iWonderwhy
Mar 22, 07:25 PM
D.O.A.
iOS 5 will only further put these wannabes back in their place.
iOS 5 will only further put these wannabes back in their place.
SevenInchScrew
Nov 12, 08:01 PM
We've been given release dates for this game before, so until this game is in my PS3 and I'm actually playing it, I don't believe them. ;)
It will be nice to actually USE my PS3 again, though, so bring it on Sony.
It will be nice to actually USE my PS3 again, though, so bring it on Sony.
dakwar
Mar 22, 02:48 PM
I wasn't thinking straight, big deal.
And Thankfully I'm more successful in life than you'll ever be. Thanks.
Keep telling yourself that. You'll sleep better at night.
And Thankfully I'm more successful in life than you'll ever be. Thanks.
Keep telling yourself that. You'll sleep better at night.
Silentwave
Aug 6, 10:19 AM
Well...I've used and ENJOYED iMac G4 for five years which is still going strong by the way. I just can't help but wonder how stupid and childish it is to expect that Apple will upgrade it already awesome MBP. The Merom CPU has very minor perforformance benefit over Yonah until Santa Rosa is out next year. It has double the L2 catch, 140M more transistors and 3 Watt/hour more cons (34W/H) than Yonah (31W/H). Conroe with faster FSB is a totally different story. So I personally have nothing against those poor souls expecting new notebooks but sympothy.
The benchmarks show it actually has better performance with almost exactly the same battery life.
I'm positive Apple will go merom ASAP simply because their competition will, and it is a 64 bit chip.
The benchmarks show it actually has better performance with almost exactly the same battery life.
I'm positive Apple will go merom ASAP simply because their competition will, and it is a 64 bit chip.
FFTT
Aug 6, 02:47 AM
I think we'll see at least some attention given to Pro Apps beings
that this is a developers conference.
It's high time for a new MacPro Workstation along with applications that take full advantage of the hardware's improved capabilities.
If wishes were horses, I'd hope for a new more user friendly
Logic Pro 8 with greater attention to ease of use for live recording. Hopefully Apple will release a UB version so us PPC
users can enjoy all the same improvements to some degree.
I'm not sure what to expect on the video side Final Cut Extreme?
Shake, Motion, Soundtrack?
Anyway, I think the focus of this event will be for the Pro's
that this is a developers conference.
It's high time for a new MacPro Workstation along with applications that take full advantage of the hardware's improved capabilities.
If wishes were horses, I'd hope for a new more user friendly
Logic Pro 8 with greater attention to ease of use for live recording. Hopefully Apple will release a UB version so us PPC
users can enjoy all the same improvements to some degree.
I'm not sure what to expect on the video side Final Cut Extreme?
Shake, Motion, Soundtrack?
Anyway, I think the focus of this event will be for the Pro's
inkswamp
Mar 31, 02:43 PM
John Gruber would eat Steve Job's ***** if he could. His opinion is extremely biased.
You don't read his site, do you?
You don't read his site, do you?
Mattsasa
Apr 6, 03:15 PM
Shame people are brainwashed by Apple with their crappy product, and the superior tablet is behind on sales. Im sure it will pick up soon.
superior tablet? lol
superior tablet? lol
Multimedia
Jul 21, 12:20 PM
It really depends on your application.
On the desktop, if you're a typical user that's just interested in web surfing, playing music files, organizing your photo collection, etc., more than two cores will probably not be too useful. For these kinds of users, even two cores may be overkill, but two are useful for keeping a responsive UI when an application starts hogging all the CPU time.
If you start using higher-power applications (like video work - iMovie/iDVD, for instance) then more cores will speed up that kind of work (assuming the app is properly multithreaded, of course.) 4-core systems will definitely benefit this kind of user.
With current applications, however, I don't think more than 4 cores will be useful. The kind of work that will make 8 cores useful is the kinds that requires expensive professional software - which most people don't use...
Cluster computing has similar benefits. With 8 cores in each processor, it is almost as good as having 8 times as many computers in the cluster, and a lot less expensive. This concept will scale up as the number of cores increases, assuming motherbaords can be designed with enough memory and FSB bandwidth to keep them all busy.
I think we might see a single quad-core chip in consumer systems, like the iMac. I think it is likely that we'll see them in Pro systems, like the Mac Pro (including a high-end model with two quad-core chips.)
I think processors with more than 4 cores will never be seen outside of servers - Xserves and maybe some configurations of Mac Pro. Mostly because that's where there is a need for this kind of power.I strongly disagree. I could use 16 cores right now for notihng more than simple consumer electronics video compression routines. There will be a Mac Pro with 8 cores this Winter 2007.
You are completely blind to the need for many cores right now for very simple stupid work. All I want to do is run 4 copies of Toast while running 4 copies of Handbrake simultaneously. Each wants 2 cores or more. So you are not thinking of the current need for 16 cores already.
This is not even beginning to discuss how many Final Cut Studio Editors need 16 Cores. Man, I can't believe you wrote that. I think you are overlooking the obvious - the need to run multiple copies of today's applicaitons simultaneously.
So as long as the heat issue can be overcome, I don't see why 8 Cores can't belong inside an iMac by the end of 2008.
I apologize if I read a little hot. But I find the line of thought that 4 or 8 Cores are enough or more than enough to really annoy me. They are not nearly enough for those of us who see the problem of not enough cores EVERY DAY. The rest of you either have no imagination or are only using your Macs for word processing, browsing and email.
I am sincerely frustrated by not having enough cores to do simple stupid work efficiently. Just look at how crippled this G5 Quad is already only running three things. They can't even run full speed due to lack of cores.
On the desktop, if you're a typical user that's just interested in web surfing, playing music files, organizing your photo collection, etc., more than two cores will probably not be too useful. For these kinds of users, even two cores may be overkill, but two are useful for keeping a responsive UI when an application starts hogging all the CPU time.
If you start using higher-power applications (like video work - iMovie/iDVD, for instance) then more cores will speed up that kind of work (assuming the app is properly multithreaded, of course.) 4-core systems will definitely benefit this kind of user.
With current applications, however, I don't think more than 4 cores will be useful. The kind of work that will make 8 cores useful is the kinds that requires expensive professional software - which most people don't use...
Cluster computing has similar benefits. With 8 cores in each processor, it is almost as good as having 8 times as many computers in the cluster, and a lot less expensive. This concept will scale up as the number of cores increases, assuming motherbaords can be designed with enough memory and FSB bandwidth to keep them all busy.
I think we might see a single quad-core chip in consumer systems, like the iMac. I think it is likely that we'll see them in Pro systems, like the Mac Pro (including a high-end model with two quad-core chips.)
I think processors with more than 4 cores will never be seen outside of servers - Xserves and maybe some configurations of Mac Pro. Mostly because that's where there is a need for this kind of power.I strongly disagree. I could use 16 cores right now for notihng more than simple consumer electronics video compression routines. There will be a Mac Pro with 8 cores this Winter 2007.
You are completely blind to the need for many cores right now for very simple stupid work. All I want to do is run 4 copies of Toast while running 4 copies of Handbrake simultaneously. Each wants 2 cores or more. So you are not thinking of the current need for 16 cores already.
This is not even beginning to discuss how many Final Cut Studio Editors need 16 Cores. Man, I can't believe you wrote that. I think you are overlooking the obvious - the need to run multiple copies of today's applicaitons simultaneously.
So as long as the heat issue can be overcome, I don't see why 8 Cores can't belong inside an iMac by the end of 2008.
I apologize if I read a little hot. But I find the line of thought that 4 or 8 Cores are enough or more than enough to really annoy me. They are not nearly enough for those of us who see the problem of not enough cores EVERY DAY. The rest of you either have no imagination or are only using your Macs for word processing, browsing and email.
I am sincerely frustrated by not having enough cores to do simple stupid work efficiently. Just look at how crippled this G5 Quad is already only running three things. They can't even run full speed due to lack of cores.
11thIndian
Apr 6, 08:05 AM
Yikes! Better offload my copy of the current version of FCS before it drops too low.
Any takers? :D
If you're planning on buying the new FCS at an "Upgrade" price, you can't sell your old version. You still need the serial # for installations.
Any takers? :D
If you're planning on buying the new FCS at an "Upgrade" price, you can't sell your old version. You still need the serial # for installations.
j_maddison
Jul 20, 08:47 AM
THIS is why IBM was given the boot.
I doubt it had anything to do with the desktop/ server market. They switched because they had no viable alternative for their laptop range.
Jay
I doubt it had anything to do with the desktop/ server market. They switched because they had no viable alternative for their laptop range.
Jay
mcgillmaine
Jun 22, 12:13 PM
Thanks for the info ugp.....Is there anyway you can check other stores to see what they got in stock?
Also what area do you live in? And why do you think Apple sent out so little to your area? Because Raleigh-Durham is a decent size (maybe 7-10 stores) but we also have two Apple stores. So maybe Apple is taking that into consideration with allotted units to Radio Shack. IDK just an idea.
Thanks again for your help! Good luck on the 24th!
Also what area do you live in? And why do you think Apple sent out so little to your area? Because Raleigh-Durham is a decent size (maybe 7-10 stores) but we also have two Apple stores. So maybe Apple is taking that into consideration with allotted units to Radio Shack. IDK just an idea.
Thanks again for your help! Good luck on the 24th!
janmc
Aug 5, 08:13 PM
To me the answer to the whole IR/Mac Pro/Front Row thing is obvious - put an integrated IR receiver into the keyboard. The keyboard would come with the Mac Pro (unlike the display) and is rarely under the desk. :)
Plus they could sell the keyboard for any Mac (including ones that don't have Front Row - they could include the app with it).
Are you listening Apple? Maybe you should patent that one quick ;)
Plus they could sell the keyboard for any Mac (including ones that don't have Front Row - they could include the app with it).
Are you listening Apple? Maybe you should patent that one quick ;)
michaelflynn
Apr 6, 12:46 PM
A lot of pros have already left Mac, but I have been holding out. However, this is the last straw. If the new FCP disappoints I will be jumping ship, buying a high-end PC and switching to Avid or Premiere. I just can't stand the frustrations anymore of watching every consumer itoy get upgraded, and then the Pro stuff getting shafted.
The time is now. The new FCP had better have something equivalent to Mercury Playback, optimization for RED footage, different HD codecs, real-time playback, 64 bit, multi-core usage, etc. If it's a dumbed-down consumer product I will be absolutely livid.
I would try out Premiere on your Mac before jumping to PC. I edit on Premiere for Windwos at one of my part-time jobs, and it is terribly unstable on every machine I've used. Constant crashes and hang-ups, and I don't like the interface as much as FCP. People cite native DSLR support as an advantage, but you have to sit there and wait for Premiere to "conform" every clip, which can take 45 minutes for large projects...probably the same amount of time it would take to convert to ProRes!
The time is now. The new FCP had better have something equivalent to Mercury Playback, optimization for RED footage, different HD codecs, real-time playback, 64 bit, multi-core usage, etc. If it's a dumbed-down consumer product I will be absolutely livid.
I would try out Premiere on your Mac before jumping to PC. I edit on Premiere for Windwos at one of my part-time jobs, and it is terribly unstable on every machine I've used. Constant crashes and hang-ups, and I don't like the interface as much as FCP. People cite native DSLR support as an advantage, but you have to sit there and wait for Premiere to "conform" every clip, which can take 45 minutes for large projects...probably the same amount of time it would take to convert to ProRes!
sanmiguel
Aug 12, 07:15 AM
fake obviously but it seems like a nice possibility....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5qGn7kIkMA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5qGn7kIkMA
Bill McEnaney
Mar 1, 04:55 AM
Couldn't God just forgive everyone and make heaven bigger?
However many people go to heaven, it'll have plenty of room them. For God to forgive sinners, they need to repent first.
However many people go to heaven, it'll have plenty of room them. For God to forgive sinners, they need to repent first.
bradc
Jul 27, 11:19 AM
"...Core 2 Duo chips need less electricity, drawing just 65 watts compared to the Pentium 4�s 95 watts and Pentium D�s 130 watts"
Good Lord - does anybody know what the G5 is? I'd imagine that the elaborate cooling system in the current G5 towers probably won't be needed it it's running anything like the D's...
Don't ask! Hahahaha, the G5's run hot, I'd hate to know how much they're sucking but with a 600W power supply...it's a lot;)
Good Lord - does anybody know what the G5 is? I'd imagine that the elaborate cooling system in the current G5 towers probably won't be needed it it's running anything like the D's...
Don't ask! Hahahaha, the G5's run hot, I'd hate to know how much they're sucking but with a 600W power supply...it's a lot;)
chrmjenkins
Apr 6, 11:36 AM
That isn't what this story reads, and I don't think anyone but you and I have even read the actual facts supposed here.
I actually find this one of the least accurate stories ever posted on MacRumors.com for several reasons... the OP is assuming ULV in the 13" MBA. The OP is assuming that if SB IGP is good enough for MBP it's fine for MBA. There is no rumor or timeframe listing these chips especially not in the 13" MBA. It seems like it's a blatant attempt to stir up activity without any real facts, rumors, or even common knowledge about the chips used in the MBAs.
Certainly the people haven't read the story or they're somehow focusing on the 11" MBA. Sure, this would be fine for the 11" MBA in terms of CPU clock speed but even then it's a gigantic loss in Tue graphics capabilities. That leads to a problem with the author saying good enough for 13" MBP than good enough for MBA. However, the IGP clock speed used in this ULV chip will be nearly a 50% drop in graphics performance. That for me doesn't equate to if this then that...
I am disappointed with MR for even writing such a poor piece of garbage. Forget that I cannot stand the SB IGP... the assumptions made here are absurd! It definitely doesn't warrant this sort of reply from the fans of the MBA. You and I could assailed things all day, but that isn't the story written.
Given Apple's willingness to go with it on the 13", I'm inclined to go with the reasoning that they'll use it here. The argument that it will be a big step down from the 320M is kind of moot given that anyone will say you're crazy if you try to insist that a MBA should be used for anything like gaming or graphical work (read anyone as Apple). You also have to remember that the 320M is downclocked in the MBAs too compared to the 13", so the drop isn't as drastic as you state.
The combination of a lower or equal TDP, a GPU that doesn't need its own heatsink because its integrated into the CPU and the very likely prolonged battery life for the MBA, it's pretty much a done deal for the MBA.
So is that also true for the difference between SV and LV? If that is the case, the Core i7-2649M you cite above (2.3 LV chip) should be faster compared to the 2.3 i5 in the low end Pro 13?
Thanks!
He didn't quite tell the whole story. A LV and ULV chip likely went through different binning as their performance at the same settings varies because the process they are built on varies. The chips that work at the extremes (say Intel's extreme desktop processors or the lowest voltage CPUs they offer) are likely the top performers in their binning tests. Just because a chip can function as a LV doesn't mean it would meet the requirements for ULV, for example. However, if the ULV chip were to be scaled to the LV's parts speed and voltage, it would function just fine.
I actually find this one of the least accurate stories ever posted on MacRumors.com for several reasons... the OP is assuming ULV in the 13" MBA. The OP is assuming that if SB IGP is good enough for MBP it's fine for MBA. There is no rumor or timeframe listing these chips especially not in the 13" MBA. It seems like it's a blatant attempt to stir up activity without any real facts, rumors, or even common knowledge about the chips used in the MBAs.
Certainly the people haven't read the story or they're somehow focusing on the 11" MBA. Sure, this would be fine for the 11" MBA in terms of CPU clock speed but even then it's a gigantic loss in Tue graphics capabilities. That leads to a problem with the author saying good enough for 13" MBP than good enough for MBA. However, the IGP clock speed used in this ULV chip will be nearly a 50% drop in graphics performance. That for me doesn't equate to if this then that...
I am disappointed with MR for even writing such a poor piece of garbage. Forget that I cannot stand the SB IGP... the assumptions made here are absurd! It definitely doesn't warrant this sort of reply from the fans of the MBA. You and I could assailed things all day, but that isn't the story written.
Given Apple's willingness to go with it on the 13", I'm inclined to go with the reasoning that they'll use it here. The argument that it will be a big step down from the 320M is kind of moot given that anyone will say you're crazy if you try to insist that a MBA should be used for anything like gaming or graphical work (read anyone as Apple). You also have to remember that the 320M is downclocked in the MBAs too compared to the 13", so the drop isn't as drastic as you state.
The combination of a lower or equal TDP, a GPU that doesn't need its own heatsink because its integrated into the CPU and the very likely prolonged battery life for the MBA, it's pretty much a done deal for the MBA.
So is that also true for the difference between SV and LV? If that is the case, the Core i7-2649M you cite above (2.3 LV chip) should be faster compared to the 2.3 i5 in the low end Pro 13?
Thanks!
He didn't quite tell the whole story. A LV and ULV chip likely went through different binning as their performance at the same settings varies because the process they are built on varies. The chips that work at the extremes (say Intel's extreme desktop processors or the lowest voltage CPUs they offer) are likely the top performers in their binning tests. Just because a chip can function as a LV doesn't mean it would meet the requirements for ULV, for example. However, if the ULV chip were to be scaled to the LV's parts speed and voltage, it would function just fine.
seenew
Aug 27, 02:26 PM
Maybe there will be a new iMac launched with the new iPod in October.
littleman23408
Dec 4, 04:59 PM
A-spec level 19. Haven't played it for a week now, maybe I should play this weekend and get it to 25.
I think I got mine up to 16 or 17 last night. Finished the second license with all gold, started a bspec driver, and did some other things.
yep im pretty sure thats what i saw! pretty cool this game
my PSN name is psychofetus
Awesome, I sent you a friend request. Edit: I received your friend request.
I think I got mine up to 16 or 17 last night. Finished the second license with all gold, started a bspec driver, and did some other things.
yep im pretty sure thats what i saw! pretty cool this game
my PSN name is psychofetus
Awesome, I sent you a friend request. Edit: I received your friend request.
Some_Big_Spoon
Aug 27, 12:56 PM
I'd like to see a couple pounds shaved off the iMac. I know it sounds goofy, but I'd like a machine thatI could transport easily either to work, or just room to room. It's very light now (considering how much is in there), but - 2 to 5 lbs. would be great.
Also, and I know peeps don't dig them, but the glossy screen would be nice. The glare's not cool, but the rich colors and brightness are tops.
Also, and I know peeps don't dig them, but the glossy screen would be nice. The glare's not cool, but the rich colors and brightness are tops.
maclaptop
Apr 13, 03:26 PM
1) I'm perfectly happy with the data speeds I get on AT&T 3G. I would guess the new 4G phones will suffer in battery life. I don't want to give up battery life for network speed I don't really need. If I had to choose I would choose battery life every time.
2) It's not the cost of the phone, its the cost of the data plan. I would guess it will be like the iPhone 3G launch where AT&T forced you into a 3G plan even if you didn't have 3G coverage in your area.
3) I currently have unlimited data with AT&T which I would like to keep. I doubt very seriously this will be an option with the new "4G" network plans.
4) I can wait for a "4G" phone until there is decent "4G" coverage.
1) Me too
2) I Agree
3) I'm sure you're right
4) Me too
Great post :)
2) It's not the cost of the phone, its the cost of the data plan. I would guess it will be like the iPhone 3G launch where AT&T forced you into a 3G plan even if you didn't have 3G coverage in your area.
3) I currently have unlimited data with AT&T which I would like to keep. I doubt very seriously this will be an option with the new "4G" network plans.
4) I can wait for a "4G" phone until there is decent "4G" coverage.
1) Me too
2) I Agree
3) I'm sure you're right
4) Me too
Great post :)
bep207
Aug 17, 02:35 AM
man that is impressive
the quad g5, once the fastest, has just taken a back seat -third row even
the quad g5, once the fastest, has just taken a back seat -third row even
deniseeliza
Aug 29, 02:44 PM
I don't believe Apple would (or should) license out Mac OS X to run on non-Apple hardware. This is because Apple is a hardware company that uses Mac OS X to sell hardware. I wouldn't want it to be licensed out anyway, because then we would have to deal with registration key nightmares. Right now, there's nothing but your conscience and a license agreement you probably threw away keeping you from installing one copy of Mac OS X on every Mac you can get your hands on. Not that I do that, but I sure like just popping in my disk and reinstalling whenever it strikes my fancy.
On to the support issue, I think since the beginning of technical support there have always been those who complain that quality has really gone down and back in the good ol' days, you never had any problems, ever! And now, by golly, it's a coin toss whether you get a machine that even turns on!
Right, gramps, and back in your day, you walked to school uphill both ways in the snow with no boots and you liked it.
And 25% of new machines being lemons? Last quarter, Apple reported they shipped 1,327,000 computers. If we call a quarter 90 days, and assume that 25% of them are dead, that's more than 3,600 computers sold defective every single day. Are you kidding me? You really think a major hardware company would sell 3,600 defective computers every single day and get away with it?
This is what's really happening: Apple is selling more machines than ever. Apple's customers have greater access to the internet than ever. Even if the rate of failure stays the same, you have more customers with more internet savvy to come whine and moan on bulletin boards.
Yes, you deserve a perfectly functioning computer and you have the right to complain when your computer is broken. So call Apple or go down to your local service provider and get your machine serviced under warranty. That's what it's there for. It's also the number 1 best way to help Apple get clued in to potential issues with their products. They're not going to issue a recall because a bunch of bulletin board users complain to each other over and over again until they convince each other that there isn't a single MacBook Pro in the world that functions properly.
On to the support issue, I think since the beginning of technical support there have always been those who complain that quality has really gone down and back in the good ol' days, you never had any problems, ever! And now, by golly, it's a coin toss whether you get a machine that even turns on!
Right, gramps, and back in your day, you walked to school uphill both ways in the snow with no boots and you liked it.
And 25% of new machines being lemons? Last quarter, Apple reported they shipped 1,327,000 computers. If we call a quarter 90 days, and assume that 25% of them are dead, that's more than 3,600 computers sold defective every single day. Are you kidding me? You really think a major hardware company would sell 3,600 defective computers every single day and get away with it?
This is what's really happening: Apple is selling more machines than ever. Apple's customers have greater access to the internet than ever. Even if the rate of failure stays the same, you have more customers with more internet savvy to come whine and moan on bulletin boards.
Yes, you deserve a perfectly functioning computer and you have the right to complain when your computer is broken. So call Apple or go down to your local service provider and get your machine serviced under warranty. That's what it's there for. It's also the number 1 best way to help Apple get clued in to potential issues with their products. They're not going to issue a recall because a bunch of bulletin board users complain to each other over and over again until they convince each other that there isn't a single MacBook Pro in the world that functions properly.
SPUY767
Jul 27, 04:03 PM
It's always a little alarming when a post starts "sorry if I missed it but..."
The 2.7 G5 will be the highest clocked chip in a mac for a while, but probably not the fastest. In a number of benchmarks, Yonah has already beaten dual G5's, the conroes and woodrests will likely widen the gap even more.
I'm sorry. I thought that it was adequately implied that I meant the fastest chip, to date. Anyway, that's what I meant if I've been misunderstood.
The 2.7 G5 will be the highest clocked chip in a mac for a while, but probably not the fastest. In a number of benchmarks, Yonah has already beaten dual G5's, the conroes and woodrests will likely widen the gap even more.
I'm sorry. I thought that it was adequately implied that I meant the fastest chip, to date. Anyway, that's what I meant if I've been misunderstood.
Post Title → Switchfoot The Beautiful Letdown
