Recommended Posts

I can allready tell you that Apple will stay with the market share they have now and will not go up anymore because the ones who would buy this have macs to start with. This is a bad step for Apple. I'm a fairly big apple fan but I'm being realistic that no consumer will pay that much for a computer unless they know about it firsthand and that other 90% of the market doesn't so thats that.

Does everyone have short memories around here? How much did the 3.0 Ghz P4 computer cost at first compared to the 2.x Ghz machines when they were introduced? Remember that the 3 Ghz P4 required a different type of mobo?

Sheesh. Get real jobs people.

If you want top of the line, you have to pay for it.

They are comparing this to Dual Xeon chips, not the cheap consumer level P4's.

Holy crap! After checking out the G5 site...

8GB RAM? Jesus! Dual 2Ghz G5 64-bit Processor? Damn! This is the most powerful personal computer I've seen in my life! All I've got to say is that they've just pushed the envelope! Damn it! Gotta start saving for the G5! By the time I'm done saving there will probably be a G10! :p

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • In the boot options in the UEFI is set to legacy or CMS? It needs to be set to UEFI if it's not already.
    • Researchers claim Microsoft's quantum breakthrough is flawed by basic Python errors by Karthik Mudaliar Microsoft's aggressive roadmap to deliver a commercial quantum supercomputer by 2029 has now hit a bit of a snag, and it's not because of a complex sub-zero dilution refrigerator, but rather because of a few lines of basic Python code. A new critique published in the scientific journal Nature argues that simple software errors effectively manufactured the breakthrough that Microsoft's foundational research claimed back in 2025 into Majorana-based topological qubits. Topological quantum computing, the path that Microsoft chose for its research, relies on creating and controlling "Majorana zero modes." These are exotic quasiparticles that theoretically offer vastly superior error resistance compared to the highly sensitive superconducting qubits currently being championed by rivals like Google and IBM. However, physically proving you have created these particles requires sifting through massive amounts of complex electrical conductance data to isolate a specific "topological gap." Because of the sheer volume of data, physicists rely heavily on custom software pipelines to process the results. This is where the Python scripts come in. Now, according to the critique, Microsoft’s data processing software contained fundamental programming errors that ultimately skewed the published results. By mishandling data arrays or deploying incorrect logic within the Python script, the software supposedly discarded "noisy" or contradictory data. Which is why it only highlighted the specific electrical measurements that supported the topological-gap claim. The researchers behind the critique argued that this makes the findings invalid, suggesting the heralded "quantum leap" was actually a false positive generated by bad code and not a product of groundbreaking physics. However, Microsoft is pushing back hard against these allegations. The Redmond giant has formally rejected the criticism, saying that it's just a minor anomaly rather than a fatal flaw. According to the company, while there may have been a minor oversight in the data parsing scripts, it does not alter the fundamental reality of their physical experiment. Just weeks ago, Microsoft unveiled the Majorana 2 quantum processor, a milestone so significant that the company boldly accelerated its timeline for a commercial quantum supercomputer from 2035 down to 2029. But the new software allegations reopen an old wound. Microsoft's quantum division faced a remarkably similar crisis when a landmark 2018 paper on Majorana particles was famously retracted in 2021 after independent physicists discovered the data had been inappropriately cropped. That historical baggage makes the current Python-related allegations particularly sensitive. If the foundational math and data processing for the 2025 breakthrough are genuinely flawed, the highly anticipated 2029 commercial timeline could easily be delayed or, worse, cancelled.
    • Because of what they have done to VMware I will never buy anything Broadcom again.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      Tom Schmidt earned a badge
      First Post
    • One Month Later
      D0nn13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Rookie
      +ChiefOfNeo went up a rank
      Rookie
    • One Year In
      Tom Schmidt earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      466
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      177
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      123
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      82
    5. 5
      Xenon
      76
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!