mattwallace24
Apr 28, 09:36 AM
I think a lot of the Verizon fans are missing the boat on this topic.
This is about Apple expectations for the CDMA iPhone. I would think that Apple is sophisticated enough to bake all the reasons suggested her on this board (i.e. iPhone 5 release, Android adoption, etc) into their expectations.
I'm sure the CDMA iPhone product manager isn't sitting in his office in Cupertino thinking "damn, how did I miss that the iPhone 5 would impact this launch."
AT&T is still selling the heck out of the iPhone 3GS (at a discounted price of course), so there is obviously a population out there that doesn't delay every purchase waiting for the next great thing.
This is about Apple expectations for the CDMA iPhone. I would think that Apple is sophisticated enough to bake all the reasons suggested her on this board (i.e. iPhone 5 release, Android adoption, etc) into their expectations.
I'm sure the CDMA iPhone product manager isn't sitting in his office in Cupertino thinking "damn, how did I miss that the iPhone 5 would impact this launch."
AT&T is still selling the heck out of the iPhone 3GS (at a discounted price of course), so there is obviously a population out there that doesn't delay every purchase waiting for the next great thing.
Mac Fly (film)
Sep 26, 10:15 PM
.Mac is a load of old BALLS!!! It's absolutely ridiculously. We're paying €99 in Europe really for Mail, iWeb was only added recently, but you have to buy iLife '06 to use it. iChat is free? No it's not! Guess what? You have to pay €99, cause you need .Mac to use iChat. The whole thing is a joke! Way to respect your loyal fans Apple.
/joke..
First thing apple could do is simple!! Bar this new, rarely useable addition (by me) every single thing about .Mac should stay the same!! Except one thing, PRICE, .Mac should be $29 in the US, and €29 in Europe. Then add more feature later next year.
/joke..
First thing apple could do is simple!! Bar this new, rarely useable addition (by me) every single thing about .Mac should stay the same!! Except one thing, PRICE, .Mac should be $29 in the US, and €29 in Europe. Then add more feature later next year.
.jpg "JaneFonda Barbarella 0o 33 jpg")
jrko
Apr 4, 11:19 AM
Thanks for the replies guys.
Unfortunately it panics even without the cards - turn on bong, them white screen with apple logo then grey screen with power symbol saying you need to restart your computer and over the top of it all some script about the 'unresolved kernal trap(cpu0)
Would it help if I posted the script or anything from it?
btw the ticking seems to be coming from the back of the power supply near the inlet. Non of the fans are twitching etc
Unfortunately it panics even without the cards - turn on bong, them white screen with apple logo then grey screen with power symbol saying you need to restart your computer and over the top of it all some script about the 'unresolved kernal trap(cpu0)
Would it help if I posted the script or anything from it?
btw the ticking seems to be coming from the back of the power supply near the inlet. Non of the fans are twitching etc
Sun Baked
Feb 13, 07:33 AM
Being a mod doesn't mean I can't still have a sense of humor, which is all I saw that as. No one's going to have a "battle of the 'tars", I'm just messin', which I'm still allowed to do from time to time you know...And all the hazing we can do to you cannot compare to the mountain of spam you're about to be burried under.
Good luck, you'll need it. :p
Good luck, you'll need it. :p
more...
ikir
Mar 23, 01:22 PM
His Lion demo was so-so.
Cmooon, the demo was fine. It isn't easy to show something knowing half of the nerd world will see you.
Cmooon, the demo was fine. It isn't easy to show something knowing half of the nerd world will see you.
Macdaddy1129
Jul 31, 04:13 PM
http://i576.photobucket.com/albums/ss210/Macdaddy1129/desktop.png
more...
nizmoz
Dec 28, 08:38 AM
Well said. I was going to start typing a similar post but glad you did. The person that replied to the OP above saying IT people are clueless is 100% wrong as you are the one that is clueless. I run a IT department and there is no way MACs would ever become the Computer of choice over any Windows machine that has way more software for the enterprise than a MAC will ever see. And using Bootcamp is a waste of funds as PCs are cheaper. It always takes someone who has no clue about how IT works to say something like that.
Yeah, sure. Because all of those business/enterprise applications written exclusively for Windows run ah-so smoothly on Macs...
Just accept it, folks: There is no business case for using Macs in an enterprise environment.
Compatibility? Fail. (There is a world beyond the Microsoft .doc format where enterprise applications live. There's OLD Java, and many Java apps require a very specific Oracle JVM to run. There's .NET. There's Sharepoint. There's an IBM mainframe you need to talk to. There are department printers that have no OS X drivers. There's a long list of office equipment that only plays well with Windows.)
Enterprise-ready? Fail. See compatibility, see support, see backup.
Central administration? Fail. Try applying group policies to a Mac.
Central backup? Fail. No, Time Machine is NOT an enterprise solution.
TCO? Fail. Expensive hardware, short-lived platform support.
Enterprise-support from the manufacturer (Apple)? HUGE fail.
Roadmaps? Fail. Apple doesn't even know what the word means. You just cannot plan with this company and their products.
Product longevity? Knock-out Fail. (Try getting support for OS X Leopard in two years from now. Try getting support for Tiger or Panther TODAY. Then compare it to Windows XP, an OS from the year that will be officially supported until 2014. Then make your strategic choice and tell me with a straight face that you want to bet your money on Cupertino toys.)
It's MUCH easier to integrate Linux desktops into an enterprise environment than it is to put Mac OS X boxes in there. Why? Because some "blue chip" companies like Oracle and IBM actually use, sell and support Linux and make sure that it can be used in an enterprise environment.
Trying to push a home user/consumer platform like the Mac into a corporate environment is a very bad idea. Especially if the company behind the product recently even announced that they dropped their entire server hardware because nobody wanted them. Why should the head of a large IT department trust a company that just dropped their only product that was even remotely targeted at the enterprise market? It's like asking a CTO to bet the company's IT future on Nintendo Wiis.
And just for your info: I've had those discussions at the World Health Organization of the United Nations, and it turned out to be IMPOSSIBLE to integrate Macs into their IT environment. I had the only Mac (a 20" Core Duo) in a world wide network because I was able to talk someone higher up the ladder into approving the purchase order for it, but then I quickly had to give up on OS X and instead run Windows on it in order to get my job as an IT admin done and be able to use the IT resources of the other WHO centers. OS X Tiger totally sucked in our network for almost all of the above reasons, but Windows Vista and XP got the job done perfectly. It wasn't very persuasive to show off a Mac that only runs Windows. That's what you get for being an Apple fanboy, which I admittedly was at that time.
Where I work now, two other people bought Macs, and one of them has ordered Windows 7 yesterday and wants me to wipe out OS X from his hard disk and replace it with Windows. He's an engineer and not productive with OS X, rather the opposite: OS X slows him down and doesn't provide any value to him.
And personally, after more than five years in Apple land, I will now also move away from OS X. It's a consumer platform that's only there to lock people into the Apple hardware and their iTunes store. If the web browser and iTunes and maybe Final Cut Studio, Logic Studio or the Adobe Creative Suites are the only pieces of software that you need to be happy, then OS X probably is okay for you. For everything else, it quickly becomes a very expensive trap or just a disappointment. When Apple brag about how cool it is to run Windows in "Boot Camp" or a virtualization software, then this rather demonstrates the shortcomings of the Mac platform instead of its strengths. I can also run Windows in VirtualBox on Linux. But why is this an advantage? Where's the sense in dividing my hardware resources to support TWO operating systems to get ONE job done? What's the rationalization for that? There is none. It just shows that the Mac still is not a full computing platform without Microsoft products. And that is the ultimate case AGAINST migrating to Mac OS X.
Yeah, sure. Because all of those business/enterprise applications written exclusively for Windows run ah-so smoothly on Macs...
Just accept it, folks: There is no business case for using Macs in an enterprise environment.
Compatibility? Fail. (There is a world beyond the Microsoft .doc format where enterprise applications live. There's OLD Java, and many Java apps require a very specific Oracle JVM to run. There's .NET. There's Sharepoint. There's an IBM mainframe you need to talk to. There are department printers that have no OS X drivers. There's a long list of office equipment that only plays well with Windows.)
Enterprise-ready? Fail. See compatibility, see support, see backup.
Central administration? Fail. Try applying group policies to a Mac.
Central backup? Fail. No, Time Machine is NOT an enterprise solution.
TCO? Fail. Expensive hardware, short-lived platform support.
Enterprise-support from the manufacturer (Apple)? HUGE fail.
Roadmaps? Fail. Apple doesn't even know what the word means. You just cannot plan with this company and their products.
Product longevity? Knock-out Fail. (Try getting support for OS X Leopard in two years from now. Try getting support for Tiger or Panther TODAY. Then compare it to Windows XP, an OS from the year that will be officially supported until 2014. Then make your strategic choice and tell me with a straight face that you want to bet your money on Cupertino toys.)
It's MUCH easier to integrate Linux desktops into an enterprise environment than it is to put Mac OS X boxes in there. Why? Because some "blue chip" companies like Oracle and IBM actually use, sell and support Linux and make sure that it can be used in an enterprise environment.
Trying to push a home user/consumer platform like the Mac into a corporate environment is a very bad idea. Especially if the company behind the product recently even announced that they dropped their entire server hardware because nobody wanted them. Why should the head of a large IT department trust a company that just dropped their only product that was even remotely targeted at the enterprise market? It's like asking a CTO to bet the company's IT future on Nintendo Wiis.
And just for your info: I've had those discussions at the World Health Organization of the United Nations, and it turned out to be IMPOSSIBLE to integrate Macs into their IT environment. I had the only Mac (a 20" Core Duo) in a world wide network because I was able to talk someone higher up the ladder into approving the purchase order for it, but then I quickly had to give up on OS X and instead run Windows on it in order to get my job as an IT admin done and be able to use the IT resources of the other WHO centers. OS X Tiger totally sucked in our network for almost all of the above reasons, but Windows Vista and XP got the job done perfectly. It wasn't very persuasive to show off a Mac that only runs Windows. That's what you get for being an Apple fanboy, which I admittedly was at that time.
Where I work now, two other people bought Macs, and one of them has ordered Windows 7 yesterday and wants me to wipe out OS X from his hard disk and replace it with Windows. He's an engineer and not productive with OS X, rather the opposite: OS X slows him down and doesn't provide any value to him.
And personally, after more than five years in Apple land, I will now also move away from OS X. It's a consumer platform that's only there to lock people into the Apple hardware and their iTunes store. If the web browser and iTunes and maybe Final Cut Studio, Logic Studio or the Adobe Creative Suites are the only pieces of software that you need to be happy, then OS X probably is okay for you. For everything else, it quickly becomes a very expensive trap or just a disappointment. When Apple brag about how cool it is to run Windows in "Boot Camp" or a virtualization software, then this rather demonstrates the shortcomings of the Mac platform instead of its strengths. I can also run Windows in VirtualBox on Linux. But why is this an advantage? Where's the sense in dividing my hardware resources to support TWO operating systems to get ONE job done? What's the rationalization for that? There is none. It just shows that the Mac still is not a full computing platform without Microsoft products. And that is the ultimate case AGAINST migrating to Mac OS X.
robbieduncan
Apr 30, 07:16 AM
Revert your system to your last backup? You do have regular backups right?
more...
Eminemdrdre00
Oct 10, 04:02 PM
He�s already said if he could, he would gladly offer an upgrade price for 1.x users.. but that�s not on him. That�s Apple and the app store.
He also said "Either I release it [Tweetie 2] completely for free and don't make any more money, or I charge $2.99 for everyone and piss off all the existing customers.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BwbGAeTJnU
He also said "Either I release it [Tweetie 2] completely for free and don't make any more money, or I charge $2.99 for everyone and piss off all the existing customers.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BwbGAeTJnU
whatever
Nov 20, 02:15 PM
Wow, that is one nasty Danish mockup. I hope it won't look like that.:eek:
http://www.baekdal.com/images/articles/iphone.jpg
Here's actually a nice touchscreen iPhone mockup:
http://static.flickr.com/106/299323271_8625bfb1c6_o.jpg
I've been in many debates with people about the iPhone and I've always been on the side that Apple just shouldn't do one. Everyone always says that it would sell like hot-cakes because it would be an Apple phone, but my stance has always been that it would have to run on a particular carrier.
But lately I've been thinking about this and what if Apple bucked the system a little. They made a phone which connected directly to your computer and you downloaded the correct carrier setting to. So if you used Verizon, all you had to do is in setup select Verizon or Sprint....
I feel that one of the big problems with mobile phones is the computer connectivity has always been an afterthought, mainly because they're not computer companies. But what if Apple created a new iApp which managed the phone (ran on both Windows and OS X), which made the connectivity easy. This is basically what happened with the iPod.
Would the carriers care that a generic iPhone ran on their network, maybe the stupid ones, but in the long they're lives would be easier, because they wouldn't have to market the phones, just their service (which is where they really make their money).
I also like the idea of using the click wheel to make a retro style digital-rotary phone. However, I doubt Apple would just display the numbers on the screen and not on the unit. So when in dial mode, you would spin the click wheel and the numbers, displayed on the display in a circle, would highlight the number that you were on and then click the center button on the click wheel to select. If you wanted to get really old school, you could have the rotary sounds come through the headphones. Or course you would still be able to dial by your address book or search through a downloaded version of the white or yellow pages (which would naturally sync into your phone whenever you charge it at home, via blue tooth or direct connection to your computer).
http://www.baekdal.com/images/articles/iphone.jpg
Here's actually a nice touchscreen iPhone mockup:
http://static.flickr.com/106/299323271_8625bfb1c6_o.jpg
I've been in many debates with people about the iPhone and I've always been on the side that Apple just shouldn't do one. Everyone always says that it would sell like hot-cakes because it would be an Apple phone, but my stance has always been that it would have to run on a particular carrier.
But lately I've been thinking about this and what if Apple bucked the system a little. They made a phone which connected directly to your computer and you downloaded the correct carrier setting to. So if you used Verizon, all you had to do is in setup select Verizon or Sprint....
I feel that one of the big problems with mobile phones is the computer connectivity has always been an afterthought, mainly because they're not computer companies. But what if Apple created a new iApp which managed the phone (ran on both Windows and OS X), which made the connectivity easy. This is basically what happened with the iPod.
Would the carriers care that a generic iPhone ran on their network, maybe the stupid ones, but in the long they're lives would be easier, because they wouldn't have to market the phones, just their service (which is where they really make their money).
I also like the idea of using the click wheel to make a retro style digital-rotary phone. However, I doubt Apple would just display the numbers on the screen and not on the unit. So when in dial mode, you would spin the click wheel and the numbers, displayed on the display in a circle, would highlight the number that you were on and then click the center button on the click wheel to select. If you wanted to get really old school, you could have the rotary sounds come through the headphones. Or course you would still be able to dial by your address book or search through a downloaded version of the white or yellow pages (which would naturally sync into your phone whenever you charge it at home, via blue tooth or direct connection to your computer).
more...
neut
Aug 19, 12:21 PM
nobody liked this one when i was using it... what do you think
http://www.organech.com/images/72x72.gif
peace.
http://www.organech.com/images/72x72.gif
peace.
acslater017
Mar 31, 10:22 AM
Eventually, they will meet in the middle and we will have either 2 similar operating systems or simply a mix of the two.
I think Apple thinks that by taking the best of the two worlds they are creating a "better" user experience. I don't know if this is the case but I think that this is clearly the inevitable long-term outcome. Time will tell.
If anyone can do it, Apple's the company. They'll take their time, refine it, make it useful, get hardware support, etc.
So far, Microsoft's idea of touchscreen is "the finger tells the cursor where to go". Or HP overlays some terrible "Front Row"ish interface on TOP of Windows. :rolleyes:
This is probably at least 3-5 years away if at all. I'm imagining an updated second-gen iMac (sunflower style), with a big iPad-ish display that can go up down, close, far, etc. OS X with mouse when it's far, switches to a touch-optimized view when you bring it close. Or something. My imagination is probably too "inside the box" for this sort of thing.
I think Apple thinks that by taking the best of the two worlds they are creating a "better" user experience. I don't know if this is the case but I think that this is clearly the inevitable long-term outcome. Time will tell.
If anyone can do it, Apple's the company. They'll take their time, refine it, make it useful, get hardware support, etc.
So far, Microsoft's idea of touchscreen is "the finger tells the cursor where to go". Or HP overlays some terrible "Front Row"ish interface on TOP of Windows. :rolleyes:
This is probably at least 3-5 years away if at all. I'm imagining an updated second-gen iMac (sunflower style), with a big iPad-ish display that can go up down, close, far, etc. OS X with mouse when it's far, switches to a touch-optimized view when you bring it close. Or something. My imagination is probably too "inside the box" for this sort of thing.
more...
Coffee87
Feb 2, 10:53 AM
I use TunesArt (http://www.jibapps.com/products/tunesart/). It's an iTunes plugin that lets you know what song is currently playing and can fetch up lyrics automatically. It can do a lot more too.
Awesome! Thanks.
Awesome! Thanks.
MacRumors
Apr 24, 11:22 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/25/white-iphone-4-finally-launching-this-week/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/22/155622-white_iphone_4_table_500.jpg
Image via Engadget (http://www.engadget.com/2011/04/22/exclusive-white-iphone-4-lands-at-vodafone-uk/)
In case you've missed all the recent signs, the white iPhone 4 is finally being launched this week. All signs point to April 27th as the launch day. European carriers point to the 27th (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/22/european-sources-point-to-white-iphone-4-launch-on-april-27th/), Best Buy does too (http://www.9to5mac.com/63420/exclusive-white-iphone-4-lands-at-best-buy-on-april-27th/), and Apple has started shipping (http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/11/04/24/apple_begins_shipping_white_iphone_4s_to_stateside_retail_stores.html) units to Apple Stores this week. In fact, Vodafone UK even sold one (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/22/white-iphone-4-sold-by-vodafone-uk/) prematurely to a customer. Meanwhile, we've heard rumblings from both Best Buy and Apple Retail sources of the same.
With all rumor-eyes looking toward the next generation iPhone 5, it's not clear how much demand there is for the white iPhone 4 which is now 10 months late from the original launch. So, here's a poll to see who is planning on buying a white iPhone 4.
Poll: Are you planning on buying a White iPhone 4? (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/25/white-iphone-4-finally-launching-this-week/)
Article Link: White iPhone 4 Finally Launching This Week (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/25/white-iphone-4-finally-launching-this-week/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/22/155622-white_iphone_4_table_500.jpg
Image via Engadget (http://www.engadget.com/2011/04/22/exclusive-white-iphone-4-lands-at-vodafone-uk/)
In case you've missed all the recent signs, the white iPhone 4 is finally being launched this week. All signs point to April 27th as the launch day. European carriers point to the 27th (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/22/european-sources-point-to-white-iphone-4-launch-on-april-27th/), Best Buy does too (http://www.9to5mac.com/63420/exclusive-white-iphone-4-lands-at-best-buy-on-april-27th/), and Apple has started shipping (http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/11/04/24/apple_begins_shipping_white_iphone_4s_to_stateside_retail_stores.html) units to Apple Stores this week. In fact, Vodafone UK even sold one (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/22/white-iphone-4-sold-by-vodafone-uk/) prematurely to a customer. Meanwhile, we've heard rumblings from both Best Buy and Apple Retail sources of the same.
With all rumor-eyes looking toward the next generation iPhone 5, it's not clear how much demand there is for the white iPhone 4 which is now 10 months late from the original launch. So, here's a poll to see who is planning on buying a white iPhone 4.
Poll: Are you planning on buying a White iPhone 4? (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/25/white-iphone-4-finally-launching-this-week/)
Article Link: White iPhone 4 Finally Launching This Week (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/25/white-iphone-4-finally-launching-this-week/)
more...
gmidgley
Oct 26, 03:32 AM
I wouldn't expect them to, they are a supplier of apple products and not an apple store, why not head to birmingham or solihull, its only 60 mins away!
Gary
Gary
L I G H T I N G
Apr 6, 06:00 PM
Google goes through 24 petabytes of data a day....wow
more...
Dreadnought
Feb 7, 04:11 PM
If I am not mistaken, the Macross should be (or already did) finishing a -bigadv unit bringing me into the 1 Million point range... *FINALLY*
Nope, not yet, you still have to do 26,000 points, so a little over 2 days :D
Nope, not yet, you still have to do 26,000 points, so a little over 2 days :D
Chip NoVaMac
Sep 26, 10:57 AM
I don't think so... there is a growing number of instances when the authorities and the parents involved are 'wising' up to false claims.
False claims, yes. But what is a false claim is the question. "Unwanted" sex is a crime in most states, that is classified as rape.
Add to that depending on the ages involved, it is possible to be classified as a "sexual offender", even if it is consensual - even if you thought your partner was of legal age, or said they were of legal age.
False claims, yes. But what is a false claim is the question. "Unwanted" sex is a crime in most states, that is classified as rape.
Add to that depending on the ages involved, it is possible to be classified as a "sexual offender", even if it is consensual - even if you thought your partner was of legal age, or said they were of legal age.
skeep5
Feb 9, 12:28 PM
well this kinda goes along with the A-list requirements, for A-list you have to have a high enough minute plan, and if you do, like me, you never end up using your minutes because everyone you call is on your A-list. So I have 9000 rollover minutes... sheesh. And if i drop down a level, I lose all my rollovers, pay a fee, then have to bump it back up the next month anyway. It's just a complicated way of making sure I don't go over my minutes.
So I'll add this new feature tomorrow, and in 3 months I'll have 12000 rollover minutes. Hurray, i guess. :rolleyes:
So I'll add this new feature tomorrow, and in 3 months I'll have 12000 rollover minutes. Hurray, i guess. :rolleyes:
Elrond39
Nov 23, 12:27 AM
that was... ummm... not good at all. it wasnt even a good attempt. so umm no.
Pot, meet Kettle.
Pot, meet Kettle.
zen.state
Apr 5, 03:52 AM
Yeah must be crossed posts!
What is weird though is that I just ran geekbench and got a score of 764 with only 256mb ram compared with 732 when I had 512md ram :confused:
could it be that the dodgy dimm was registering its capacity but hindering the machine in the geekbench tests due to it being faulty?
Geekbench isn't super consistent with it's scores in my experience. Xbench is even worse. I have seen GB waver as much as 30-40 points in identical situations.
The best benchmarks for consistency which is exactly what you need in a benchmark:
Cinebench (CPU and Hardware/Software Graphics)
SuperPrime (prime number CPU bench)
PowerFractal (Altivec)
OpenMark (3D video)
Let 1000 Windows Bloom (2D video)
QuickBench (hard disk)
What is weird though is that I just ran geekbench and got a score of 764 with only 256mb ram compared with 732 when I had 512md ram :confused:
could it be that the dodgy dimm was registering its capacity but hindering the machine in the geekbench tests due to it being faulty?
Geekbench isn't super consistent with it's scores in my experience. Xbench is even worse. I have seen GB waver as much as 30-40 points in identical situations.
The best benchmarks for consistency which is exactly what you need in a benchmark:
Cinebench (CPU and Hardware/Software Graphics)
SuperPrime (prime number CPU bench)
PowerFractal (Altivec)
OpenMark (3D video)
Let 1000 Windows Bloom (2D video)
QuickBench (hard disk)
one1
Feb 29, 05:14 PM
If you have a 4g iPhone for sale pm me or post please :)
r0n1n
Apr 13, 11:27 PM
Here's mine. :)
OrangeSVTguy
Feb 8, 06:47 AM
glad you are back up!
might as well put that 920 to use!
good luck with the home buy! i know how that can be! (i just bought one exactly 1 month ago!)
yeah i can't be spending too much either ;)
Thanks. Put my offer in on one so hopefully it gets accepted.
I'm sitting on 48-9k PPD right now. 950 @ 4ghz and 1750mhz on the shaders of the 460. Not too shabby.
**Edit**
Updated the Nvidia drivers to 266 and now the GTX 460s are both folding at 15K + each. That's an increase of 3-4k PPD each.
might as well put that 920 to use!
good luck with the home buy! i know how that can be! (i just bought one exactly 1 month ago!)
yeah i can't be spending too much either ;)
Thanks. Put my offer in on one so hopefully it gets accepted.
I'm sitting on 48-9k PPD right now. 950 @ 4ghz and 1750mhz on the shaders of the 460. Not too shabby.
**Edit**
Updated the Nvidia drivers to 266 and now the GTX 460s are both folding at 15K + each. That's an increase of 3-4k PPD each.
