One man's offense is the others defense. We know the NSA and CIA have been trying to get rid of Putin and both the official US and EU channels have called for 'fair elections' and oversight in Russia
There's a difference between revealing one's misdeeds and fabricating them. Also, Russia has no non-partisan monitoring of their elections. Trump is evidence that the US has fair elections. That the Russians meddled and Comey swung it doesn't detract from the fact that the elections themselves were fair.
Who's looking at this in a vacuum? You didn't go back far enough. The U.S. and Russia have had an adversarial relationship going back to the Bolshevik revolution, but the U.S. has always been the aggressor. We bombed Japan with nukes even after their Navy was obliterated and couldn't go on the offensive. Why? To show Russia our new toy.
Revisionist much? We had a non-recognition policy until 1933, nothing more. Certainly not adversarial. In fact, it was even semi-friendly from 1933-1947. As for bombing Japan, that was done to prevent a recurrence of the relatively heavy losses the US had experienced in fighting the Japanese island to island. The US had no need to demonstrate the bomb, as the tests themselves were certainly evidence of the capability.
Then after WWII we formed NATO, which sits on Russia's doorstep. We made allies with Germany, the war with whom cost Russia 14 million lives.
First, Russia lost over 20M lives in WWII. Second, we conquered Germany with Russia's help and split the country between the victors for rebuilding. NATO wasn't on the doorstep of Russia. If you recall, there were a whole slew of countries between Greece, Italy, Switzerland, France, Belgium, Denmark, Sweden and the Netherlands and the official Russian border besides just Germany and Austria. Russia, however, took the countries that it was responsible for post WWII and effectively absorbed them into it's own empire as states rather than shepherding them back to self rule.
What does Russia have to gain by partaking in activities obvious to even you that would destabilize NATO?...
Um, let's see - complete the invasion and reclamation of Ukraine, for starters. At this point, Crimea is likely never going to be returned to the Ukraine, but, given the history of that particular piece of territory, I'm not sure anyone can make enough claims to start a real war over it. The Ukraine, however, is a different beast. Then there's Iran/Syria and the rest of the Middle East, as well as a few other countries floating about that Putin would more than likely love to own.
But it's not according to Russia's plan, it's the U.S. deep state who wants two things: 1. Le Pen to lose and 2. more evidence that Russia is rigging elections.
I'm not sure Trump wants Le Pen to lose. Everyone that's not an Alt-right sock puppet does, however, and not just in the US. As for Russia influencing elections, that appears to be a cost Putin is willing to pay to fray the alliances that stand in his empire's way.
Note that while the US may have been the only country that dropped a nuclear bomb on another country, it is also the only country that effectively given control of countries back to their people after taking military control of the previous ruling parties. Russia has never done that willingly. In fact, Russia has only done it once, when it collapsed.
I think we've already passed peak Apple and they're going to start to descend into being just another device. Apple have managed to evade this being noticeable by expanding into other markets like China and India, but now they've got nowhere left to expand into and their decline in popularity is going to be noticeable. Apples problem here is that their competitors are just as good, if not better than they are. Sure Apple will be around for a while but their power is waning, just like IBM in the 2000's.
Apple can go a number of ways. If they truly invest in modernizing their desktop lines and keep on top of improving products, They will continue to do well. IBMs problem was that they didn't cannibalize their own business, so others did it for them. Apple has shown no such tendencies, and that is why they are where they are.
Nah, the writing was on the wall well before that.
It certainly was. Their major issue was hiring new MBA types that didn't stick to the company's core values but instead started practicing their myopic next quarter numbers racket. Nokia quickly disintegrated after that as their best people started leaving and their product lines quit moving forward. Then apple came around and drove a stake through its heart. Nokia no longer had the talent nor will to answer to the iphone, and they quickly spiraled down the drain.
Well it took 1 for you apparently. What kind of "hacker" doesn't know about VPNs and woudn't buy a new keyboard? The fact that a Russian ISP was involved and a cyrillic keyboard screams "fake." Nonetheless, I'm sure the "Russian hackers" will continue until everyone in the West is screaming for Putin's head and witch hunts are commonplace. Convenient.
And that proves what, exactly? You can't look at this incident in a vacuum. Look at what's been going on in the past decade, or do you believe all the Putin adversaries disappearing and dying and Russian soldiers and weaponry in the Ukraine are mere "coincidence"? Russia is on an offensive, now figure out exactly what the end goals are. Propping up the EU or destabilizing it? You can do it, I know you can.
You may have excellent hearing, and using hearing protection certainly seems like a good idea. The values I mentioned may also have been a tad low. You said you could hear 12K - that's of choose quite a bit less than 20K or 22K.
> I guess that those monitor speakers aren't as crappy as I thought.:)
Maybe, but actually maybe they are throwing off your test. Less expensive equipment has more harmonics, often called THD (total harmonic distortion). This is an effect where when you ask for 8Khz, your amp and speakers actually deliver 8Khz, 16Khz, 4Khz, and 2Khz.
Yep, but doubtful, as the pitch was definitely up the scale. Not something I'd call musical, which the lower frequencies definitely are closer too. As for 20K+, I never claimed those were within hearing range for me, nor do I have what I would consider excellent hearing. I used to be able to hear 16K+ a long time ago as verified in a hearing test. Painful screeching noise really. But hearing loss is progressive, and you never know when the cliff will arrive.
> 10K is an easy limit for most according to the charts I saw.
I can only guess the charts you saw didn't account for age, and maybe you're counting the range that we can only barely hear if it's really loud. For the same detection rate you get for 1 watt at 2K, you might need 1000 watts at 10K.
I didn't do much research, I admit that freely. Here's one link with a graph, and here's another to tests.
The 10K test run on my system through crappy monitor speakers set at about 30% volume was easily heard rooms away in a quiet house. The 12K test could be heard, and the 14K+ annoyed my dogs. I guess that those monitor speakers aren't as crappy as I thought.:) So for me, at least, my drop off is somewhere around 12K. Then again, I've practiced hearing safety protection for years, even while mowing the yard, trying to compensate for a span of rather bad habits early on. Maybe it's working.
You should calibrate your TV. Look up your model number and maker for calibration settings, usually something close will be available from CNET or one of the AV forums. It certainly reduced the sharpness (or soap opera effect) significantly and improved motion blur effects. The blocking effect is still there, but somewhat muted, because the artificially bright panel is somewhat dimmed, but rather a slightly dimmer picture that's watchable vs a super bright cartoon like picture with all the things that bother us physically. My LED panel is watchable, but my plasma just blows it away. The new 4K sets, especially the OLEDs, are certainly interesting, but likely won't replace my plasma for a few years yet.
And that's optimistic, for a young person. At the age when people have money for this stuff, a 45 year old man can generally hear up to about 4,000 Hz or so. Maybe barely hear 8,000 if they are lucky.
What damage did you do to your ears? 10K is an easy limit for most according to the charts I saw. Yes, it dips here and there, and hearing damage will affect you. If your hearing is limited to 4K, you're way out of normal bounds.
There's more to this than being able to see static detail. I never realized until dealing with some colleagues back during the CRT days that most people have lower quality eyesight than I realized. While I could see scan lines below 76Hz on a 1024x768 screen (yes, that's dateable) they were perfectly fine looking at their screens at 60Hz and could not see any difference when I had to increase the scan rate while helping them out. It's likely the same reason I am distracted by ghosting and blocking effects on LCD based televisions while many seem perfectly content with those sets. Where they might see a steady gray block, I see a flashing block between darker and lighter shades and motion artifacts they just never notice.
it's hard to cheaply find good statistics on this sort of thing but it looks like the median size is somewhere from 40-55 inches, but definitely skewed towards the 40s.
walk into your club warehouse, and you'll think the median size is between 65 and 70" these days with the largest moving to 80+.
Message passing is not expensive, in fact, it's likely far cheaper than excessive synchronization required in "standard" mutable data structures. It's the message passing under the single threaded process mutable state assumptions where performance hits come into play.
I'm relying on the underlying system not to be a porous system designed to run as root.
Well, that hasn't been the case since Vista. In fact, it was that architectural change that caused the most outcry among users and developers alike. I firmly believe that Windows 7 was nothing more than a re-release of Vista with a more polished UI, timed to coincide with the majority of software vendors finally making their apps compatible with the new security architecture.
You are incorrect. My information on the porous system designed to run as root dates as recently as the 2012 server edition I worked on extensively. I'm telling you that the core of windows is still the shitty NT4 system that was in place back in 96. All that's changed is the restrictions to do things "legally" within the system. e.g., you can no longer raise privileges of tokens within a process via authentication. In fact, a whole suite of token manipulation APIs were effectively removed, but IMNSHO, they removed the wrong set. They band-aided the fact that processes must run with a highest privilege token necessary for your process. If that requires any sort of system level privilege, guess what? Your entire process tree will have access to system privileges. The mechanisms for allowing just the specific privilege you might need were, well, let's just call them non-workable at that time. Tie that together with the broken system/network model for services, and you wind up jumping through some interesting hoops to keep a true lowest privilege level process running that requires certain higher privilege level functions for a select less than 1% use case.
Not just upgrades, updates can break things, in my experience. While the idea of uptimes measured in months does sound nice on the surface, the reality is that many of Apple's updates are patches for remotely-exploitable vulnerabilities and, on top of that, require a reboot. Yes, there are Mac OS updates that require a reboot; and they're more common than anyone with a multi-month uptime might realize. Not installing them isn't doing your system security any favors and running a Hackintosh often requires delaying the installation of updates.
The way I handle those is I have a cloned drive I test those on. Generally, the only instability I've come across is networking, which requires re-running the network configuration tool I use. Yes, that requires a second reboot.
That said, my hope is that the next run of Mac Pros will utilize Ryzen, as it really does make sense for Apple to go that route, and I'll be able to throw Mac OS in a VM on my workstation. I've got things sufficiently locked down that I'm not really super worried about a VM being a month or two behind on updates. For the workloads a Mac Pro is supposedly marketed toward, Ryzen absolutely thrashes Intel at this point in time; I'm sure Intel will release something faster in short order, to which AMD will respond in kind. From where I'm sitting, Ryzen will stay ahead of Intel's platforms for the foreseeable future.
I'm in full agreement that Intel seems to still be in a corner regarding their architecture. They managed to kill AMD's momentum with the Core ix architecture, but like the super-pipelining, it appears that they've hit another wall. They will need to do something new architecture wise. AMD, meanwhile, appears to have perfected it's multi-core technology, so yes, for multi-core scenarios, it's going to be interesting. Hacks on AMD is something I avoided, because I no longer have time to dabble with OS stability and configuration issues. Same reason I only run Linux in VMs or on servers, and no longer as a desktop.
It is built on the mach kernel, but OSX itself wasn't really message based. GCD moved it in that direction. Several other OSes are built on the Mach kernel as well. AFAIK, none of them are message based either. Message based systems require a different thought process to work on as, for one, hiding things in thread associated constructs doesn't work.
I too have run windows without AV. Windows XP even. For years. I also stripped it down and removed that most important piece of malware, Windows Update Service. I also ran no other MS software on it. It was reasonably secure for what I used that box for. However, there's a major difference between a secure OS and windows. Windows is insecure by design. Anything that gets outside of its process sandbox via a buffer overflow or whatever has almost instant root access. That's not true with any other OS currently in use that I know of.
I'd say that every single one of those sponsors, and Ajit Pai specifically, should be recused from anything touching technology and the internet. They are either so woefully ignorant of all aspects related to technology that they are similar to an orangutang performing brain surgery, or they are attempting to criminally line their pockets. There does not seem to be a middle ground that explains their stance.
You're missing the point. They fundamentally changed the OS to be message passing. Look up exactly what that means in terms of parallelism. It's an amazing feat of software engineering to make an OS truly message based and still function with all of yesterday's software. (I don't believe they're really there yet, however.)
So NSA would have had access to this for years.
Russian FSB would have had access to this for years.
China would have had access to this for years.
Hmm.. You forgot to mention the intelligence agency of the country most likely to exploit this "backdoor". In fact, some other posters are doing the same thing. I wonder why.
They listed the top 3? How are you going to rank them?
Grand Central Dispatch is the cause for that. The monolithic computing entity in 10.6 and before basically was going to hold up performance increases as time moves on. You're going to get more cores, not really faster cores, and OSX has been positioning itself for that new reality.
Slashdot Mirror
One man's offense is the others defense. We know the NSA and CIA have been trying to get rid of Putin and both the official US and EU channels have called for 'fair elections' and oversight in Russia
There's a difference between revealing one's misdeeds and fabricating them. Also, Russia has no non-partisan monitoring of their elections. Trump is evidence that the US has fair elections. That the Russians meddled and Comey swung it doesn't detract from the fact that the elections themselves were fair.
Who's looking at this in a vacuum? You didn't go back far enough. The U.S. and Russia have had an adversarial relationship going back to the Bolshevik revolution, but the U.S. has always been the aggressor. We bombed Japan with nukes even after their Navy was obliterated and couldn't go on the offensive. Why? To show Russia our new toy.
Revisionist much? We had a non-recognition policy until 1933, nothing more. Certainly not adversarial. In fact, it was even semi-friendly from 1933-1947. As for bombing Japan, that was done to prevent a recurrence of the relatively heavy losses the US had experienced in fighting the Japanese island to island. The US had no need to demonstrate the bomb, as the tests themselves were certainly evidence of the capability.
Then after WWII we formed NATO, which sits on Russia's doorstep. We made allies with Germany, the war with whom cost Russia 14 million lives.
First, Russia lost over 20M lives in WWII. Second, we conquered Germany with Russia's help and split the country between the victors for rebuilding. NATO wasn't on the doorstep of Russia. If you recall, there were a whole slew of countries between Greece, Italy, Switzerland, France, Belgium, Denmark, Sweden and the Netherlands and the official Russian border besides just Germany and Austria. Russia, however, took the countries that it was responsible for post WWII and effectively absorbed them into it's own empire as states rather than shepherding them back to self rule.
What does Russia have to gain by partaking in activities obvious to even you that would destabilize NATO? ...
Um, let's see - complete the invasion and reclamation of Ukraine, for starters. At this point, Crimea is likely never going to be returned to the Ukraine, but, given the history of that particular piece of territory, I'm not sure anyone can make enough claims to start a real war over it. The Ukraine, however, is a different beast. Then there's Iran/Syria and the rest of the Middle East, as well as a few other countries floating about that Putin would more than likely love to own.
But it's not according to Russia's plan, it's the U.S. deep state who wants two things: 1. Le Pen to lose and 2. more evidence that Russia is rigging elections.
I'm not sure Trump wants Le Pen to lose. Everyone that's not an Alt-right sock puppet does, however, and not just in the US. As for Russia influencing elections, that appears to be a cost Putin is willing to pay to fray the alliances that stand in his empire's way.
Note that while the US may have been the only country that dropped a nuclear bomb on another country, it is also the only country that effectively given control of countries back to their people after taking military control of the previous ruling parties. Russia has never done that willingly. In fact, Russia has only done it once, when it collapsed.
I think we've already passed peak Apple and they're going to start to descend into being just another device. Apple have managed to evade this being noticeable by expanding into other markets like China and India, but now they've got nowhere left to expand into and their decline in popularity is going to be noticeable. Apples problem here is that their competitors are just as good, if not better than they are. Sure Apple will be around for a while but their power is waning, just like IBM in the 2000's.
Apple can go a number of ways. If they truly invest in modernizing their desktop lines and keep on top of improving products, They will continue to do well. IBMs problem was that they didn't cannibalize their own business, so others did it for them. Apple has shown no such tendencies, and that is why they are where they are.
Nah, the writing was on the wall well before that.
It certainly was. Their major issue was hiring new MBA types that didn't stick to the company's core values but instead started practicing their myopic next quarter numbers racket. Nokia quickly disintegrated after that as their best people started leaving and their product lines quit moving forward. Then apple came around and drove a stake through its heart. Nokia no longer had the talent nor will to answer to the iphone, and they quickly spiraled down the drain.
Wow, gullible.
Well it took 1 for you apparently. What kind of "hacker" doesn't know about VPNs and woudn't buy a new keyboard? The fact that a Russian ISP was involved and a cyrillic keyboard screams "fake." Nonetheless, I'm sure the "Russian hackers" will continue until everyone in the West is screaming for Putin's head and witch hunts are commonplace. Convenient.
And that proves what, exactly? You can't look at this incident in a vacuum. Look at what's been going on in the past decade, or do you believe all the Putin adversaries disappearing and dying and Russian soldiers and weaponry in the Ukraine are mere "coincidence"? Russia is on an offensive, now figure out exactly what the end goals are. Propping up the EU or destabilizing it? You can do it, I know you can.
You may have excellent hearing, and using hearing protection certainly seems like a good idea. The values I mentioned may also have been a tad low. You said you could hear 12K - that's of choose quite a bit less than 20K or 22K.
> I guess that those monitor speakers aren't as crappy as I thought. :)
Maybe, but actually maybe they are throwing off your test. Less expensive equipment has more harmonics, often called THD (total harmonic distortion). This is an effect where when you ask for 8Khz, your amp and speakers actually deliver 8Khz, 16Khz, 4Khz, and 2Khz.
Yep, but doubtful, as the pitch was definitely up the scale. Not something I'd call musical, which the lower frequencies definitely are closer too. As for 20K+, I never claimed those were within hearing range for me, nor do I have what I would consider excellent hearing. I used to be able to hear 16K+ a long time ago as verified in a hearing test. Painful screeching noise really. But hearing loss is progressive, and you never know when the cliff will arrive.
> 10K is an easy limit for most according to the charts I saw.
I can only guess the charts you saw didn't account for age, and maybe you're counting the range that we can only barely hear if it's really loud. For the same detection rate you get for 1 watt at 2K, you might need 1000 watts at 10K.
I didn't do much research, I admit that freely. Here's one link with a graph, and here's another to tests.
The 10K test run on my system through crappy monitor speakers set at about 30% volume was easily heard rooms away in a quiet house. The 12K test could be heard, and the 14K+ annoyed my dogs. I guess that those monitor speakers aren't as crappy as I thought. :) So for me, at least, my drop off is somewhere around 12K. Then again, I've practiced hearing safety protection for years, even while mowing the yard, trying to compensate for a span of rather bad habits early on. Maybe it's working.
You should calibrate your TV. Look up your model number and maker for calibration settings, usually something close will be available from CNET or one of the AV forums. It certainly reduced the sharpness (or soap opera effect) significantly and improved motion blur effects. The blocking effect is still there, but somewhat muted, because the artificially bright panel is somewhat dimmed, but rather a slightly dimmer picture that's watchable vs a super bright cartoon like picture with all the things that bother us physically. My LED panel is watchable, but my plasma just blows it away. The new 4K sets, especially the OLEDs, are certainly interesting, but likely won't replace my plasma for a few years yet.
Pretty much all the 4k you will see around is compressed heavily, so '4k' is kind of meaningless.
And that's why 4K UHD disks are what are of interest here. 4K streaming is a joke.
And that's optimistic, for a young person. At the age when people have money for this stuff, a 45 year old man can generally hear up to about 4,000 Hz or so. Maybe barely hear 8,000 if they are lucky.
What damage did you do to your ears? 10K is an easy limit for most according to the charts I saw. Yes, it dips here and there, and hearing damage will affect you. If your hearing is limited to 4K, you're way out of normal bounds.
There's more to this than being able to see static detail. I never realized until dealing with some colleagues back during the CRT days that most people have lower quality eyesight than I realized. While I could see scan lines below 76Hz on a 1024x768 screen (yes, that's dateable) they were perfectly fine looking at their screens at 60Hz and could not see any difference when I had to increase the scan rate while helping them out. It's likely the same reason I am distracted by ghosting and blocking effects on LCD based televisions while many seem perfectly content with those sets. Where they might see a steady gray block, I see a flashing block between darker and lighter shades and motion artifacts they just never notice.
it's hard to cheaply find good statistics on this sort of thing but it looks like the median size is somewhere from 40-55 inches, but definitely skewed towards the 40s.
walk into your club warehouse, and you'll think the median size is between 65 and 70" these days with the largest moving to 80+.
Message passing is not expensive, in fact, it's likely far cheaper than excessive synchronization required in "standard" mutable data structures. It's the message passing under the single threaded process mutable state assumptions where performance hits come into play.
I'm relying on the underlying system not to be a porous system designed to run as root.
Well, that hasn't been the case since Vista. In fact, it was that architectural change that caused the most outcry among users and developers alike. I firmly believe that Windows 7 was nothing more than a re-release of Vista with a more polished UI, timed to coincide with the majority of software vendors finally making their apps compatible with the new security architecture.
You are incorrect. My information on the porous system designed to run as root dates as recently as the 2012 server edition I worked on extensively. I'm telling you that the core of windows is still the shitty NT4 system that was in place back in 96. All that's changed is the restrictions to do things "legally" within the system. e.g., you can no longer raise privileges of tokens within a process via authentication. In fact, a whole suite of token manipulation APIs were effectively removed, but IMNSHO, they removed the wrong set. They band-aided the fact that processes must run with a highest privilege token necessary for your process. If that requires any sort of system level privilege, guess what? Your entire process tree will have access to system privileges. The mechanisms for allowing just the specific privilege you might need were, well, let's just call them non-workable at that time. Tie that together with the broken system/network model for services, and you wind up jumping through some interesting hoops to keep a true lowest privilege level process running that requires certain higher privilege level functions for a select less than 1% use case.
Not just upgrades, updates can break things, in my experience. While the idea of uptimes measured in months does sound nice on the surface, the reality is that many of Apple's updates are patches for remotely-exploitable vulnerabilities and, on top of that, require a reboot. Yes, there are Mac OS updates that require a reboot; and they're more common than anyone with a multi-month uptime might realize. Not installing them isn't doing your system security any favors and running a Hackintosh often requires delaying the installation of updates.
The way I handle those is I have a cloned drive I test those on. Generally, the only instability I've come across is networking, which requires re-running the network configuration tool I use. Yes, that requires a second reboot.
That said, my hope is that the next run of Mac Pros will utilize Ryzen, as it really does make sense for Apple to go that route, and I'll be able to throw Mac OS in a VM on my workstation. I've got things sufficiently locked down that I'm not really super worried about a VM being a month or two behind on updates. For the workloads a Mac Pro is supposedly marketed toward, Ryzen absolutely thrashes Intel at this point in time; I'm sure Intel will release something faster in short order, to which AMD will respond in kind. From where I'm sitting, Ryzen will stay ahead of Intel's platforms for the foreseeable future.
I'm in full agreement that Intel seems to still be in a corner regarding their architecture. They managed to kill AMD's momentum with the Core ix architecture, but like the super-pipelining, it appears that they've hit another wall. They will need to do something new architecture wise. AMD, meanwhile, appears to have perfected it's multi-core technology, so yes, for multi-core scenarios, it's going to be interesting. Hacks on AMD is something I avoided, because I no longer have time to dabble with OS stability and configuration issues. Same reason I only run Linux in VMs or on servers, and no longer as a desktop.
It is built on the mach kernel, but OSX itself wasn't really message based. GCD moved it in that direction. Several other OSes are built on the Mach kernel as well. AFAIK, none of them are message based either. Message based systems require a different thought process to work on as, for one, hiding things in thread associated constructs doesn't work.
I too have run windows without AV. Windows XP even. For years. I also stripped it down and removed that most important piece of malware, Windows Update Service. I also ran no other MS software on it. It was reasonably secure for what I used that box for. However, there's a major difference between a secure OS and windows. Windows is insecure by design. Anything that gets outside of its process sandbox via a buffer overflow or whatever has almost instant root access. That's not true with any other OS currently in use that I know of.
My coworkers didn't doubt it.
That's the proper metric.
Said the lead lemming "Let's go this way!!!!"
I attempted this round not to slam the "entitled" millennials, so I recast your statement as "try" which you absolutely should tell a child.
I'd say that every single one of those sponsors, and Ajit Pai specifically, should be recused from anything touching technology and the internet. They are either so woefully ignorant of all aspects related to technology that they are similar to an orangutang performing brain surgery, or they are attempting to criminally line their pockets. There does not seem to be a middle ground that explains their stance.
You're missing the point. They fundamentally changed the OS to be message passing. Look up exactly what that means in terms of parallelism. It's an amazing feat of software engineering to make an OS truly message based and still function with all of yesterday's software. (I don't believe they're really there yet, however.)
now $900 sounds a bit high... hehe
Not for 2TB....
No.
The short answer is, I fixed the fucking problem by donating that shitty stuff to Goodwill.
I doubt it.
So NSA would have had access to this for years. Russian FSB would have had access to this for years. China would have had access to this for years.
Hmm.. You forgot to mention the intelligence agency of the country most likely to exploit this "backdoor". In fact, some other posters are doing the same thing. I wonder why.
They listed the top 3? How are you going to rank them?
Secondly, because my Hackintosh is really just a virtual machine running in it's own little partition,
This is not a hackintosh by any stretch of the imagination. I run a hack, it runs windows and linux VMs just fine.
Grand Central Dispatch is the cause for that. The monolithic computing entity in 10.6 and before basically was going to hold up performance increases as time moves on. You're going to get more cores, not really faster cores, and OSX has been positioning itself for that new reality.