AppliedVisual
Oct 22, 03:14 PM
I heard Leo Laporte talking about this on his KFI podcast... exciting... one question... how many softwares take advantage of multi cores? I understand that the OS can deal with it for multi tasking, but how many programs multi thread?
DD
Unfortunately not many multithreaded apps - yet. For a long time most of the multi-threaded apps were just a select few pro level things. 3D/Visualization software, CAD, database systems, etc.. Those of us who had multiprocessor systems bought them because we had a specific software in mind or group of software applications that could take advantage of multiple processors. As current CPU manufacturing processes started hitting a wall right around the 3GHz mark, chip makers started to transition to multiple CPU cores to boost power - makes sense. Software developers have been lazy for years, just riding the wave of ever-increasing MHz. Now the multi-core CPUs are here and the software is behind as many applications need to have serious re-writes done in order to take advantage of multiple processors. Intel tried to get a jump on this with their HT (Hyper Threading) implementation that essentially simulated dual-cores on a CPU by way of two virtual CPUs. Software developers didn't exactly jump on this and warm up to it. But I also don't think the software industry truly believed that CPUs would go multi-core on a mass scale so fast... Intel and AMD both said they would, don't know why the software industry doubted. Intel and AMD are uncommonly good about telling the truth about upcoming products. Both will be shipping quad-core CPU offerings by year's end.
DD
Unfortunately not many multithreaded apps - yet. For a long time most of the multi-threaded apps were just a select few pro level things. 3D/Visualization software, CAD, database systems, etc.. Those of us who had multiprocessor systems bought them because we had a specific software in mind or group of software applications that could take advantage of multiple processors. As current CPU manufacturing processes started hitting a wall right around the 3GHz mark, chip makers started to transition to multiple CPU cores to boost power - makes sense. Software developers have been lazy for years, just riding the wave of ever-increasing MHz. Now the multi-core CPUs are here and the software is behind as many applications need to have serious re-writes done in order to take advantage of multiple processors. Intel tried to get a jump on this with their HT (Hyper Threading) implementation that essentially simulated dual-cores on a CPU by way of two virtual CPUs. Software developers didn't exactly jump on this and warm up to it. But I also don't think the software industry truly believed that CPUs would go multi-core on a mass scale so fast... Intel and AMD both said they would, don't know why the software industry doubted. Intel and AMD are uncommonly good about telling the truth about upcoming products. Both will be shipping quad-core CPU offerings by year's end.
adamfilip
Jul 20, 11:48 AM
New Apple Mac Pro Dual Quad
Dual Intel Xeon 8400 Quardro processors at 3.4Ghz (2 x 4 core)
2Gb Buffered DDR2 RAM
750 Gb Sata2 Hard drive
Blue Ray Super drive 2x
Regular DVD rom in second bay
ATI X1900 video card 512mb PCI express x16
$3950
Dual Intel Xeon 8400 Quardro processors at 3.4Ghz (2 x 4 core)
2Gb Buffered DDR2 RAM
750 Gb Sata2 Hard drive
Blue Ray Super drive 2x
Regular DVD rom in second bay
ATI X1900 video card 512mb PCI express x16
$3950
tripjammer
Apr 11, 01:05 PM
Not sure I believe the rumors, but as long as my 3G still works, I'll wait. $200 every 3 years is better than $200 every 2 years.
That is why you sell your iphone every year and it does not cost you to upgrade. ATT basically allows you to upgrade at the lowest price every year.
Its all about timing.
That is why you sell your iphone every year and it does not cost you to upgrade. ATT basically allows you to upgrade at the lowest price every year.
Its all about timing.
mazola
Nov 29, 12:11 PM
Why just the other day I was thinking to myself, 'There ought to be an easier way to get my money to UMG.'
This sure beats taking out a fin, finding an envelope and stamp, digging out an address, and making the trek out to the mailbox.
Let's face it, the Universal Music Group DESERVES our money. Sure I don't listen to Ashlee Simpson, Lindsay Lohan, or the Doggy Style All Stars but who am I to say where my money should go?
And why on earth should an independent society for artist rights like ASCAP, BMI, or SOCAN be responsible for distributing money collected from what amounts to an MP3 tax? They'll just divy up the money to artists and music publishers according to boring criteria like record sales/radio play, etc.
I want my money going directly to the LABEL to do whatever they see fit with no public oversight! Maybe the artists don't need the money this month and the coke-head A&R guy needs it instead? Did you ever think of that?
Thank God UMG is FINALLY standing up for its rights and Microsoft had the good sense to listen when it agreed to implement a UMG tax in the Zune!
Apple, pay attention, or I'll just have to mail my money to UMG instead of buying an iPod!
This sure beats taking out a fin, finding an envelope and stamp, digging out an address, and making the trek out to the mailbox.
Let's face it, the Universal Music Group DESERVES our money. Sure I don't listen to Ashlee Simpson, Lindsay Lohan, or the Doggy Style All Stars but who am I to say where my money should go?
And why on earth should an independent society for artist rights like ASCAP, BMI, or SOCAN be responsible for distributing money collected from what amounts to an MP3 tax? They'll just divy up the money to artists and music publishers according to boring criteria like record sales/radio play, etc.
I want my money going directly to the LABEL to do whatever they see fit with no public oversight! Maybe the artists don't need the money this month and the coke-head A&R guy needs it instead? Did you ever think of that?
Thank God UMG is FINALLY standing up for its rights and Microsoft had the good sense to listen when it agreed to implement a UMG tax in the Zune!
Apple, pay attention, or I'll just have to mail my money to UMG instead of buying an iPod!
sachamun
Nov 28, 09:00 PM
While I usually don't go for boycotts this time I would make an exception, if this was to go through I'd boycott buying anything from Universal. It wouldn't matter if it was an artist I had listened to for years, I'd simply never buy anything they release from that point on.
I'd boycott Apple ipods too. I wouldn't touch a zune either but...that's for a whole lot of reasons.
I'd boycott Apple ipods too. I wouldn't touch a zune either but...that's for a whole lot of reasons.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 19, 09:01 PM
I remember when the ipad 2 was announced. A samsung CEO said "we're going to have to rethink our copy of the ipad." Very innovative.
deannnnn
Jun 9, 08:44 AM
I have a feeling that those trade-in prices will be substantially reduced once the iPhone 4 is released.
asiayeah
Aug 25, 09:16 PM
It seems like a preponderance of the issues people have are with the notebooks.
Do you think it could be because Apple has the thinnest laptops on the market which means they sacrifice build quality and heat management?
When I looked at the innards of an iBook G3 it was basically "a mess" in there...nothing looked modular like you would see inside the new Mac pro.
Apple doesn't has the thinnest laptops on the market.
Do you think it could be because Apple has the thinnest laptops on the market which means they sacrifice build quality and heat management?
When I looked at the innards of an iBook G3 it was basically "a mess" in there...nothing looked modular like you would see inside the new Mac pro.
Apple doesn't has the thinnest laptops on the market.
ergle2
Sep 21, 03:17 PM
I had the pleasure of meeting Jef Raskin at his home in Pacifica a year before he passed away. He loved to play musical instruments and performed a short recital on his piano. Later that evening, after showing his Apple I in a wooden box, he encouraged me to read his book The Humane Interface and let him know what I thought about it. Sadly, I wasn't able to do that in time. But the conversation we had made it clear that he was not a fan of Steve Jobs. They both had strong opinions on various aspects of UI design. Even though I rather like OS X, Raskin politely argued against the inefficiencies of that design.
It was some time ago and I don't remember all the details from that night, but Raskin, I think, was more scientific in his approach. He preferred to study user response rates, time-to-decision, amount of eye movement, amount of pointer movement, number of mouse clicks, and various other factors that might contribute to 'dead' or wasted time.
It doesn't surprise me he was no fan of Jobs, especially given the history of the original Mac. From people I know who've worked with Jobs, he's not always easy to get along with.
From what I've read, the Mac was fundamentally quite different from Raskin's original vision after Jobs took over the project, though some of his ideas were obviously incorporated into it. (I believe Raskin wanted to go with the cheaper but obviously slower 6809).
His book's been one I've meant to track down for some time now. You know how it is, so many things to do/see...
The Archy interface modelled on his concepts is quite interesting, too.
I was sorry when we lost Jef, I feel he was one of those people striving to make the world a better place.
What did you think of The Humane Design?
It was some time ago and I don't remember all the details from that night, but Raskin, I think, was more scientific in his approach. He preferred to study user response rates, time-to-decision, amount of eye movement, amount of pointer movement, number of mouse clicks, and various other factors that might contribute to 'dead' or wasted time.
It doesn't surprise me he was no fan of Jobs, especially given the history of the original Mac. From people I know who've worked with Jobs, he's not always easy to get along with.
From what I've read, the Mac was fundamentally quite different from Raskin's original vision after Jobs took over the project, though some of his ideas were obviously incorporated into it. (I believe Raskin wanted to go with the cheaper but obviously slower 6809).
His book's been one I've meant to track down for some time now. You know how it is, so many things to do/see...
The Archy interface modelled on his concepts is quite interesting, too.
I was sorry when we lost Jef, I feel he was one of those people striving to make the world a better place.
What did you think of The Humane Design?
powers74
Apr 10, 09:57 PM
If I think the new FCP sucks I'll be b*tching and moaning too. ;)
Lethal
Ha! fair enough.
Lethal
Ha! fair enough.
aegisdesign
Sep 13, 11:55 AM
Lets not forget things like Spotlight that can now run more rigorously without affecting CPU resource much. You will get more intelligent software that can prepare for what you want to do so that when you go to do it it will be much more responsive. In other words just because some tasks cannot be easily broken up to leverage multiple cores doesn't mean that tasks such as those cannot be speculative run by software on idle cores in preparation for you doing the task.
Yes, that's definitely true. And I'd be happy to divert a whole core just to frickin WindowServer. :D
Yes, that's definitely true. And I'd be happy to divert a whole core just to frickin WindowServer. :D
DocNo
Apr 11, 10:00 AM
I'm sure they will still be shipping since they support the current Final Cut Studio 3 reeaallllyyy well. Lets face it the thing thats coming out will not support the old Plug-ins or workflows and will not be the replacement for FCP that everyone was expecting.
I find this line of "reasoning" fascinating.
If Apple was really intent of "throwing the baby out with the bathwater" and totally re-defining the way FCP works then why, pray tell, are they bothering to (presumably) announce the new FCP to industry and film editing heavyweights?
That seems rather daft - if Apple is no longer catering to them, why announce to them?
How can Apple simultaneously be a marketing genius (it is the only reason people buy iPods, iPhones and iPads after all!) and stupid enough to target people they are getting ready to diss?
I'll have the popcorn ready for tomorrow as well as my running shoes so I can sidestep all the backpedaling that will be happening :rolleyes:
I find this line of "reasoning" fascinating.
If Apple was really intent of "throwing the baby out with the bathwater" and totally re-defining the way FCP works then why, pray tell, are they bothering to (presumably) announce the new FCP to industry and film editing heavyweights?
That seems rather daft - if Apple is no longer catering to them, why announce to them?
How can Apple simultaneously be a marketing genius (it is the only reason people buy iPods, iPhones and iPads after all!) and stupid enough to target people they are getting ready to diss?
I'll have the popcorn ready for tomorrow as well as my running shoes so I can sidestep all the backpedaling that will be happening :rolleyes:
Yvan256
Apr 6, 01:45 PM
Once people start buying and using software (even freeware), the game is over. Most people don't want to lose what they use right now, it's their "personal software libraries".
That's why Microsoft Windows still dominates the desktop and even a free OS like Linux cannot compete. More than two decades of Windows near-monopoly on the desktop can't be pushed aside as easily as OSS folks would like to, though they did win on the server side.
That's also why the iPad currently dominates the tablet market and probably will for at least a few years down the road. The only chance competitors have is to sell a tablet for at most half the price of the iPad, with equivalent features (browser, music, videos, books). Unfortunately for them, the iPad can also run software made for the iPhone and iPod touch, so they are much more than a year late as far as "personal software libraries" go.
Apple, on the other hand, are simply competing with themselves. Their goal doesn't appear to be "beat the competitors products", it's probably "beat the previous iteration of our own product".
Twice as much RAM, faster dual-core CPU, up to 9 times faster GPU, facetime cameras... the iPad 1 just can't compare to the iPad 2. Imagine what's to come for future models.
That's why Microsoft Windows still dominates the desktop and even a free OS like Linux cannot compete. More than two decades of Windows near-monopoly on the desktop can't be pushed aside as easily as OSS folks would like to, though they did win on the server side.
That's also why the iPad currently dominates the tablet market and probably will for at least a few years down the road. The only chance competitors have is to sell a tablet for at most half the price of the iPad, with equivalent features (browser, music, videos, books). Unfortunately for them, the iPad can also run software made for the iPhone and iPod touch, so they are much more than a year late as far as "personal software libraries" go.
Apple, on the other hand, are simply competing with themselves. Their goal doesn't appear to be "beat the competitors products", it's probably "beat the previous iteration of our own product".
Twice as much RAM, faster dual-core CPU, up to 9 times faster GPU, facetime cameras... the iPad 1 just can't compare to the iPad 2. Imagine what's to come for future models.
gekko513
Jul 14, 10:08 PM
The pricing seems reasonable compared to the current models.
I agree that it would be nice to have a cheaper upgradable model, but unless they introduce a new middle range with a different and cheaper design all around, I don't see it happening.
I agree that it would be nice to have a cheaper upgradable model, but unless they introduce a new middle range with a different and cheaper design all around, I don't see it happening.
Mr Fusion
Mar 26, 01:33 AM
http://dissociatedpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/facebook-meh-button-500.png
Yet another unimpressive "major" update to an O/S that's showing it's age and irrelevance. (Hell it's already to most consumers nothing more than "That thing you gotta hook your iPad up to to make it work.) Compared to the iDevice world, the computer side of Apple has ground to a halt. Is it intentional I wonder...? ;)
Enough!! Combine MacOS and iOS already!!! The transition is so painfully slow, would someone else in tech get off their lazy ass and prod these guys to move a LITTLE quicker?!?
:rolleyes:
Yet another unimpressive "major" update to an O/S that's showing it's age and irrelevance. (Hell it's already to most consumers nothing more than "That thing you gotta hook your iPad up to to make it work.) Compared to the iDevice world, the computer side of Apple has ground to a halt. Is it intentional I wonder...? ;)
Enough!! Combine MacOS and iOS already!!! The transition is so painfully slow, would someone else in tech get off their lazy ass and prod these guys to move a LITTLE quicker?!?
:rolleyes:
FleurDuMal
Sep 12, 11:28 AM
A bit pointless given that no software utilises the extra cores yet. But nice to know, I guess.
I'm still getting used to having two cores in my laptop!
I'm still getting used to having two cores in my laptop!
bibbz
Jun 14, 06:34 PM
I hate Radio Shack.
Salesman have their heads up their butts
or corporate does not know what to tell them.
The 4th store I called said if you have a PIN
you are guaranteed a phone.
I understand your frustration, but apple kept us all in the dark until the very last minute. Before 3:30 no body knew anything. It will take it a little while to roll down hill.
I think we all know how secretive apple is don't we?
I just manage a store in the best region in the company. We have a very effective chain of command here in E. Texas.
Salesman have their heads up their butts
or corporate does not know what to tell them.
The 4th store I called said if you have a PIN
you are guaranteed a phone.
I understand your frustration, but apple kept us all in the dark until the very last minute. Before 3:30 no body knew anything. It will take it a little while to roll down hill.
I think we all know how secretive apple is don't we?
I just manage a store in the best region in the company. We have a very effective chain of command here in E. Texas.
Macnoviz
Jul 22, 03:03 AM
So I read in this thread that Kentsfield and Clovertown ARE compatible with Conroe and Woodcrest sockets (respectively) (Cloverton or Clovertown?)
Hope for upgrading an iMac to Quad Core is kindled! At least if Apple releases Conroe iMacs.
BTW, In my opinion, one thing a person should never, ever say is some computer has too much power, and that it will never be needed. So when 128 core CPUs come out in ~10 years time, will we still be considering dual core CPUs as fast enough for our use?
I seem to remember that when the original DOS operating system was created, its RAM was limited. I can't remember exactly to how much, but it was decided that people would never use more than a few kilobytes of memory. Now we are arguing that Mac should provide no less than a gigabyte! Now we are moving to 64 bit processing, with its capability to address a few exobytes, or millions of Terabytes of storage, it seems impossible that we will ever need 128bit computing. But, no doubt, one day we will.
When we will be able to download our entire lives, and even conciousness into a computer, as is said to happen in about 40 years (very much looking forward to), I dare say it will take a lot of memory to do, and even more processing power to manage effectively, especially if we wanted to "live" inside computers, as we will no doubt want to do someday.
So as a conclusion to my most recent rant, Please, never tell me a computer is too powerfu, has too many cores, or has too much storage capacity. If it is there to be used, it will be used. It always is.
I agree with your point on never saying a computer is too powerful, although living in computers is probably not going to happen. Sounds a bit too Matrix-like for me.
Hope for upgrading an iMac to Quad Core is kindled! At least if Apple releases Conroe iMacs.
BTW, In my opinion, one thing a person should never, ever say is some computer has too much power, and that it will never be needed. So when 128 core CPUs come out in ~10 years time, will we still be considering dual core CPUs as fast enough for our use?
I seem to remember that when the original DOS operating system was created, its RAM was limited. I can't remember exactly to how much, but it was decided that people would never use more than a few kilobytes of memory. Now we are arguing that Mac should provide no less than a gigabyte! Now we are moving to 64 bit processing, with its capability to address a few exobytes, or millions of Terabytes of storage, it seems impossible that we will ever need 128bit computing. But, no doubt, one day we will.
When we will be able to download our entire lives, and even conciousness into a computer, as is said to happen in about 40 years (very much looking forward to), I dare say it will take a lot of memory to do, and even more processing power to manage effectively, especially if we wanted to "live" inside computers, as we will no doubt want to do someday.
So as a conclusion to my most recent rant, Please, never tell me a computer is too powerfu, has too many cores, or has too much storage capacity. If it is there to be used, it will be used. It always is.
I agree with your point on never saying a computer is too powerful, although living in computers is probably not going to happen. Sounds a bit too Matrix-like for me.
shadowfax
Jul 27, 04:13 PM
Well it's back to the future for all of us. Remember when the Mac was going 64-bit with the introduction of the G5 PowerMac on June 23, 2003? :rolleyes: Only more thanthree years later and we're doing it all over again thanks to Yonah's 7 month retrograde.
This may be a bit of a disappointment, but I think that Merom is still in the "past:" merom is not a 64-bit chip. None of these Core 2's are. They just have EM64T (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EM64T), which allows them to address more than 4 GB of memory directly. These are not true 64-bit processors like the G5--that is, the Core 2 Duo won't work with 64-bit applications. The G5's Intel counterpart would, I think, bit the Itanium chip, based on intel's IA-64 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IA-64) Architecture, which is truly 64 bit in every way. Merom simply contains a 64-bit extension to the IA-32 (x86) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86_architecture#64-bit) architecture, which I understand is still a 32-bit architecture. We're not out of the woods yet...
This may be a bit of a disappointment, but I think that Merom is still in the "past:" merom is not a 64-bit chip. None of these Core 2's are. They just have EM64T (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EM64T), which allows them to address more than 4 GB of memory directly. These are not true 64-bit processors like the G5--that is, the Core 2 Duo won't work with 64-bit applications. The G5's Intel counterpart would, I think, bit the Itanium chip, based on intel's IA-64 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IA-64) Architecture, which is truly 64 bit in every way. Merom simply contains a 64-bit extension to the IA-32 (x86) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86_architecture#64-bit) architecture, which I understand is still a 32-bit architecture. We're not out of the woods yet...
HyperZboy
Apr 8, 01:22 AM
I also don't think brick and mortar stores are dying, just certain types that are easy to purchase same product online like movies, toys, known products that don't need to be checked out.
The average person buying a computer is still not that computer bright like the average Macrumors member.
And there will always be people looking to check out and play with new technology in person.
When Amazon can pull that rabbit out of a hat then I'll admit brick & mortar is done. So far brick and mortar is only done for content sales which can be checked out online and various new ways.
I don't think anybody's going to be buying a lawn tractor or big screen TV on Amazon anytime soon.
Hell, even my success rate buying computers on Ebay has always been sketchy even. About 30% of the time, the items showed up damaged in shipping due to poor packaging. That's why I believe most general consumers will always go brick and mortar for more expensive things that could easily be damaged in shipping.
The average person buying a computer is still not that computer bright like the average Macrumors member.
And there will always be people looking to check out and play with new technology in person.
When Amazon can pull that rabbit out of a hat then I'll admit brick & mortar is done. So far brick and mortar is only done for content sales which can be checked out online and various new ways.
I don't think anybody's going to be buying a lawn tractor or big screen TV on Amazon anytime soon.
Hell, even my success rate buying computers on Ebay has always been sketchy even. About 30% of the time, the items showed up damaged in shipping due to poor packaging. That's why I believe most general consumers will always go brick and mortar for more expensive things that could easily be damaged in shipping.
padr�
Sep 19, 01:12 PM
then i will have to work just a little bit harder i'm afraid ;)
i'll start with the 1 gig ram, maybe 2, and later i will be upgrading,it can't stay expansive forever.
thx again for your reply
i'll start with the 1 gig ram, maybe 2, and later i will be upgrading,it can't stay expansive forever.
thx again for your reply
noire anqa
Mar 26, 07:35 AM
Thank you for your constructive reply but I have a feeling it will all fall on deaf ears given that most have never actually gone on Google and researched what has been added/changed/enhanced to Mac OS X Lion. For example SAMBA has been removed and completely replaced with a ground up clean room implementation of SMB2 which will translate into better support for Windows Vista and 7 clients as well as the latest versions of Windows. Why hasn't that been mentioned by the nay sayers here?
OpenGL 3.2 has been added and funny enough not a single thing has been said about the fact that it lays the foundation for future updates that will be more prompt.
Then there is Webkit2 based web browser whose knock on effects go well beyond Safari and into applications wishing to utilise web based technologies with framework that provides said functionality but handles all the mundane security/process isolation/etc behind the scenes.
The merging of AV Foundation that serves as the foundation for future development for media products that will span iOS and Mac OS X; that you can have the same media core on iOS and Mac OS X then build upon it to differentiate between the desktop and tablet version by having a different interface, more features on the desktop version etc.
Sandboxing is being enhanced further and more system components are being put into it as to reduce the security exposure when a bug is found.
I'm sure others can note even more enhancements but it is frustrating when I hear the same nauseating ignorance over and over again from the cheap seats screaming there are no new features and yet they've done zero in the way of researching and reading on the matter.
You can't hear me .. but i'm cheering for you.
OpenGL 3.2 has been added and funny enough not a single thing has been said about the fact that it lays the foundation for future updates that will be more prompt.
Then there is Webkit2 based web browser whose knock on effects go well beyond Safari and into applications wishing to utilise web based technologies with framework that provides said functionality but handles all the mundane security/process isolation/etc behind the scenes.
The merging of AV Foundation that serves as the foundation for future development for media products that will span iOS and Mac OS X; that you can have the same media core on iOS and Mac OS X then build upon it to differentiate between the desktop and tablet version by having a different interface, more features on the desktop version etc.
Sandboxing is being enhanced further and more system components are being put into it as to reduce the security exposure when a bug is found.
I'm sure others can note even more enhancements but it is frustrating when I hear the same nauseating ignorance over and over again from the cheap seats screaming there are no new features and yet they've done zero in the way of researching and reading on the matter.
You can't hear me .. but i'm cheering for you.
mwswami
Jul 21, 09:53 AM
Before thinking about Apple competing with Sun in the Server market check out Sun's recently released x86 server products. They are very impressive and much higher up the "food chain" than what Apple is expected to compete in.
Sun Fire X4600 (http://www.sun.com/servers/x64/x4600/). It has 8 sockets with support for up to 16 Opteron cores today and 32 Q1 next year. It is designed to be easily upgradable - processors are on separate cards connected via HyperTransport backplane.
Sun Fire X4500 (http://www.sun.com/servers/x64/x4500/). A "hybrid" server (code name "Thumper") with 28TB directly attached storage and 2 Opteron Sockets (4 cores) in a 4U packaging. The storage density is at least 4 times traditional NAS/SAN - you can have a quarter Peta Byte on a 42U rack!!
Sun Blade 8000 (http://www.sun.com/servers/blades/8000/). A 19U chassis supporting 10 8-way (now, 16-way Q1 2007) blades. This platform will also support Sun's Ultrasparc T1 (8 cores, 32 threads) and the upcoming UltraSparc T2 (8 cores, 64 threads) processors.
Sun Fire X4600 (http://www.sun.com/servers/x64/x4600/). It has 8 sockets with support for up to 16 Opteron cores today and 32 Q1 next year. It is designed to be easily upgradable - processors are on separate cards connected via HyperTransport backplane.
Sun Fire X4500 (http://www.sun.com/servers/x64/x4500/). A "hybrid" server (code name "Thumper") with 28TB directly attached storage and 2 Opteron Sockets (4 cores) in a 4U packaging. The storage density is at least 4 times traditional NAS/SAN - you can have a quarter Peta Byte on a 42U rack!!
Sun Blade 8000 (http://www.sun.com/servers/blades/8000/). A 19U chassis supporting 10 8-way (now, 16-way Q1 2007) blades. This platform will also support Sun's Ultrasparc T1 (8 cores, 32 threads) and the upcoming UltraSparc T2 (8 cores, 64 threads) processors.
Bill McEnaney
Apr 27, 12:54 PM
Where's the extremism?
Would you call someone a moderate when he would leave a baby alone in a room to die after the baby had survived an abortion? Most people here already know that I'm against the stimulus and against "gay" rights. As for the stimulus packages, Ford just reported a profit, and that company refused the stimulus money. If a company is going to fail let it do that. Let it take responsibility for its own blunders. Don't let a codependent government rescue it. If John Huntsman, Sr. ran for President, I'd vote instantly for him, partly because he's one of the most honest men I know of. My first question about a potential presidential candidate is, How morally virtuous is he? For me to vote for a candidate, he needs to be conservative fiscally and socially, especially socially.
I think that social conservatism implies, or should imply, fiscal conservatism. I say that partly because I believe Obama's statist policies would have the U.S. Government take moral responsibilities that individuals should take instead. I advocate the principle of subsidiarity that tells me that a problem should be solved by the people who are closest to it. If I need help, I first go to my family. If my family can't help me, I go to me friends. If my friends can't help me, I ask my neighbors for help, etc. Government should be a last resort.
Would you call someone a moderate when he would leave a baby alone in a room to die after the baby had survived an abortion? Most people here already know that I'm against the stimulus and against "gay" rights. As for the stimulus packages, Ford just reported a profit, and that company refused the stimulus money. If a company is going to fail let it do that. Let it take responsibility for its own blunders. Don't let a codependent government rescue it. If John Huntsman, Sr. ran for President, I'd vote instantly for him, partly because he's one of the most honest men I know of. My first question about a potential presidential candidate is, How morally virtuous is he? For me to vote for a candidate, he needs to be conservative fiscally and socially, especially socially.
I think that social conservatism implies, or should imply, fiscal conservatism. I say that partly because I believe Obama's statist policies would have the U.S. Government take moral responsibilities that individuals should take instead. I advocate the principle of subsidiarity that tells me that a problem should be solved by the people who are closest to it. If I need help, I first go to my family. If my family can't help me, I go to me friends. If my friends can't help me, I ask my neighbors for help, etc. Government should be a last resort.
