123Macmini.com
FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   GalleryPhoto Gallery   RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Apple Unveils Mighty Mouse
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    123Macmini.com - Forums Forum Index -> 123Macmini.com News and Reviews
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
devo
Veteran Member
Veteran Member


Joined: 23 Jan 2005
Posts: 5377
Location: Dunwoody, GA

PostPosted: Wed Aug 03, 2005 1:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ken4757 wrote:


As a user of 10.3.9 I would still buy the mouse for the two primary buttons and the fantastic scroll ball.

Ken


Mac OS X v10.4.2 or later Enable or disable scrolling, assign primary and secondary buttons, activate Exposé, display Dashboard, open Spotlight, switch applications or open applications.

Mac OS X v10.3.9 or 10.4.1 and earlier Assign primary and secondary buttons and activate Exposé. Display Dashboard in Mac OS X v10.4 or 10.4.1.

Mac OS X v10.3.8 and earlier Use as a multibutton scrolling mouse.

http://www.apple.com/mightymouse/specs.html

Break out that credit card! Wink
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Susurrus
Veteran Member
Veteran Member


Joined: 05 May 2005
Posts: 1303
Location: Providence, Rhode Island

PostPosted: Wed Aug 03, 2005 1:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

resuna wrote:
"Megahertz Myth" becomes "Intel Inside"


Intel doesn't believe in the Megahertz Myth anymore now. AMD started it with their naming scheme, now Intel has followed. They no longer name their products based on clock frequency. They are also abandoning the Netburst architecture whose long pipeline allowed such high frequencies to be reached. Their new Pentium M core is the casis of their chips, and you can see that it runs at a much slower frequency.
_________________
Computer Engineer
Junior, Brown University
15" NC8430 HP Laptop
1.42Ghz PPC Mac Mini, 1Gb RAM, 1st Gen
40GB G4 iPod
2GB Black iPod Nano
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Bandit Bill
Veteran Member
Veteran Member


Joined: 07 Jun 2005
Posts: 5968
Location: Edmonton, AB, Canada

PostPosted: Wed Aug 03, 2005 2:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ken4757 wrote:
Apple has again left a large part of its loyal users to twist in the wind. A lot of us haven't upgraded to Tiger yet


I understand there may be very good reasons that you have not upgraded to Tiger yet, but Apple hasn't left you there, that's your choice.

Obviously, Apple wants everyone to upgrade to Tiger. This is just a little push.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nthe10ring
New Member
New Member


Joined: 07 May 2005
Posts: 11

PostPosted: Wed Aug 03, 2005 2:14 pm    Post subject: smooth scroll Reply with quote

bummer that you cant click the button down and keep on a smooth scroll, for that price should have all the features of other scrolling mice. I hadnt thought of it but does osx support that feature.


nthe10ring
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
resuna
Member
Member


Joined: 15 May 2005
Posts: 215

PostPosted: Wed Aug 03, 2005 2:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

devo wrote:
Break out that credit card! Wink

The 2d scrolling does not work in 10.3 or 10.4 below 10.4.2.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
resuna
Member
Member


Joined: 15 May 2005
Posts: 215

PostPosted: Wed Aug 03, 2005 2:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Susurrus wrote:
Intel doesn't believe in the Megahertz Myth anymore now.

They're still not getting as much work done per clock as the G4 core: the Pentium-M core is still basically the same P6 core introduced with the Pentium Pro. The only problem with the G4 core is the 166 MHz bus is so much slower than the Pentium-M's 400- and 533- MHz busses.

The Freescale MPC8641 with its dual 667 Mhz memory busses would have kicked the Pentium-M's butt, watt-for-watt, even without throwing the "D" in. Too bad we won't get to see it happen now.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Susurrus
Veteran Member
Veteran Member


Joined: 05 May 2005
Posts: 1303
Location: Providence, Rhode Island

PostPosted: Wed Aug 03, 2005 4:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

resuna wrote:
They're still not getting as much work done per clock as the G4 core: the Pentium-M core is still basically the same P6 core introduced with the Pentium Pro. The only problem with the G4 core is the 166 MHz bus is so much slower than the Pentium-M's 400- and 533- MHz busses.


I agree that the G4, and especially the G5, core are more efficient clock-for-clock than the Pentium M. Intel isn't using the Megahertz Myth against anyone anymore. If anyone's still spreading it, it's Steve Jobs who's still obsessed with the magic 3Ghz. Of course, it's harder to get faster than a G5 single-core clock for clock, and there aren't any viable alternatives right there, so the only way to go is with higher clockspeed.
_________________
Computer Engineer
Junior, Brown University
15" NC8430 HP Laptop
1.42Ghz PPC Mac Mini, 1Gb RAM, 1st Gen
40GB G4 iPod
2GB Black iPod Nano


Last edited by Susurrus on Wed Aug 03, 2005 6:49 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
resuna
Member
Member


Joined: 15 May 2005
Posts: 215

PostPosted: Wed Aug 03, 2005 6:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Susurrus wrote:
If anyone's still spreading it, it's Steve Jobs who's still obsessed with the magic 3Ghz.

Steve Jobs and his damn 3 GHz.

I wouldn't be surprised to find that a G4 beat a G5 clock-for-clock once they got rid of the crappy front side bus. 7 stage pipeline vs a 20 stage pipeline? I mean, the G5 does a better job of dealing with a long pipeline than most anything I know of... but still, that's gotta hurt.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Susurrus
Veteran Member
Veteran Member


Joined: 05 May 2005
Posts: 1303
Location: Providence, Rhode Island

PostPosted: Wed Aug 03, 2005 6:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The thing is that the G5 is 64bit, so if you're executing 64bit code, the G5 would be your only choice. That's one of the reasons that things run faster on a G5, OS X executes 64bit code on them. At least, that's my understanding. The thing is, with good branch prediction, a longer pipeline isn't that bad. The problem with the Netburst architecture was that Intel's branch prediction is crap.

If the G4 had its FSB bumped up, it would be a good processor, but I think that the design went to the G5 for a reason.

Luckily, the whole point is moot with the Mactels!
_________________
Computer Engineer
Junior, Brown University
15" NC8430 HP Laptop
1.42Ghz PPC Mac Mini, 1Gb RAM, 1st Gen
40GB G4 iPod
2GB Black iPod Nano
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
devo
Veteran Member
Veteran Member


Joined: 23 Jan 2005
Posts: 5377
Location: Dunwoody, GA

PostPosted: Wed Aug 03, 2005 7:24 pm    Post subject: Re: smooth scroll Reply with quote

nthe10ring wrote:
bummer that you cant click the button down and keep on a smooth scroll, for that price should have all the features of other scrolling mice. I hadnt thought of it but does osx support that feature.


nthe10ring


Do you mean when you click down on the scroll wheel and get up and down arrows?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
resuna
Member
Member


Joined: 15 May 2005
Posts: 215

PostPosted: Wed Aug 03, 2005 8:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Susurrus wrote:
The thing is that the G5 is 64bit, so if you're executing 64bit code, the G5 would be your only choice. That's one of the reasons that things run faster on a G5, OS X executes 64bit code on them. At least, that's my understanding.

The whole 64 bit thing is so overhyped it's not funny.

If you need 64-bit addresses, you know it, and I don't have to explain why you know it because you know why. You're also probably working at Oracle or Pixar or the National Weather Service or Lawrence Labs.

If you're even slightly unsure why you might need 64 bits, if you can't explain in detail how you'd improve the algorithm with bigger pointers or integers, you don't need 64 bits.

And if you don't need 64 bits, you're better off in 32 bits, because your code will run faster in 32 bit mode.

I've been working on 64-bit systems for ten years now, using the DEC Alpha, supporting programmers who are doing things like simulating the electricity grids of states and small countries. I know why you need 64 bits. And I doubt more than one tenth of one percent of the people running on a G5 fit into that category.

But, you want to know what is funny? Hold on, I'll get there...

"What about AMD64"?

That's really a funny story. See, the thing about the 80x86 is that it's got a teeny tiny register file. Like, you have half or a quarter the number of general purpose registers that any half-decent RISC has. This means that compilers have to keep copying stuff from registers to memory and back again, and that's a realy slow thing to do even if you have cache and a fast bus. What AMD did was come up with a 64 bit address mode that had TWICE AS MANY REGISTERS. SO people bought it because 64 bit was cool, and recompiled their code because 64 bit was cool, and lo and behold it was faster.

And that's why AMD64 is faster. The compiled code spends less time copying data between registers and memory. Not because it's 64-bit. It'd actually be a bit faster still if it had those extra registers in 32-bit mode. But nobody would recompile their code for a different 32-bit mode, so it wouldn't sell... so making it just a bit slower than it could be, they end up letting a lot of people run code that's faster.

Pretty funny, eh?

Quote:
The thing is, with good branch prediction, a longer pipeline isn't that bad. The problem with the Netburst architecture was that Intel's branch prediction is crap.

The big problem with netburst is that the best branch prediction in the world won't help you if you keep having to stall the pipeline waiting for stuff to get copied between registers and memory for no good reason because you've got a crappy instruction set. Shadow registrers help, some, but at some point you still have to wait for memory writes or reads because, well, you don't KNOW that the compiler wasn't just making room for another temporary... you have to treat them all as if they're sacred writes.

(boom-swish)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nthe10ring
New Member
New Member


Joined: 07 May 2005
Posts: 11

PostPosted: Wed Aug 03, 2005 10:19 pm    Post subject: hands free scrollin Reply with quote

Devo,
Yes, the scroll mouse I use now, I enjoy being able to click and then slide the mouse up or down and let go and scroll hands free. It comes in handy on long documents , as in these posts here.

nthe10ring
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
blazer
Veteran Member
Veteran Member


Joined: 23 Mar 2005
Posts: 1108
Location: San Ramon, California

PostPosted: Wed Aug 03, 2005 10:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mighty Shipped! Very Happy
_________________
1.42GHz Mac mini
2.0GHz Core 2 Duo Mac mini
2.0GHz Core 2 Duo Mac mini (2009)
2.5GHz Core i5 Mac mini (2011)
24" Dell LCD & 42" Sharp TV
EyeTV 250 Plus
1G, 2G, 3G, 4G and 5G iPod nanos
16GB 3G iPhone
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
xforce11
Junior Member
Junior Member


Joined: 27 Apr 2005
Posts: 44
Location: Bur-Vegas, NC

PostPosted: Thu Aug 04, 2005 5:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Demand is high. I orderd one Tue. night and the expected ship date was yesterday. I recieved an email from Apple saying b/c of demand the expected ship date is the 10th.
_________________
Sincerely,
XForce11

Mac Mini, Ministack (160 gig), LG Flatron 17"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
syaman
Junior Member
Junior Member


Joined: 09 May 2005
Posts: 34
Location: Singapore

PostPosted: Thu Aug 04, 2005 8:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Just wondering how well the mouse works via a KVM? Specifically, whether some of the buttons would lose their functionality when "routed" through a KVM.

Yes, I do use a PC too - for the occasional game. Twisted Evil
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    123Macmini.com - Forums Forum Index -> 123Macmini.com News and Reviews All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 3 of 6

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum



      

Shop:  Apple Store  |  Refurbished Macs  |  Refurbished iPads  |  MacConnection  |  Mac Mini Vault  |  Other World Computing

MK 1 Studio Mac mini Racks  |  Crucial Mac Memory  |  Top Free Mac Apps  |  Top Paid Mac Apps



123Macmini.com is an independent publication and has not been authorized, sponsored, or approved by Apple Computer, Inc.
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owners.
Copyright © 2011 123Macmini.com. All Rights Reserved.