dlewis23

Simple Flash is the number one reason why browsers on devices crash. It doesn't matter wether its a Mac, PC, Tablet or Phone. It's a totally garbage outdated POS software that is dead. The only thing we are waiting for now is for someone to come and push some dirt over it. That will happen once HTML5 and CSS3 become a full standard that is supported in a uniform way across every browser. (And we get people to finally stop using old versions of IE) Everyone knows its over even Adobe thats why they are building tools to convert Flash to HTML5.

Have you ever considered setting a minimum number of tests that need to be taken to be in the top 100? It might be a good idea.

To make shadows cast on something like a web from a spider. First do the shadow for the spider get it how you would like it, dup the layer of the spider with the shadow, flatten the layer so everything is in one. Erase the spider from one layer and the shadow from the order. Now you should have 2 layers, one with just the spider the other with just the shadow of the spider. Select the web layer then choose the spiders shadow invert the selection and delete. You should now have the shadow on just the web. The spice it up, take a semi-fat eraser that is very soft and go around the edges of the shadow on the web this will make it look like the shadow is rolling over the web ie. more natural. Hopefully you can understand that, its very hard to describe in text, how to do this.

Post a traceroute to testmy.net

Going to 12 GB really makes a huge difference. Going the extra 4 GB to 16 GB only made a small difference when having 3 VM's open for me. Adding the SSD is the way to go. When you opened the iMac did you see the spot for the SSD? I know in the last gen there was a spot for it with a 3rd SATA right near the optical drive not sure if they kept the same spot with these ones.

Yep. Every time they have shown benchmarks of there browser they have used standard tests like sunspider. They also just go to websites and load pages. Thats a real world test. Using some stupid test that Microsoft wrote to show how fast there browser is, doesn't actually tell me how fast there browser is. It doesn't help me or anyone in any way when building an HTML application. Oh and Google shows there browser off the same way as Apple they don't have to build there own stupid HTML5 app to show how FPS the browser is getting. There is nothing to fucking prove. It's a fact the test is one sided. They built there own test. That makes it one sided. Using real world tests, and they are not the fastest, using there own test they are. What a surprise... There is a reason why the built there own test. They have to. If they don't use there own tests they don't score first place because in all reality IE9 is a POS browser, it has very poor real world javascript performance.

Prove what wrong? They built there own test and it was the fastest at their own test. They did the same thing with IE9 on Windows 7. Guess what IE9 isn't the fast HTML5 browser as they said it was with there little demos. In the real world. IE9 is still a piss poor browser wether its on a desktop or phone.

Any pictures of it in its final home? or is it still taking a vacation in the kitchen?

I like some of the things they are doing with Win Phone 7, but somethings that are done are just like why? and it's just very wasteful of screen real-estate. As for there little new features video the I hate when they show off something new (IE9 on the phone) and use a test they built to show off how fast it is. Of course your browser is going to be the fastest you built the damn test. They should just have used a standard test. And great they added IE9 OHHHHH AHHHHH... So my sites can look just as crappy as they do on the desktop browser because they don't support some basic CSS3 and HTML5 features such as Gradients, Text-Shadow, User-Select and a bunch of others.

You know you almost had me going there for a second. Till I read your second line. BTW. off topic a little. I noticed some PHP processes there on your server. Curious, are you running the PHP handler as SUPHP? or like CGI? If its SUPHP did you do anything special with the config? I can't get the server load down when running PHP in SUPHP.

There is an easy way to tell. If there are 2 breaks in the connector then its MSA. It kinda looks like there is in one picture, but then not really in the other. Be sure to post what you get for them on EBay because I have a ton of old crap and if it sells for more then it costs to ship I'm all in.

Ill tell ya what they are. Useless.... Put your time into other things. Its technology that isn't used anymore and probably would take you for ever to find drivers let alone an OS that it will work on. I'm pretty sure someone was using ISA when he was maybe 6

Typically its never for any kind of "bling". People who buy a mac typically have a very good reason for buying mac. Even for day to day use its better. And if your in any kind of design or media production environment its really kinda a must. It's not just about getting the job done, its getting it done efficiently and possibly better. If I had to use a Windows PC, yea I could get my job done, but its probably not going to be done as good because in my type of work the programs I use, there is no Windows equivalent.

hmm. I still have a problem getting past 7 Mbps :::.. Download Test Results ..::: Download Connection is:: 7063 Kbps about 7.1 Mbps (tested with 12 MB) Download Speed is:: 883 kB/s Tested From:: https://testmy.net/ (Dallas, TX USA) Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/db/XhEJI8t Test Time:: 2011-05-20 07:05:31 1MB Download in 1.16 Seconds - 1GB Download in ~20 Minutes - 123X faster than 56K Tested from a 12 MB file and took 14.253 seconds to complete Running at 130% of hosts average (sbcglobal.net) User Agent:: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10_6_6; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.20.25 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.4 Safari/533.20.27 [!]

There are 2 free ram slots. 4 total on the 27in imac. Only the ram is on the bottom. The hard drive is under the screen. It's not a super hard upgrade, but not for a novice. There is a 3rd SATA port in there near the DVD drive. Some people make it really easy and just remove the DVD drive and put the SSD in there, or will do 2 SSD's on Raid 0.

Well now try and sell her on 8 GB of ram. It's only $74.00 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820159028 Having 12GB will make development go so much faster lol.

Yea I'm in the same, I guess if you were gaming a lot or wanted the I7 then the other would be good. This is a massive update from the mac mini.

Did you get the base 27" iMac or the one with the Radeon 6970?

Ca3le, Did it recover for you yet? It's still off for me and I'm not using Cox. It should be around 11.5 Mbps. :::.. Download Test Results ..::: Download Connection is:: 7636 Kbps about 7.6 Mbps (tested with 12 MB) Download Speed is:: 955 kB/s Tested From:: https://testmy.net/ (Dallas, TX USA) Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/db/mlBLD8Y Test Time:: 2011-05-19 07:08:18 1MB Download in 1.07 Seconds - 1GB Download in ~18 Minutes - 133X faster than 56K Tested from a 12 MB file and took 13.182 seconds to complete Running at 140% of hosts average (sbcglobal.net) User Agent:: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10_6_6; en-us) AppleWebKit

Yea its a pretty good amount. Should hold me off from needed more space for 3 - 4 Months. Once my host gets there new DC open tho I'm probably going to just build my own custom nas using a program called unRAID with 22 3 TB hard drives for a 66TB nas. Now thats some storage space.

Curios, What do you get from here http://speedtest.dal01.softlayer.com/downloads/test500.zip and here http://208.115.252.42/speedtest/test500.zip The second one is on a 1000 Mbps connection, I'm not sure what the first one is on I just know it gets used a lot.

I am quickly running out of storage space on my servers and I needed an effective way of expanding that storage and having some redundancy would also be nice. I looked into just building a basic server and put a bunch of drives in on Raid 5 but thats not really cost effective since I really need a way to expand as I go and you can't really expand a traditional raid with out rebuild it. I looked into a few other things but everything I came across wasn't cost effective or worked with in my power requirements since I'm going to be using it in a colo. I came across the Netgear Readynas NV+ and its a pretty sweet little product. I paired it with 4 of these 2 TB hard drives http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822148681 I went with 5900 RPM drives because I needed to use as little power as I can since I'm paying for the power and I wanted less heat. Plus it didn't hurt that they performed better then the WD 7200RPM 2TB drives. I like the Readynas because if a drive fails, I just have to pop in another drive and it rebuilds the data for that drive automatically. It's pretty fast too, I'm getting about 35 MB/s read and 17 MB/s write. The write speed should go up once its in the datacenter because the switch will support Jumbo Frames, my current router doesn't support that feature. Right now, it has 5.4 TB of protected usable storage space. If this box works out good I will be upgrading to the NVX which has more twice the read/write speed and can support 3TB drives. My only complaint is that the fan likes to rev up and down randomly even when the box isn't being used, or just by going in the control panel.

Nope. Thats regular HSPA. If you start to see around 3 Mbps down then your in a HSPA + area. I've seen it go as high as 8 Mbps. But most of the time its been around 3.5 Mbps.

There is a problem doing it your self. I'm not sure if they changed the position of the SSD on the new one but in the last gen. 27" iMac there is a bracket that is needed that the SSD mounts to. You could probably find it around, or do what others have been doing for a long time which is remove the optical drive. Doing that has been on my to do list for a while. I want to do 2 SSD's on Raid 0. If you got the bracket, you could actually do 3 drives in the new gen. iMac. ESATA isn't much of a big deal, USB3 would be nice. It will probably happen when Intel puts it in there chip sets but I think like Apple they are betting on Thunderbolt. It's a much better overall connection because it can be used for everything. If it takes off USB3 wont matter.

The problem is with Web developers, not the browser I'm just going to come out and say it. That statement. Is completely fucking bull shit. And the guy who wrote this article should shoot him self in the face with a .45. Even if web developers adhered to the W3C standard you would still have a fucked up looking website in IE6. It would actually be messed up looking in IE7 and IE8 too. IE6 doesn't adhered to proper standards, it adheres to the Microsoft standard which is wrong. I'm a pretty damn good web designer, CA3LE can back that up just gotta look at the latest design for one of my sites. If I build something correctly, it will work and look correctly with no problems in FireFox, Chrome, Safari, Opera, IE9, and 50% of the time in IE8. I open it in IE6 and forget about it, I need to build a CSS fix file and chop it up. This has nothing to do with lazy programers. It has to do with a shitty browser. I can not build a modern website in IE6. IE6 doesn't support CSS3, or any HTML5 and modern Javascript is so sluggish in it, it becomes unusable. There is a reason why Google doesn't support IE6 anymore. There is a reason why I dropped support for IE6. The reason web design has gone way down the tubes is because you have a bunch stupid people who all of a sudden think they can design a real website because they could design a myspace profile. The problem with that is (and this has nothing to do with a browser) people have shitty design skills. Proper design is a skill and something that takes a very long time to learn, most people can never learn it. Use the Inspector and you will get a hell of a lot more information then you ever did from those stupid error messages.