bradley emmanuel

You're operating based on assumptions that because it hasn't happened in a meaningful way that it cannot happen and I think that is a false sense of security paramount to emotional fanaticism.
Please quote when I have ever indicated that Macs cannot or will not get malware or viruses. Before you falsely accuse me of having such assumptions, take the time to read the Mac Virus/Malware Info (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=9400648&postcount=4) I've posted in so many of these threads.
Since no OS, including Mac OS X, is immune to malware threats, this situation could change at any time, but if a new virus is discovered, the news media, forums, blogs, etc. will be instantly buzzing with the news.
Get your facts right before you make assumptions about me.

Originally posted by Pants

what when the altivec unit gets starved of data?

Im talking from a 'doing' point of view - when a machine i have spent 2.5k wont allow me to use its best feature (with gcc) then i feel cheated.

Is this that you think GCC can never invoke Altivec or that it doesn't know how to optimise from arbitrary code to Altivec?

Heck, I work in an office in the flatiron district, and on my work iPhone, it is literally an act of god if your call lasts longer than two minutes. I get slightly better times in Brooklyn (Prospect Heights), but I'm averaging about 5-6 dropped calls during the day. Sluggish data speeds in Midtown Manhattan.

Strangely, my (personal) Verizon Blackberry has never had a problem anywhere in NYC. Hmm :rolleyes:

i work in the flatiron district too. on 5th ave around 19th st.

i believe that you have issues with your iPhone but i am baffled as to why i have never experienced the amount of problems that many have here in NYC. don't get me wrong, i feel lucky i haven't had as many dropped calls.

It's easier to admit being an atheist on the Internet than in the real world, as even the Dalai Lama seems to hate atheists. Although only a fool would say in his heart "there is no god", it should be legitimate to say "I want to see proof before I believe".

Oh - and about the universe not likely being made by chance: a designer must be more advanced than what he creates, and where does the designer come from? I'm not saying that there is no such designer, just that I don't see any reason to think about that in the first place. Wouldn't it be far more likely that the universe is made by itself rather than by some creating force being made by itself?

I depends on where you are at and what company you are in. Your "immediate culture" plays a large factor in how you are "accepted into society". It's no different from nerds vs jocks in adolescence. People are people. For example,

It's hard to "admit being an atheist" in the rural areas.
It's easier to admit it being an atheist in the big cities.

It's hard to admit being an atheist among working class folk.
It's easy to admit being an atheist among college students and higher class folk.

It's hard to admit being atheist among white and latino ppl.
It's easy to admit being atheist among Asian ppl.


When you're always surrounded by ppl of a particular culture that is majority religious, you will think that "atheists" are closet freaks. Just like how "gays" are stereotyped to be. But that's not true everywhere. And there are many ppl who say "there is no god", but personally I find that it's usually younger ppl. A lot of ppl with higher education also would say this, but they are very careful, because when you are "mature", you are also wary about respecting other ppl's beliefs around you so they are careful not to say it to a religious person. Because it might insult them...as many religous ppl are also implicitly taught to HATE others who are not like them.

If even 0.0000001% of an incredibly lowball estimate as to the number of current Christians in the world (not to mention past Christians or other theistic religions) have legitimately experienced a supernatural event - pick one, doesn't matter which or how large or small it is - this is an incorrect statement.

In another forum that I left recently (because of the poor quality of discussion) someone used this same type of argument to "prove" the existence of aliens visiting the Earth.


Of course it is a logical fallacy, this is why there is an element of faith required to fully claim an atheistic belief.

I'm sorry, but that sentence makes no sense at all.


I should mention this is not necessarily totally different than a Biblical definition of faith ...

I prefer dictionaries for my definitions.

Not what he said, but how he said it. But you already knew what I meant.

People tossing out random verses from the Pentateuch/Torah to defend or condemn religion is problematic and is above most people's pay grades. There are plenty of rabbis and other scholarly folks who can help people understand some of these harsh and difficult passages. Of course, it's easier and way more fun to remain ignorant of these books to play "gotcha!" with other people's religious beliefs.

The modern view of homosexual sex in all the orthodox Christian religions is so tame and simple it's almost boring. It's just premarital sex, which is considered sinful. It's not morally worse than heterosexual premarital sex. And yes, marriage is considered to be between a man and a woman in these religions, so yes, that does really suck for the orthodox gay Christian.

my scanner came with photoshop 5.

AV/multimedia, how far do you sit from your screen?

I sit about 35 to 40" from my 30" display. Seems to be about the ideal distance. I keep the height adjusted so my eyes looking straight ahead are about 1/4 of the way down from the top of the screen. My primary display is centered straight ahead and the secondary display is on my left on an angle. Works very well. Took some getting used to as I've always had my secondary monitor on the right, but with the room layout, it worked better on the left at my new place. Ah, it's late, but I'll post a picture tomorrow tomorrow night so you can get a feel for what we're talking about. These Dell 30-inchers are just plain cool.

Other than that, I second everything Multimedia said... Although, I already bought my second Dell 30" when it broke the $1400 mark. it's just too cool having 2 of these side by side. It's almost surreal having this kind of desktop real estate. Just be aware that with the G5 Macs, you need an FX4000 of FX4500 video card to use two of these. With the Mac Pro, the FX4500 again, or the ATI X1900xt will run dual 30" displays as well and is a bargain at $240 upgrade when ordering.

Yeah, I don't know about one click CC either. Color me skeptical. Although a lot of color adjustments are just minor, so theoretically, it could do a decent job.

Anyone doing complicated color work is going to need a dedicated app anyway. I don't think it's realistic to assume FCPX will ever be able to do this.

I don't understand the outrage at this announcement UNLESS this means Color, Motion etc are going to be 'dumbed down' and integrated as extras into FCPX. That will upset a lot of people.
Agreed, Color and Motion probably need to remain separate apps, although Apple may later market them as part of a suite. I don't think today's announcement has any bearing on the status of Color and Motion.

Do either IBM or Motorola have a quad-core chip on the horizon?

With cooperation it may not be as difficult as many think:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/jul/23/solarpower.windpower

Superb. Replace one fuel reliance on the Middle East with another. Genius idea.

If you learned that a huge portion of those really crazy doctrines were simply wrong, would it cause you to view Christianity/religion differently?.

In my view, Christianity is an extreme mythologizing of the unknown and unknowable.

In my view, a huge portions of those "really crazy doctrines" are wrong.



"I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."

Exactly.

Pray to Ba'al lately?

Watching these Tsunami pictures on CNN ... I hope people will be OK.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/asiapcf/03/11/japan.quake/index.html?hpt=T1&iref=BN1

Edit ... 2:15am watching it Live on CNN ... unbelievable footage

I am so there with the cash ready a willing to fly out the window to Apple's account sooner than Apple can say:

"8-Core Mac Pro Available At the Apple Online Store For Ordering." :)

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8G4)

Looks like Apple made it easier to use and the so-called "Pros" feel threatened by that because it takes less specialized knowledge to do impressive work. We might not be there yet, but in time even grandma can edit. You get the point.

Part of the reason established IT folk feel so threatened by Apple.

You're incorrect... well... at least I think you are.

I have yet to meet a professional in this field that resists products getting easier to use. But what professionals hate are changes so drastic that 1) there's a learning curve, thus slowing them down, preventing them to make a living and 2) removing features that significantly change the workflow that allow them to work quickly and creatively.

Number 2 is my biggest worry. A complete rewrite is great. 64 bit is great. Grand Central is great. Multi-Core is great. What isn't great is the potential loss of features. Even the littlest feature, that most people would find mundane, could be very important to editors who've become used to that feature being in their workflow.

I work in broadcast/cable news where editors have to turn packages around quickly. You remove features that prevent them to work quickly because it altered their workflow... well now you're in trouble.

I can buy the excuse "Well they'll add it in version 2" if we're talking about consumer programs like iMovie. iMovie is not "mission critical."

But that feature that existed in the old-world FCP versions MUST be in X from day one, IMO, or else Apple will face a steep uphill battle to win FCP editors back.

OK to swerve this thread back on topic, what if Apple is planning to unleash a massive multi-core assault and fill that big middle gap in the lineup at the same time?
Here's the theory;
January Macworld Steve unveils the 8 core Mac Pro, no surprises there, shows off the massive power using Leopard demo's etc. Great for Pro's (like Multimedia and myself) but not much use to the average guy. Prices stay the same or even rise slightly, after all, we are talking 8 cores here. Previously you needed to spend $7-8k to get that kind of power. But what if the one more thing was a Kentsfield Mac Pro (using the C2Q6600), a i975 Mb with DDR2 ram, etc, etc . Sloting into that $1400-2000 zone? I dont see this competing with the iMac, esp. since you get a 24" screen with your $2000 iMac. It's just another choice. Use the same case, make it black or something, but you now have
Mac Mini 2 cores
iMac 2 cores + Widescreen display
Mac Prosumer 4 cores + upgradeable
Mac Pro 8 cores for ultimate power.

Sounds good......:)

I'd have to say my opinion is this is very unlikely. Apple has stuck with the four squares of producst, pro, consumer in desktop and portable for years. A sub mac pro without a xeon wouldn't fit into that model. While you could certainly make nice Mac out of a quad-core Core2 extreme I just don't see it happening. I think the only way we'll see conroe/kentsfield in Macs is if they some how got the components needed small enough and cool enough to cram into all sizes of iMacs (if they don't fit in the smallest, they won't go in any, keeps them all the same), and I don't think that will happen.

I never cease to be amazed though, everytime Steve gives a keynote I feel like he announces stuff I just wouldn't have thought of. So, maybe there is a chance, just not sure what they'd call it, or who it'd be targeted at. My gut says it won't happen.

For people to view conroe as a lesser chip in some way smacks of mac snobbery and I tend to agree with him.

...but they are a lesser chip in some ways (more so if you also consider the chipset)...

(not forgetting AMD in the following... just trying to keep it simple... also note when I say Conroe or Woodcrest I am also implying different class of chipsets)

The simple fact is workstation class systems from most vendors (in recent history) are usually based on Xeon (now Woodcrest) CPUs with 2 sockets (if not more) while desktop class systems from most vendors are are based on Pentium 4/D (soon Conroe) CPUs with 1 socket.

So the question is will Apple replace the PowerMac G5 with a true workstation class system, or will they split the PowerMac into a desktop tower and workstation with the former using Conroe and the later using Woodcrest, or will they use Conroe only (and for the moment not have a quad core system), etc.

Historically I have stated that Apple will use Conroe in a PowerMac replacement and wait for Kentsfield to bring back the quad (doing that would give them great performance and price point)... but looking at the timing of things now (and Intel price drops) I am starting to believe either Apple will go all Woodcrest for the PowerMac (truly make it a workstation class system) or go all Woodcrest for a workstation Mac and bring out a lower end tower that uses Conroe.

Problems with Windows security in comparison to Mac OS X presented just in this thread:

1) Greater number of privilege escalation vulnerabilities:

Here is a list of privilege escalation (UAC bypass) vulnerabilities just related to Stuxnet (win32k.sys) in Windows in 2011:

http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvekey.cgi?keyword=win32k.sys+2011

Here is a list of all of the privilege escalation vulnerabilities in Mac OS X in 2011:

http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvekey.cgi?keyword=Mac+OS+X+privileges+2011

2) Earlier versions of NT based Windows (Windows XP and earlier) do not use discretionary access controls by default.

3) Permissions system does not include a user defined unique identifier (password) by default. More susceptible to user space exploitation leading to authentication stolen via spoofed prompt that appears unrelated to UAC because password not associated with authentication.

4) Windows sandbox mechanism relies on inherited permissions so that turning off UAC turns off the sandbox. This sandbox has been defeated in the wild (in the last two pwn2owns).

I do not know of any TrustedBSD MAC framework (BSD and Mac sandbox), AppArmor (openSUSE and Ubuntu), or SE Linux (Fedora) mandatory access control escapes? These sandbox mechanisms do not rely on inherited permissions.

5) The Windows registry is a single point of failure that can be leveraged by malware.

EDIT:

If malware doesn't need to use some method to achieve privilege escalation or actively phish users for their credit card number to be profitable enough to warrant their creation, then why did the specific example of malware that started this thread rely on these methods to be profitable?

Why did it not use the methods presented by KnightWRX? Why do you not see malware that only uses user level access to upload a user's data files to achieve some effect that is profitable? I can't recall any malware that uses this method.

Is it because most users do not have valuable info stored in insecure data files? I keep that type of info in encrypted secured notes in Keychain Access or in encrypted sparse bundle disk images.

Is it because it would require too much time to data mine the files for valuable info in relation to the amount of profit gained? How many GBs of data are on your system? Even the data I keep in encrypted sparse bundle disk images wouldn't be very useful for identity theft even if it was not encrypted.

Is it because given all the variables it is more cost effective to go after achieving system level access to keystroke log passwords protected by user space security mechanisms or simply to use basic phishing scams on unknowledgeable users? Makes sense to me but maybe I am wrong.

Are you drunk?

Looks like it. And BTW, I don't think the Japanese people would think leaving their homeland and going to the USA is a good idea. Not saying they don't like the US, but generally, just generally, people tend to care more about their own countries and cultures than about the American ones. Just saying.

>>> Those who think this isn't a Tivo killer don't understand Tivo's plans.

Those that think this is a Tivo Killer don't understand economics, or why people buy Tivos.

Fort this to even be in the BALLPARK, it needs a Hard Dive. Needs to be Hi Def. That ain't happening at a 299.99 price tag. Still, people love the Tivo interface, so to get them, it's gonna have to offer MORE than Tivo- like an optical drive, a couple tuners. No WAY that is in this box and "not discolsed yet" at 299.

Tivo Killer. That's a killer joke, or Appleboy dreaming. Not close to reality.

nixd2001:

Those score I posted earlier were from the integer version of the loop that I was ripping on as meaningless. The float version is not quite so meaningless because you can't just unroll the thing, because floats get different results if the ops are even done in different orders. For the benefit of people who may not know it, with floating point numbers often 4x != x + x + x.

Anyway, my P3 Xeon 700 sports this compiler:

gcc version 2.96 20000731 (Red Hat Linux 7.3 2.96-112)

Results for the exact loop posted by PCUser are:

gcc -O driver.c -o exe && time ./exe
38.858

gcc -O2 -funroll-loops driver.c -o exe && time ./exe
38.818

On a side note, I also found gcc on my Mac after relogging into the terminal so that things were added to the path. Funny that the finder's find cannot see tools like gcc. I'll get results for that posted soon.

Mac:
cmd-shft-3 to get a screen shot *instantly* on your desktop

Windows:
Opening snipping tool
switching to full screen mode
click
choosing a file name
quit the app

Or press print-screen. It puts the screen capture on the clipboard instead of saving to the desktop, but just as easy. AFAIK there is no simple equiv. to cmd-shft-4. I usually open in Paint and crop.

Erm.. you're being closed minded.

---