes?
Regarding CFL most of my light in my appartment are those, I live in Sweden but I just have them here at home so far and would never throw them with regular garbage, and I hope most other people wouldn't either. I don't know about the non-swedes living here thought, maybe they don't understand (or care) where to throw it. Most of them don't seem to understand that where to throw the garbage at all but just leaves their bag on the ground at random locations...
But I have only had the graphics glitches twice, this was the second time. And yes, my guess for why switching rows in a text area took like a few second was that core image / opengl / the graphics hardware did something weird.
The problem with a repair is that there are no Apple stores in Sweden so I may be without computer for like a month or something, which suck of course.
I think that maybe Opera run flash in the background, because in Opera I tend to always have much higher CPU usage than in Safari, but lower memory usage. But it makes my fans kick in and since it's a laptop it's annoying. So therefor I often close Opera with a bunch of tabs and use Safari but then I have to restart Safari every now and then because it have used up all my RAM.
I don't think the sites are anything special, www.stylesearch.se, www.youtube.com and earlier www.spraydate.se and such. They do have a couple of flash banners as all other webpage does, and I know flash on OS X (and in general, completely useless as it is) suck. But if it's because of flash that doesn't really help me since I'm stuck in the situation anyway and can't do shit about it.
(Well, except uninstalling flash / run an old version of Safari with pithelmet / block flash in some other way.)
I still don't get it. If I share the RAM I was expecting all the things which shared it to have the same "knowledge" about it. Like say it's representing an ingame map of the environment and everything knows what things are. No matter if it's the own-unit-have-moved, others-units-have-moved or the thread which draws the map.
I knew I used Firefox3 beta, not which one thought, but it was beta 5. Next?
I don't see what the difference is in synching shared memory access between threads or synching shared (partitioned) memory between programs runnong on stream processors would be thought.
Leopard requires a G4 1GHz+ from system requirements I belive, so no, Leopard don't support those machines. It do support PPC, which would be very bad if they didn't considering they are just like 1.5 year old or something.
... I will get 4GB of RAM aswell but I wanted to complain on Apple because my case have losen up a little around the button you use to open the lid and I have something which looks like a scratch/dent in the backlightning of the LCD (if you move your head the brighter "dent" will move around beneath the pixels.) ... And now I'm to lazy because I don't want to live without my computer for like a month and have to backup my harddrive. And if I had changed harddrive I would eventuelly lose my warranty and if I had bought new RAM I would still have to keep the old ones if I wanted to send the machine back I guess.
A G3 _IS_ outdated, OS X is the most heavy OS I've ever used, Windows XP would live very happy on this 2.2GHz C2D, 2GB ram MBP. I don't say there is anything weird or wrong with G3 being outdated, 1GHz P3s is aswell. It's just the "omg macs live forever"-bs which is wrong. And even more so "omg Windows is like teh lol, it's so heavy on my machinery, OS X are like a canary bird on a football field!"
But I don't hate OS X either, and I accept that it's heavy, it's just all the bullshit I can't handle. And I would prefer to be able to do simple stuff as browsing the web on a new computer! But maybe that is impossible nowadays considering the fucking bloat the web have become.
XP SP2 was very stable for me, I don't remember if I ran it on my Athlon64 aswell but I think I did, I for sure did on my Athlon-XP. But I had new BIOS and the latest drivers for everything, maybe that helped, I have no idea.
I would want to call this integrate-stuff BS aswell because I know that:
1) I sort of know noone who has problems with XP SP2.
2) Hacks run OS X more or less just as good as real macs.
But I won't because I know some people over here on Slashdot use to say that drivers cause most of the crashes, and maybe they are correct and I'm wrong. So maybe it's a benefit, not as huge one as people say thought.
My browser and whole computer experience get absurb once I run out of free RAM, I have no idea why, maybe it's because the machine have to start swapping around some virtual memory as soon as I want to do something, using my 5400rpm 2.5" 160GB HDD. And honestly I don't care, I just know what happens. Maybe I should just live with it, but if most stuff are caches I would prefer the OS not to cache so much and spare more free RAM so it doesn't have to swap around virtual memory as much.
I would assume the memory you are speaking about which aren't really needed would count under VSIZE? And even if real memory column in activity monitor lists shared ram multiple times (of which I have no idea), the system free memory should be correct, right?
Currently my Safari have been running for 7 hours, I know I run plenty of tabs, and Pithelmet doesn't work with latest Safari, but currently it says:
CPU: 55%, real memory: 965MB, VSIZE: 1.85GB.
System free: 58.78MB, Resident: 236MB, Active: 1.13GB, Inactive: 589MB.
I guess the inactive is that my machine should be able to use for other stuff? So in reality I should have like 640MB of RAM which are usable for loading "active" memory? That seems more ok but the swapping would kill me way before that. Maybe I just need a deskop with a much faster drive instead
I waited to RMA it because I wanted the new models to be released just in case
Anyway here are my other thread with memory allocations:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=542426&cid=23286992
And here is how it looks right now:
http://img233.imageshack.us/img233/5764/bild89nh6.png
I guess those SSD drives may help a lot with handling swap? Since it's probably lots of small areas which need to be read/written. But a better start are probably to max the RAM first.
Yeah, please, please tell me someone would run Photoshop with 512MB (for some serious work), even more so with XP and all other bullshit running aswell. Yeah! Great! Magic at work!
Hopefully you block flash banners and they don't have a bunch of youtube tabs running in the background. If not I have no idea what the difference is. Feel free to tell me.
Even if I close all tabs in Safari the piece of crap use even MORE ram, and for what? What is cached? There is no undo for closed tabs in Safari. What is it storing in my RAM? Except memory leaks? Please tell me!
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=542426&cid=23286992
Maybe it's that I'm not idiot enough to use this kind of idiot proof setup?
Yeah Mr Bigshot, please tell me what I'm doing wrong.
...
Here you have a screenshot from my MBP 16:25 today, I had my browser running and had run Google Earth, quit it and I got this kind of graphics glitches, the stuff to the right is spotlight. The machine was very slow as soon as there was a line switch in a text area and in the end it halted completely so I cold rebooted.
http://img291.imageshack.us/img291/8727/bild82ch6.png
I quit firefox at 18.34, it used 841 MB of ram:
http://img240.imageshack.us/img240/5503/bild86ia5.png
That is probably when I started to use Safari, 00.50 now, current screenshots:
CPU - http://img233.imageshack.us/img233/4718/bild87jm1.png
RAM - http://img521.imageshack.us/img521/7607/bild88qy5.png
I do understand that some of the allocated RAM probably are file caches or something, that doesn't mean Safari doesn't run as shit as soon as I have no free RAM left.
But I know mac fanatics always tell how their crap machines run the latest and greatest Apple software with no issues at all
Maybe I just haven't catched up with all the magic yet.
This is 5 days old news, and it's not that big news anyway.
I guess it could be a reason which makes it 64-bit only aswell, or they just considered the other platforms to old to care, but that kind of suck. Pretty normal in Apple-land to consider old OS versions obsulete thought so maybe it's true for hardware aswell?
(Never mind the Apple fanboys which says that a G3 are still future proof.... Or how macs don't crash (mine crashed today for instance, I can somewhat understand it since Safari usually pick up like 800 MB of ram and I only have 2GB and I had run Google Earth aswell. And if the machine runs out of ram you get issues. But what I can't understand is why Safari and Flash on OS X has to be such pile of shit so it needs 2GB to begin with.))
ZFS supports compression (and on average I assume that they belive it will speed up the data fetching since compression/decompression are faster than the additional read/writes for most data.)
What do you mean with "that's all you do"?
How many people train for 30+60+60 minutes / day of which 30+60 are weight lifting?
I didn't get if he train for 4 weeks and rest two or if it was just the later 60 minutes which was cut of for two weeks.
"Due to chronically low B12 in vegans"
Say what? Any vegan who doesn't supplement vitamine B12 is an idiot, and the people which do (such as myself) probably don't have low levels, why would we?
... and bad planning / lack of effort / simplest solution.
But we already know it's hard to split up all kinds of work evenly.
Anyway, what does CUDA to help with that?
Yeah, I had prefered if the summary mentioned some short little information about how CUDA helps and does it better. Because as the summary is written now it's like "Maybe a video card dude will fix it because they need to run more threads", not "This video card dude came up with a new language which made it much easier to handle multiple threads", or whatever.
HOW does CUDA make it easier? I'm very confident it's not because Nvidia hardware contains lots of stream processors.
Ohwell, guess I need to RTFA, and maybe Wikipedia aswell..
Hey, we read the headlines, eventually the summary and then head on to comment and read comments. It's just TFA we skip ;)
Exactly, I can't see why it couldn't last? What's so bad with offering free network connection at some locations? And as soon as one read that people "logged in" by typing in their phone number this was very obvious. I doubt they will care. And it's not like every person on the planet will know about it or care either (as you point out.)
Yeah, seriously, who cares about yet another distribution of debian? Aren't there like 500 already?