Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » OT: dual-boot and disappearing cd drive
|
|
|
|
| Re: dual-boot and disappearing cd drive [message #61813 is a reply to message #61809] |
Fri, 23 December 2005 10:51   |
erlilo
Messages: 405
Registered: June 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
nd disappear very
> quickly and then it will ask you to restart.
>
> Right-click on your desktop, and then click Properties.
> Click on Themes tab
> Set Themes to Windows Classic
>
> Also do this for the Start Menu:
> Right-click the Start button, and then click Properties.
> Click Classic Start menu.
> Click the Customize button to select items to display on the Start menu.
> By default, selecting the Classic Start menu also adds the My Documents,
> My Computer, My Network Places, and Internet Explorer icons
> to your desktop.
>
> Click on the Screen Saver tab, Set Screensaver to None, Press the Power
> button near the bottom
>
> Hibernate..If this is Enabled uncheck it. This is mainly for Laptops but
> uses a very large chunk of data.(I've seen this not show up on the first
> boot of XP..when you restart it will be there but it's disabled)
>
> Disable automatic update - Since Windows XP will connect to the internet
> to find updates automatically for you, you will want to disable this.
> Sometimes beneficial but unnecessary and often annoying, you can ditch
> it by going to Start » Settings » Control Panel » Performance and
> Maintenance » Automatic Updates and select "Turn off automatic updates".
>
> Disable system restore - Windows XP has a built in function to back up
> system files to help reduce the risk of crashes due to lost data,
> software conflicts and so on. The drawback, is that a fair bit of system
> overhead is used to perform this and can be disabled if you choose by
> right clicking on "My Computer", clicking on "Properties" » "System
> Restore" and choosing "Turn off system restore on all drives."
>
> Advanced tab: Press Settings t
|
|
|
|
| Re: dual-boot and disappearing cd drive [message #61818 is a reply to message #61813] |
Fri, 23 December 2005 14:32 |
duncan
Messages: 123
Registered: November 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
t;>>
>>>>James
>>>>
>>>>"LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>Wow!! So, it finnaly happend!!
>>>>>
>>>>>I sold my G4 last year because it was just too slow for my VSti
>>>>>modern recording studio needs. Tok the money, and got a nice speedy
PC..
>>>>>Now, I'm Mac excited!!!
>>>>>
>>>>>However, as excited as I am for Apple and it's new Macs, I'm wondering
>>>if
>>>>>it's too late to the Party?
>>>>>This move proves all they ney sayer's and Mac loverswrong in the speed
>>>arguments
>>>>>over the years. Even worse is when Apple purchases
>>>>>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Sorry about the type-O!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Apple announced a new Intel based iMac that is 2 to 3 times faster
than
>>>>>the
>>>>>>G5 iMac. The one more thing, was the announcement of a new lap top
>>>>>>15.3"
>>>>>>screen, that is 5 to 6 times faster than the current PowerBook. Pro
>> app.
>>>>>>will be available for the new Intel Macs in March. The upgrades will
>>>be
>>>>>>$49.00.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>James
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Apple announced a new Intel based iMac that is 2 to 3 times faster
>>>>>>>than
>>>>>>the
>>>>>>>G5 iMac. The one more thing, was the announcement of a new lap top
>> 15.3"
>>>>>>>screen, that is 5 to 6 tomes faster than the current PowerBook. Pro
>>>app.
>>>>>>>will be available for the new Intel Macs in March. The upgrades will
>>>>be
>>>>>>>$49.00.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>James
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
|
|
|
|
| Re: dual-boot and disappearing cd drive [message #61832 is a reply to message #61818] |
Sat, 24 December 2005 01:17 |
erlilo
Messages: 405
Registered: June 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
>
>
>>Was working on a project last night and Paris kinda crashed with a
>
> "failure
>
>>to calculate overview" and when I tried to save, got a disk read error.
>>
>>I rebooted and now it asks if I want for format the drive, that it is
>
> unformatted.
>
>>A pretty recent WD 80 gig with light use. I really need some stuff off
>
> it.
>
>>Ideas????
>>
>>TIA
>
>
>Yes..All the time..it thee best best drum replacer app.
LAD
"tonehouse" <zmcleod@comcast.net> wrote:
>Anyone using Drumagog? Does it work with PARIS ?
>
>TCB wrote:
> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>I look forward to finding out about Thunderbird, Firefox, Open Office
>>and other open source project plans for running on OSX with Intel.
>
> Since those apps use X86 compilers with a long and superb development tree
> I can't imagine it will be that long before they move over. In fact, I would
> expect things like Firefox the be running nearly bug free on Intel OS X before
> most commercial apps get there.
That would be great, they are very useful cross-platform apps.
>>(grin) Well it seems fairly probable that a dual processor chip could
>>possibly be twice as fast as a single processor chip, minus the overhead
>>but plus any advantages from the newer design. Let us know if you
>>discover anything about design problems or improvements with the new
>>chips, OSX upgrade and compiler upgrades.
>
> Come now, Jamie, you know better than that. Dual processor machines don't
> get anywhere near twice the performance in the absolute best of situations.
That's why I mentioned "minus the overhead." Although I _have_ seen some
tests where some apps did do surprisingly close to double the speed but
I can't remember the specifics. Might've been BeOS. Alzheimer's is
kicking in...
> Getting 1.5X is considered very good unless apps are specifically designed
> for many processors. And the more processes one tacks on the board the less
> the performance improvement until essentially all that's left is some advantages
> in multi-threading when some processes can just take their own chip to run
> on.
>
> Now then, I went back and checked the original post and I got it only partially
> right. It was a 3 Ghz Celeron that "spanked a Dual G5 in a HUGE way." This
> comes from Pete Leoni, who has forgotten more about computer hardware than
> I'll ever know. It would not surprise me at all to find that Apple is the
> first computer company ever to under report their performance. We'll see.
From what you posted before, we were talking about a test where the
Intel running Linux (wasn't it?) beat a dual G5 (2GHZ only?) with the
then-current version of OSX in a specific multi-threading situation. It
didn't spank on every test, and where Altivec was used the G5 won out.
If we're talking about the same test.
Of course there's lies, damn lies and benchmarks. For which you rightly
criticize Jobs as a cherry-picker, as are many people when the time
comes to market a system. Where benchmarks are most useful though is
when a benchmark can closely represent a real-world situation, such as
rendering tests with a 3D app, speed of oft-used image filters (although
those are moving to real time performance with the GPU under OSX's
core-image) or testing other actual apps under high loads (like your
threading test apparently did).
>>Let us know what you find out.
> I think that will be the most interesting pi
|
|
|
|
| Re: dual-boot and disappearing cd drive [message #61840 is a reply to message #61832] |
Sat, 24 December 2005 06:58 |
Jorsi
Messages: 23
Registered: December 2005
|
Junior Member |
|
|
, faster bussing speeds, faster memory, and two processors are faster
than one. Apple went with the first processor available and used it in both
models. It's not the fastest Intel chip that will be available to them.
The iMac is a consumer model, they haven't released the Mac Tower Pros yet!!!
Although, when they do, I'll bet they won't be the fastest Intel based machines
available. I guess we'll have to wait and see on that one.
It's no secret that the PowerBook was lagging way behind. I believe that
is why the got the Mac Book pro out to their business customers first. Give
it time, Intel will release faster chips and the Mac Book Pro will get faster.
Right now it's Apples first offering.
Jobs does a great job as CEO, and he does know how to put a good spin on
their products, he just did it yesterday! You should go find out for yourself,
and find out what he really did say, instead of hearing a tidbit of information
and jumping to a lot of wrong conclusions! I recommend watching the keynote
speech, although the PC zealots wouldn't be able to stomach the truth.
Apple had to do what Apple had to do. IBM couldn't get a G5 mobile chip
out that worked. On the desk top, IBM did not meet their time line for releasing
faster G5 chips, and I don't think they could tell Apple when they would
be able to. Apple always knew that this would be a possibility, that is
part of why they have been running Mac OSX on Intel systems for the past
five years now. The other reason I believe they were doing this is in the
event MS dropped Office for the Mac they would be ready to roll out Intel
based Macs and or Mac OSX for the PC. sort of a computer software cold war.
Notice they signed a five year plus operating agreement on support and product
development. Well that's my opinion.
As for the question on Apples past processor performance.
In the past the Apple PowerMac G4 with a single processor were tested against
a standard Intel Pentium 4, by independent computer test labs, using industry
standard test software. An Apple PowerMac G4 1.25 single processor model
tested in the speed range of a Pentium 4 2.8 to 3.0 GHz. Later the G4 1.42
MHz's were tested against the original 1.6 to 2.0MHz G 5s. The G5s were
about 70% faster than the G4. There has been all kinds of independent testing,
If Apple was lying about performance they would have gotten sued. So I have
my doubts about Celerons eating G 5s. Check out both links.
Here is some performance info on the G5 dual 2.7GHz.
http://www.apple.com/powermac/performance/
Here is info on the performance of the Apple G5 quad 2.5 GHz compared to
the G5 dual 2.7. About 70% faster performance.
http://www.apple.com/au/powermac/
It's not logical to think that a Celeron could eat a G5. So when I hear
a rumor that a 2.8GHz Celeron ate a G5, it makes me think it's PURE BULLSHIT!!!
I asked Morgan to get the guy to post on the NG. Until then, it's hearsay.
I'd like to know what scientific testing standards he used??? I'd like
to know which model G5 was tested??? Where the machines similarly equipped???
Anything is possible, but I think it is just another PC zealot spreading
more bogus rumors about Macs. I'll stick with lab testing and real world
usefulness, not B.S. rumors.
Just because some guy says something is so, and ten thousand people repeat
it, doesn't mean it's true. Even a bad rumor with one leg will find away
to get around! Even though it has nothing to stand on!
I think people can see from the test above that something is not right about
the rumors, but of corse the PC zealots will argue that it is the other way
around.
Some people just won't let the facts get in the way of their opinion.
"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>
>Another brainwashed zealot!
That's the pot calling kettle black!
>
>"Miguel Vigil" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
>> http://createdigitalmusic.com/index.php?option=com_content&a mp;task=view&id=1098
>>
>>
>>Macsters, see above for further insight.
>>
>>
>>
>>E
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Mon May 11 12:45:27 PDT 2026
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.14582 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
