C'mon, don't be hooked by word. There exists DVD-Audio, SACD, etc. Look at this: http://www.aes.org/sections/uk/meetings/049 9.html British section of audio engeneering society
"Peter Eastty, Chief Consultant Engineer of Sony Broadcast Europe, described the fundamentals... [skip]... of the SACD.... [skip]...The l6-bit wordlength of CD allowed an unshaded dynamic range of about 94dB, although DVD-Audio supports word-lengths up to 24-bits, or a dynamic range of about 142dB if this could be realised in the production chain."
By the way, take a look at this, for example: Coding High Quality Digital Audio by Bob Stuart http://www.meridian-audio.com/w_paper/Codi ng2.PDF Where stated that:"... we have no problem measurind (and hearing) signals of -110 dB in a well-designed 16-bit channel... " This is Meridian, and similar tecniques are used almost by all high-q CDDA players from noticeable labels (Sony is one of them, meaning wide spread of such CD players)
Where I can get FULL specs on iPod? Can somebody point me to something other (deeper) than Apples link?: http://manuals.info.apple.com/Apple_Suppor t_Area/M anuals/specs/hardware/L16749C_EN.pdf
I want to tell that I can't find ANY info on iPod SNR ratio, distortions, dynamic range.
Only thing about 104 dB there is about sensitivity of earphones on 1mW of output power and this is surely nothing to deal with by hacking.
Looking at thread, you all speaking on some "LOUDNESS" addition by 4 dB. I think it's total miss.
As I haven't seen that EU law text itself, I assume that it is not about health, but about some kind of DRM.
Look: they (EU rules) are speaking not of LEVEL OF LOUDNESS itself - it is affected not only by output power, but by far more parameters - sensitivity of earphones, for example. In reality nobody can measure LOUDNESS level IN YOUR EAR. They (EU rules) are about DYNAMIC RANGE, for sure. Range between loudest and quietest sounds thet device can reproduce.
Look: "upper limit of 100dB for consumer devices" guaranteed that sound passed thru analog output will be worser, than Audio CD digital source. That's it.
PS Don't bother with it - to utilise 100 dB dynamic range you have to play at 100 dB OVER SURROUNDING NOISE, that will be 130-150 dB (as my estimate), and will scare you!;)
"BuyMusic.com has now eliminated the option to purchase songs if you're not using Internet Explorer for Windows. Not a huge loss, but notable, nonetheless."
Sorry, just can't understand, what you mean. English is not my primary. So, what you mean as "a vehicle for abuse of the service" and "Apple has no choice in this" - choice in what?
Anyway, when "online services that will buy your iTunes music for you using a US credit card and then transfer the account to you" - so it will be that services, not Apple, who will break some export rules of RIAA or whatsoever. And I have to look thru agreement, is there right to redistribute, or not. If no, there will be a big headache to give such service rights to represent you.
Sorry about unclearance - of coarse, I mean "audio transformer, properly calculated to support bandpass, impedance matching, gain, losses, peak power; preferrably thoroidal, with channel thores axices rotated at 90 deg; shielded and properly grounded" when wrote "old simple transformer";)
From my point, only bad thing with that - phase shift, but speaking of compressed sound - it's already there.
Keeping no active parts, device will add no noise, no distortions, etc. No stabilized (or any) power support, etc. No need in adjustment. No heat. Even no moving breakable parts!;)
You own what you bought. You just cant buy if you not an US resident. This is stated in agreement.
What's exactly is so wrong with this to boycott iTunes store? Do you really think that Apple involved that on their will? Cutting his own buyers base? C'mon!
Install 10.2 on ANY compatible with it Mac. Get that HD and set it to target "incompatible with 10.2" Mac. Take off ALL unnecessary cards and periferia. All HD, mouse, modem/network, scsi, video (use onboard), etc. Will it boot in some way? Normal, shifted, single-user? What it says if no? On which stage? Have you possibilities to remote debug that? Have you possibilities to try to use alternate kernel loader? Alternate debugger? Have you looked into source of stuff that hunged booting? Have you looked into source of same stuff (inits of memory/pci controller of your old Mac, 99.5% sure if it will not boot as single user) from Motorola docs? Into source of same stuff from Linux build that that works on your Mac?
Do you really think that anybody will do it with your Mac remotely? Only you, by your own brain and hands.
Install 10.2 on ANY compatible with it Mac. Get that HD and set it to target "incompatible with 10.2" Mac. Take off ALL unnecessary cards and periferia. All HD, mouse, modem/network, scsi, video (use onboard), etc. Will it boot in some way? Normal, shifted, single-user? What it says if no? On which stage? Have you possibilities to remote debug that? Have you possibilities to try to use alternate kernel loader? Alternate debugger? Have you looked into source of stuff that hunged booting? Have you looked into source of same stuff (inits of memory/pci) from Motorola docs?
on p.5: I did it on one partial Mac. I almost sure that my way will not work for you (or anybody else). In addition, it was not some kind of algorithm - more like shamaning-voodooing. Sorry, but I just can't show here step by step solution (for Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 24, @12:52PM (#6523034)). Instead I tried to point places where you can find the way to do that - and I not recommend to do that - it will work WERY slow on that Macs, in will be inexpectedly, inpredictably buggy, and I don't know will it still work after software update session. I personally can't see any practical reason to do that, I did it coase I had time and interest. I looked once and saw that old system is far more practical on old Mac. OS X on old machines is plain unusable.
So, I will not do it again. For other partial config of Mac with other partial config of PCI cards etc., which I even not own. And so, you have to do that by yourself on your Mac. And "If what I said already is not enough for you - you can't do it by yourself"
to p.6 - honour is mine;)
P.S. Keep in mind - english is my 3-rd lang, so may be I'm not as clean as I wish and may be I can't strictly understand you
It's installer that tells you that you can't install Jag on that hardware - at first
It's incompatibility with default initialisation of HD controller on 8500-8600 like machines AFAIK
Both causes are resolvable. First I can and did by myself, second-like was done by time of G3 upgrades
Hi!
Can't remember URL, but some time ago here in Moscow was a challenge painboll between Q2 team and FSB team, as I remember.
Quakers wiped out federal sequrity team. Of coarse, that was not real bullets...
Lets go there anl look/hear carefully :
http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2003/07/02/yml /
"Apple's new Power Mac G5 and Apple's claims that they're the fastest personal computers ever will be discussed on tonight's edition of Your Mac Life"
http://www.yourmaclife.com/
" Last week brought news of Apple's latest and greatest machines - and a firestorm of controversy with fingers being pointed all over the place!
Apple's benchmarks have been called into question by numerous columnists and pundits. But, do they have a case? What are benchmarks any way and why should we care?
Whenever Your Mac Life needs someone to separate the virtual wheat from the chaff, they always turn to Matt Deatherage and MacJournals.com. Last wek, Matt wrote a very interesting article dissecting the benchmarks and says who was right and who was wrong, in no uncertain terms."
At first - I'm working with PC AND Mac, and I like AMD over Intel on PC;) Read - I'm not a Mac fanatic. But look at this: all chickening on Apple testing begins from EXACTLY THAT ONE man and his article. No more sources. So I decide to research all the data in that article and more. And guess what I found!
All the article is full of , say, incomplete data and , say, some interesting kind of personal vision. Example: "Here is Dell's Precision 650 benchmark(http://www.specbench.org/cpu2000/results/res2003q2/cpu2000-20030407-02056.asc) which shows hyperthreading being enabled for a "Rate" benchmark. It says, "CPU(s) enabled: 2" and "System State: Default". So, Dell seems to think that hyperthreading should be ON for the "Rate" benchmarks. " - citation from soapbox article.
"Compiler: Intel C++ Compiler 6.0 (020613Z)
Microsoft Visual Studio.NET (7.0.9466)
MicroQuill SmartHeap Library 6.01" - citation from mentioned in article document.
Now look here "Apple/Veritest used a special fast malloc library on the G5 benchmark, but did not use it on the Dell/Intel benchmark, thus giving the G5 an unfair advantage." - from soapbox. Ang go www.MicroQuill.com ans see, what "SmartHeap Library 6.01" is.
Another example: From soapbox article: "Pedantic note: It is probably the NAGWare Fortran compiler which is poorly optimized for the Intel P4, not so much GCC. I say this because according to this SPEC FAQ, SPECfp2000 contains 10 Fortran programs, and 4 C programs. In other words, SPECfp is mostly Fortran, and NAGWare is the Fortran compiler, so therefore it is most likely NAGWare that is the bad compiler for Intel, not GCC.)" For those, who do know what Fortran is it is just funny crap. Anybody? Am I wrong?
Another example? Here it is: From soapbox: "If you look at Apple's Graphics page about the PowerMac, you can see a pretty graph where Apple claims that in a 1024x768 Quake 3 benchmark, the G5 scores 337 fps...........Not ready to be fooled, I found this March 2003 Sharky Extreme article by Vince Freeman. As you can see, Sharky Extreme says they achieved 334 fps,"
So what? 337 is still bigger than 334 and try to find configuration of box on which they "acheived" that result: "The Radeon 9800 Pro is poised to be the fastest ATI video card, and potentially the most powerful desktop solution, so we're fitting it with a platform to match. Our test system includes the Pentium 4-3.06 GHz HT processor, an AGP 8X-capable Intel E7205 "Granite Bay" dual-DDR motherboard (MSI GNB Max) and 2x256-MB of Corsair DDR. Our reference configuration represents the high-end of the Intel platforms, and with AGP 8X and dual-DDR enabled, the E7205 is the fastest we've tested, and even beats the i850E/PC1066 combo in 3D games" and: "Quake III Arena Test Specifics
Version: 1.30 (retail)
V-Sync: Disabled
Sound Disabled
High Quality Defaults" Go Veritest result - Apple tested with DEFAULTS on 1.32, mean 32 bit color, Sound Enabled.
So, found that (and more), I'm telling you - soapbox's article is fact manipulation, if not an undirect lie.
Slashdot Mirror
C'mon! Who are 'known for quality windows software'?
;)
And where you get this: ' and they treat their own folks who work on windows stuff like CRAP.' - like CRAP.
By the way, I personally (using MacAnalisys) CAN'T see that 'HTTP server on p.3689' not on XP, nor W2k adv server, nor OS X 10.2.8
How exactly you find it? Accidentally?
Try to change layer between keyboard and chair
C'mon, don't be hooked by word.9 9.html
...The l6-bit wordlength of CD allowed an unshaded dynamic range of about 94dB, although DVD-Audio supports word-lengths up to 24-bits, or a dynamic range of about 142dB if this could be realised in the production chain."
i ng2.PDF :" ... we have no problem measurind (and hearing) signals of -110 dB in a well-designed 16-bit channel... "
There exists DVD-Audio, SACD, etc.
Look at this:
http://www.aes.org/sections/uk/meetings/04
British section of audio engeneering society
"Peter Eastty, Chief Consultant Engineer of Sony Broadcast Europe, described the fundamentals... [skip]... of the SACD....
[skip]
By the way, take a look at this, for example:
Coding High Quality Digital Audio by Bob Stuart
http://www.meridian-audio.com/w_paper/Cod
Where stated that
This is Meridian, and similar tecniques are used almost by all high-q CDDA players from noticeable labels (Sony is one of them, meaning wide spread of such CD players)
Where I can get FULL specs on iPod?r t_Area/M anuals/specs/hardware/L16749C_EN.pdf
Can somebody point me to something other (deeper) than Apples link?:
http://manuals.info.apple.com/Apple_Suppo
I want to tell that I can't find ANY info on iPod SNR ratio, distortions, dynamic range.
Only thing about 104 dB there is about sensitivity of earphones on 1mW of output power and this is surely nothing to deal with by hacking.
Where that 104 dB of output (range?) come from?
Looking at thread, you all speaking on some "LOUDNESS" addition by 4 dB. I think it's total miss.
;)
As I haven't seen that EU law text itself, I assume that it is not about health, but about some kind of DRM.
Look: they (EU rules) are speaking not of LEVEL OF LOUDNESS itself - it is affected not only by output power, but by far more parameters - sensitivity of earphones, for example. In reality nobody can measure LOUDNESS level IN YOUR EAR.
They (EU rules) are about DYNAMIC RANGE, for sure. Range between loudest and quietest sounds thet device can reproduce.
Look: "upper limit of 100dB for consumer devices" guaranteed that sound passed thru analog output will be worser, than Audio CD digital source.
That's it.
PS Don't bother with it - to utilise 100 dB dynamic range you have to play at 100 dB OVER SURROUNDING NOISE, that will be 130-150 dB (as my estimate), and will scare you!
Go there:o /macosx/ 11168
http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinf
utility name is XPostFacto
"BuyMusic.com has now eliminated the option to purchase songs if you're not using Internet Explorer for Windows. Not a huge loss, but notable, nonetheless."
From here:
http://www.macslash.com/
Sorry, just can't understand, what you mean. English is not my primary.
So, what you mean as "a vehicle for abuse of the service" and "Apple has no choice in this" - choice in what?
Anyway, when "online services that will buy your iTunes music for you using a US credit card and then transfer the account to you" - so it will be that services, not Apple, who will break some export rules of RIAA or whatsoever.
And I have to look thru agreement, is there right to redistribute, or not.
If no, there will be a big headache to give such service rights to represent you.
Sorry about unclearance - of coarse, I mean "audio transformer, properly calculated to support bandpass, impedance matching, gain, losses, peak power; preferrably thoroidal, with channel thores axices rotated at 90 deg; shielded and properly grounded" when wrote "old simple transformer" ;)
;)
From my point, only bad thing with that - phase shift, but speaking of compressed sound - it's already there.
Keeping no active parts, device will add no noise, no distortions, etc. No stabilized (or any) power support, etc. No need in adjustment. No heat. Even no moving breakable parts!
By the way - what this thread was about?
How about using old simle transformer instead all of that?
Better, then tape; so-so or better than 2-tubed device.
Man, you're out of sync:
You own what you bought.
You just cant buy if you not an US resident.
This is stated in agreement.
What's exactly is so wrong with this to boycott iTunes store?
Do you really think that Apple involved that on their will?
Cutting his own buyers base? C'mon!
To moderation: where insightfull +3 exactly is?
Install 10.2 on ANY compatible with it Mac.
Get that HD and set it to target "incompatible with 10.2" Mac.
Take off ALL unnecessary cards and periferia. All HD, mouse, modem/network, scsi, video (use onboard), etc.
Will it boot in some way? Normal, shifted, single-user?
What it says if no? On which stage?
Have you possibilities to remote debug that?
Have you possibilities to try to use alternate kernel loader?
Alternate debugger?
Have you looked into source of stuff that hunged booting?
Have you looked into source of same stuff (inits of memory/pci controller of your old Mac, 99.5% sure if it will not boot as single user) from Motorola docs?
Into source of same stuff from Linux build that that works on your Mac?
Do you really think that anybody will do it with your Mac remotely?
Only you, by your own brain and hands.
To clean-up p.3:
;)
Install 10.2 on ANY compatible with it Mac.
Get that HD and set it to target "incompatible with 10.2" Mac.
Take off ALL unnecessary cards and periferia. All HD, mouse, modem/network, scsi, video (use onboard), etc.
Will it boot in some way? Normal, shifted, single-user?
What it says if no? On which stage?
Have you possibilities to remote debug that?
Have you possibilities to try to use alternate kernel loader?
Alternate debugger?
Have you looked into source of stuff that hunged booting?
Have you looked into source of same stuff (inits of memory/pci) from Motorola docs?
on p.5: I did it on one partial Mac. I almost sure that my way will not work for you (or anybody else). In addition, it was not some kind of algorithm - more like shamaning-voodooing. Sorry, but I just can't show here step by step solution (for Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 24, @12:52PM (#6523034)).
Instead I tried to point places where you can find the way to do that - and I not recommend to do that - it will work WERY slow on that Macs, in will be inexpectedly, inpredictably buggy, and I don't know will it still work after software update session.
I personally can't see any practical reason to do that, I did it coase I had time and interest. I looked once and saw that old system is far more practical on old Mac. OS X on old machines is plain unusable.
So, I will not do it again. For other partial config of Mac with other partial config of PCI cards etc., which I even not own.
And so, you have to do that by yourself on your Mac.
And "If what I said already is not enough for you - you can't do it by yourself"
to p.6 - honour is mine
P.S. Keep in mind - english is my 3-rd lang, so may be I'm not as clean as I wish and may be I can't strictly understand you
No way
1. While I'm doing it for my own interest on my own Mac - it's ok. When I'll redistribute this to public - I can be sued in many ways.
2. in 9.2 times when full installer does not work, individual installers still works on same Mac
3. Did Jag, pre-installed on compatible Mac, worked on target Mac?
4. Do you know what Resourcerer/ResEdit, The Fragmalyzer and Carbon Copy Cloner is?
5. If what I said already is not enough for you - you can't do it by yourself.
It's installer that tells you that you can't install Jag on that hardware - at first It's incompatibility with default initialisation of HD controller on 8500-8600 like machines AFAIK Both causes are resolvable. First I can and did by myself, second-like was done by time of G3 upgrades
Hi! Can't remember URL, but some time ago here in Moscow was a challenge painboll between Q2 team and FSB team, as I remember. Quakers wiped out federal sequrity team. Of coarse, that was not real bullets...
idiot?
Lets go there anl look/hear carefully : http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2003/07/02/yml /
"Apple's new Power Mac G5 and Apple's claims that they're the fastest personal computers ever will be discussed on tonight's edition of Your Mac Life"
http://www.yourmaclife.com/
" Last week brought news of Apple's latest and greatest machines - and a firestorm of controversy with fingers being pointed all over the place!
Apple's benchmarks have been called into question by numerous columnists and pundits. But, do they have a case? What are benchmarks any way and why should we care?
Whenever Your Mac Life needs someone to separate the virtual wheat from the chaff, they always turn to Matt Deatherage and MacJournals.com. Last wek, Matt wrote a very interesting article dissecting the benchmarks and says who was right and who was wrong, in no uncertain terms."
At first - I'm working with PC AND Mac, and I like AMD over Intel on PC ;) Read - I'm not a Mac fanatic. But look at this: all chickening on Apple testing begins from EXACTLY THAT ONE man and his article. No more sources. So I decide to research all the data in that article and more. And guess what I found!
s /res2003q2/cpu2000-20030407-02056.asc) which shows hyperthreading being enabled for a "Rate" benchmark. It says, "CPU(s) enabled: 2" and "System State: Default". So, Dell seems to think that hyperthreading should be ON for the "Rate" benchmarks. " - citation from soapbox article.
.NET (7.0.9466)
..... ......Not ready to be fooled, I found this March 2003 Sharky Extreme article by Vince Freeman. As you can see, Sharky Extreme says they achieved 334 fps,"
All the article is full of , say, incomplete data and , say, some interesting kind of personal vision.
Example:
"Here is Dell's Precision 650 benchmark(http://www.specbench.org/cpu2000/result
"Compiler: Intel C++ Compiler 6.0 (020613Z)
Microsoft Visual Studio
MicroQuill SmartHeap Library 6.01" - citation from mentioned in article document.
Now look here "Apple/Veritest used a special fast malloc library on the G5 benchmark, but did not use it on the Dell/Intel benchmark, thus giving the G5 an unfair advantage." - from soapbox.
Ang go www.MicroQuill.com ans see, what "SmartHeap Library 6.01" is.
Another example:
From soapbox article: "Pedantic note: It is probably the NAGWare Fortran compiler which is poorly optimized for the Intel P4, not so much GCC. I say this because according to this SPEC FAQ, SPECfp2000 contains 10 Fortran programs, and 4 C programs. In other words, SPECfp is mostly Fortran, and NAGWare is the Fortran compiler, so therefore it is most likely NAGWare that is the bad compiler for Intel, not GCC.)"
For those, who do know what Fortran is it is just funny crap. Anybody? Am I wrong?
Another example? Here it is:
From soapbox: "If you look at Apple's Graphics page about the PowerMac, you can see a pretty graph where Apple claims that in a 1024x768 Quake 3 benchmark, the G5 scores 337 fps
So what? 337 is still bigger than 334 and try to find configuration of box on which they "acheived" that result:
"The Radeon 9800 Pro is poised to be the fastest ATI video card, and potentially the most powerful desktop solution, so we're fitting it with a platform to match. Our test system includes the Pentium 4-3.06 GHz HT processor, an AGP 8X-capable Intel E7205 "Granite Bay" dual-DDR motherboard (MSI GNB Max) and 2x256-MB of Corsair DDR. Our reference configuration represents the high-end of the Intel platforms, and with AGP 8X and dual-DDR enabled, the E7205 is the fastest we've tested, and even beats the i850E/PC1066 combo in 3D games"
and: "Quake III Arena Test Specifics
Version: 1.30 (retail)
V-Sync: Disabled
Sound Disabled
High Quality Defaults"
Go Veritest result - Apple tested with DEFAULTS on 1.32, mean 32 bit color, Sound Enabled.
So, found that (and more), I'm telling you - soapbox's article is fact manipulation, if not an undirect lie.
dmdimon