G5power
Jul 27, 09:48 AM
Assuming August 7 as an announcement date of new systems, the waiting is killer.
Kane.Elson
Jul 27, 10:21 PM
Ahh so many announcments !!! Kill me now !
I'm waiting for the end of august then I'm buying whatever I can get.
I'm waiting for the end of august then I'm buying whatever I can get.
kugino
Aug 7, 11:45 PM
Well I for one was kind of disappointed. Leopard is sort of Apple's chance to prove they can out-Vista Vista, and I'm not really sure what we saw today does it. I've been following Vista somewhat closely, and it really does catch Windows up to OS X in terms of features and prettiness.
I really think most of the features shown off today are already present in Windows (I've definitely heard about all of them before) or will be in Vista, and it's too bad Apple didn't have anything truly innovative to show us. Hopefully those secret features are something good...
The other thing that has me a little concerned is the huge amount of Vista-bashing that went on. I feel like if Leopard at this point were truly better than Vista, they'd be silent about Vista entirely and let the new system speak for itself. That would be really slick. That's not what happened however, and instead there was a lot of "look what Vista copied from us" and "check out how much better Leopard is." What I saw today, though, makes the former statement sound whiney and the latter sound foolish, since in my eyes, in terms of features, they're about on-par with each other.
I really hope Apple pulls it together. They've got to do this right, because come next year, most of the myriad reasons for switching to a Mac will be nullified by Vista.
BTW: whoever this "Platform Experience" guy is, get him off the stage and go back to Steve.
hmmm, most of the features are already in windows? what version of windows do you have? are you from the future? and, ummm, who knows what's going to be in vista because it keeps changing...even what you see now may not make the final cut. to say that the two OSs are the same because they both have the same features is akin to saying that a yugo and a mercedes are both the same because they both have four wheels and an engine. look, there are things that vista will have that osx will lack...there are things in osx that vista will lack. neither os will be perfect. still, os x is great because of its underlying architecture and not only b/c of this feature or that feature.
and most people will not be making their buying decision on which os is better...the greater selling point on the mac is boot camp and booting windows on the mac. most people aren't going to care what os is better.
I really think most of the features shown off today are already present in Windows (I've definitely heard about all of them before) or will be in Vista, and it's too bad Apple didn't have anything truly innovative to show us. Hopefully those secret features are something good...
The other thing that has me a little concerned is the huge amount of Vista-bashing that went on. I feel like if Leopard at this point were truly better than Vista, they'd be silent about Vista entirely and let the new system speak for itself. That would be really slick. That's not what happened however, and instead there was a lot of "look what Vista copied from us" and "check out how much better Leopard is." What I saw today, though, makes the former statement sound whiney and the latter sound foolish, since in my eyes, in terms of features, they're about on-par with each other.
I really hope Apple pulls it together. They've got to do this right, because come next year, most of the myriad reasons for switching to a Mac will be nullified by Vista.
BTW: whoever this "Platform Experience" guy is, get him off the stage and go back to Steve.
hmmm, most of the features are already in windows? what version of windows do you have? are you from the future? and, ummm, who knows what's going to be in vista because it keeps changing...even what you see now may not make the final cut. to say that the two OSs are the same because they both have the same features is akin to saying that a yugo and a mercedes are both the same because they both have four wheels and an engine. look, there are things that vista will have that osx will lack...there are things in osx that vista will lack. neither os will be perfect. still, os x is great because of its underlying architecture and not only b/c of this feature or that feature.
and most people will not be making their buying decision on which os is better...the greater selling point on the mac is boot camp and booting windows on the mac. most people aren't going to care what os is better.
macfan881
Aug 11, 12:29 AM
Just saw on the video preview for amazon.com that this will have the Top Gears track i thought that was pretty awesome cant wait for this to finally come out. Wasn't this game a original Launch game?
technicolor
Sep 19, 10:15 PM
Why do you care?
Why shouldnt I?
Why shouldnt I?
craig jones
Sep 13, 12:58 PM
Arrays of cheap RAM on a PCIe card?
The RAM companies don't seem interested in making wodges of slow cheap hi-cap ram, only in bumping up the speed and upping the capacity. For the last 10 years, a stick of decent RAM has always been about �100/ $100 no matter what the capacity / flavour of the moment is.
Even slow RAM is still orders of magnitude faster than a HD, hence my point. There's various historical and technical factors as to why we have the current situation.
I've also looked at RAID implementations (I run a RAID5) but each RAID level has its own problems.
I've recently seen that single-user RAID3 might be one way forward for the desktop, but don't really know enough about it yet.
Slow RAM may be faster than hard disk but it's too slow for main memory. It could be useful for disk cache but products like that came and went. If such hardware could actually result in performance improvements to justify their costs then you'd see products that used them.
As for RAID 3, it has been used before but really has no place considering modern disk drives and workloads. RAID 3 and 4, in order to work properly, require spindle sync. Workstations have no business implementing any parity-based RAID scheme. Servers used RAID 5 when they have high capacity needs and aren't sensitive to write performance.
The RAM companies don't seem interested in making wodges of slow cheap hi-cap ram, only in bumping up the speed and upping the capacity. For the last 10 years, a stick of decent RAM has always been about �100/ $100 no matter what the capacity / flavour of the moment is.
Even slow RAM is still orders of magnitude faster than a HD, hence my point. There's various historical and technical factors as to why we have the current situation.
I've also looked at RAID implementations (I run a RAID5) but each RAID level has its own problems.
I've recently seen that single-user RAID3 might be one way forward for the desktop, but don't really know enough about it yet.
Slow RAM may be faster than hard disk but it's too slow for main memory. It could be useful for disk cache but products like that came and went. If such hardware could actually result in performance improvements to justify their costs then you'd see products that used them.
As for RAID 3, it has been used before but really has no place considering modern disk drives and workloads. RAID 3 and 4, in order to work properly, require spindle sync. Workstations have no business implementing any parity-based RAID scheme. Servers used RAID 5 when they have high capacity needs and aren't sensitive to write performance.
Super Dave
Aug 8, 12:54 AM
Part of the "Top Secret" stuff has got to be a new Finder... that Finder looked so boring during the Keynote... it just stood out. This release will have a two year gap and that means we are bound to see some Finder changes!
Spring '06 - still 8 months away.
Yeah, I can't imagine they won't update the Finder and Safari (with more than they've shown). We are far from seeing the end of Leopard, and I think Steve made that very clear.
David :cool:
Spring '06 - still 8 months away.
Yeah, I can't imagine they won't update the Finder and Safari (with more than they've shown). We are far from seeing the end of Leopard, and I think Steve made that very clear.
David :cool:
leekohler
Mar 1, 08:18 AM
Yet another case of straight people telling gay people how being gay works. I just don't get it.:rolleyes:
Pretty incredible, isn't it? They seem to know everything, but when we actually talk about what it's like (ya know, since we kinda KNOW), we're dismissed as if we have no clue. Amazing.
Pretty incredible, isn't it? They seem to know everything, but when we actually talk about what it's like (ya know, since we kinda KNOW), we're dismissed as if we have no clue. Amazing.
512ke
Aug 26, 03:57 PM
If the power consumption is the same... does that mean that the Merom and the current chips suck the same amount energy while going full throttle?
If the above is true, if you turned down the Merom to match the speed of the current chips, wouldn't the Merom be drawing 20% less power?
In other words if the Merom and the current chip were both going 60 mph down the freeway, would the Merom be drawing less power?
Am I missing something here (such as the basics of electricity, the basic way that chips work, etc.)?
512ke
If the above is true, if you turned down the Merom to match the speed of the current chips, wouldn't the Merom be drawing 20% less power?
In other words if the Merom and the current chip were both going 60 mph down the freeway, would the Merom be drawing less power?
Am I missing something here (such as the basics of electricity, the basic way that chips work, etc.)?
512ke
yac_moda
Jul 21, 12:39 PM
Get with the program you guys ...
... start think the way APPLE think :eek:
Apple will NOT release such a HIGH END MACchine without spotlighting a use :eek: :eek:
Such a most excellent MACchine would be released with Bluray and the computing power would be used to burn to ALL THAT SPACE in human as opposed to GEOLOGICAL time spans :eek: :eek: :eek:
... start think the way APPLE think :eek:
Apple will NOT release such a HIGH END MACchine without spotlighting a use :eek: :eek:
Such a most excellent MACchine would be released with Bluray and the computing power would be used to burn to ALL THAT SPACE in human as opposed to GEOLOGICAL time spans :eek: :eek: :eek:
Thataboy
Jul 27, 07:59 PM
It absolutely will!!! Leopard is just going to be mostly beneficial for dual-core machines. Read this article:
http://macosrumors.com/20060710A1.php
Leopard sounds FAST!
You didn't really just link to MOSR, did you? :p
Anyway, I have the sneaking suspicion that we will see Core 2 Duo/Extreme-related computer announcements next week, and not at WWDC. WWDC will get major coverage anyway because of Leopard (which could easily take up the whole keynote). So why not spread the Apple press over 2 weeks?
Moreover, everyone announced new computers today. Apple might have wanted to avoid the first-day glut of releases, but they might not want to wait almost 2 full weeks to announce a Mac Pro.
My wild guess is Mac Daddy Extreme and/or iMaconroe on Tuesday with near-immediate availability, and announcement of MeromBook Pro at WWDC with early September availability.
http://macosrumors.com/20060710A1.php
Leopard sounds FAST!
You didn't really just link to MOSR, did you? :p
Anyway, I have the sneaking suspicion that we will see Core 2 Duo/Extreme-related computer announcements next week, and not at WWDC. WWDC will get major coverage anyway because of Leopard (which could easily take up the whole keynote). So why not spread the Apple press over 2 weeks?
Moreover, everyone announced new computers today. Apple might have wanted to avoid the first-day glut of releases, but they might not want to wait almost 2 full weeks to announce a Mac Pro.
My wild guess is Mac Daddy Extreme and/or iMaconroe on Tuesday with near-immediate availability, and announcement of MeromBook Pro at WWDC with early September availability.
LagunaSol
Apr 11, 04:57 PM
Checking email and Browsing the Internet is better on a bigger screen....Ability to open Office files, yes the iPhone does that well, but it's much better with a bigger screen.
Ah, so most of the stuff on Android is "better" only because it's on a bigger screen? :rolleyes:
So if Apple came out with a 6" iPhone, that would make it better than Android, right?
Navigation system..using an Android you don't have to pay $70 (TomTom) for something which should've come with your device.
And the navigation app I purchased houses all the map data on the device and doesn't rely on a data connection to operate. Unlike Android's stock navigation.
What did Android release which was later than the iOS which defined a smartphone?
Um, how about the entire OS?
Yup, but not many people want to lug around a 10" tablet and would like the extra screen real estate on their phones. I know i would.
There are also people (like me) who prefer not to carry something the size of an old-school Palm Pilot in their pocket.
Ah, so most of the stuff on Android is "better" only because it's on a bigger screen? :rolleyes:
So if Apple came out with a 6" iPhone, that would make it better than Android, right?
Navigation system..using an Android you don't have to pay $70 (TomTom) for something which should've come with your device.
And the navigation app I purchased houses all the map data on the device and doesn't rely on a data connection to operate. Unlike Android's stock navigation.
What did Android release which was later than the iOS which defined a smartphone?
Um, how about the entire OS?
Yup, but not many people want to lug around a 10" tablet and would like the extra screen real estate on their phones. I know i would.
There are also people (like me) who prefer not to carry something the size of an old-school Palm Pilot in their pocket.
ccrandall77
Aug 11, 12:28 PM
isn't it about time you guys got in line with the rest of the world? GSM has more than 81% (http://www.gsacom.com/news/gsa_203.php4?PHPSESSID=7aa4036fa6a16fe0066d2e6dc9430727) of the world market. If you get a cdma phone you are more or less restriced to use it in US, whereas a GSM phone can be used more or less all over the planet.
Why? First of all, with CDMA2000 I get great coverage in N. America. Second, it's not like most people in N. America regularly travel to Europe. Third, CDMA2000 is a superior technology. EDGE only gave me 128Kbps for data but with EVDO I peak at 700Kbps. Fourth, with Verizon and Sprint you can get a CDMA/GSM phone if you REALLY need to travel abroad.
I could also ask why the rest of the world doesn't get with the program and move to better technology with CDMA2000 like the US and parts of Asia have?
Why? First of all, with CDMA2000 I get great coverage in N. America. Second, it's not like most people in N. America regularly travel to Europe. Third, CDMA2000 is a superior technology. EDGE only gave me 128Kbps for data but with EVDO I peak at 700Kbps. Fourth, with Verizon and Sprint you can get a CDMA/GSM phone if you REALLY need to travel abroad.
I could also ask why the rest of the world doesn't get with the program and move to better technology with CDMA2000 like the US and parts of Asia have?
tirk
Apr 11, 11:44 AM
If it is going to be a 4g/LTE iPhone then this works for me. I have no complaints with my iPhone 4 so waiting another 4-6 months is fine with me.
80%* of potential purchasers won't have access to LTE for at least another year from then. Given that 3G was added only after it was widely available, why would Apple take such a risk with the huge numbers of June/July iPhone users coming to the end of their contracts for such a minority market?
[*made up statistic, but I bet it's not far wrong! :D ]
80%* of potential purchasers won't have access to LTE for at least another year from then. Given that 3G was added only after it was widely available, why would Apple take such a risk with the huge numbers of June/July iPhone users coming to the end of their contracts for such a minority market?
[*made up statistic, but I bet it's not far wrong! :D ]
netdog
Aug 5, 04:55 PM
...in the mean time, it's best to be conservative and hope we might be surprised.
Sure, I have no problem with someone else taking that stance.
Sure, I have no problem with someone else taking that stance.
Moyank24
Apr 27, 12:08 PM
I lost mine a few years ago and it was re-issued so it isn't worn and faded. Does that mean I can't run for president? :eek::p
Yes.
Actually, we're going to have to ask you to leave the country. You and your fake birth certificate aren't welcome here.
Yes.
Actually, we're going to have to ask you to leave the country. You and your fake birth certificate aren't welcome here.
Scarlet Fever
Jul 20, 08:23 AM
wow. 8 cores. *drool
and i was just getting used to dual cores...
i cant wait till they turn up as refurbs... ill own one faster than you can say "no you dont"
and i was just getting used to dual cores...
i cant wait till they turn up as refurbs... ill own one faster than you can say "no you dont"
Cooknn
Aug 23, 12:51 PM
Let us continue to pray for a speedy death to the Macintosh PowerPC computer.I'd rather pray for the speedy development of Adobe Creative Suite 3 UB :cool:
thedarkhalf
Apr 27, 08:27 AM
The fact is that the iPhone is logging the location of the near by hot spot and cell tower. So if the cell tower is 50 miles away is some instances it is tracking that information not that the GPS location of your phone 50 miles from your phone. If you did the tracking thing on your computer and saw the map with your info, you would notice that some of the dots are places that you probably have never been. When I did and I went up to Northern Michigan it was tracking information approx 60 miles from the road I was on. This is why I never worried about this cause I knew it wasn't actually tracking my iPhones GPS location rather the nearest cell or Wifi location.
This is correct. In checking my trip to NC last year, it's showing locations i wasn't even close to. literally 81 miles away from the closest destination I was at (including the trip up and down).
Check a map of all ATT cell towers, i confirmed one cell tower in a location very close to whats pinned on the map (it's about 4 blocks off)
This is correct. In checking my trip to NC last year, it's showing locations i wasn't even close to. literally 81 miles away from the closest destination I was at (including the trip up and down).
Check a map of all ATT cell towers, i confirmed one cell tower in a location very close to whats pinned on the map (it's about 4 blocks off)
guzhogi
Jul 20, 10:07 AM
First of all, you assume that it is possible to make "one big core equal in processing power to the 8 cores". I don't think it is possible to do this (at least not with the x86 architecture using today's technology.)
But assuming such a chip exists, the answer depends on what kind of efficiency you're thinking of.
If you mean computational efficiency (meaning the most useful processing per clock-tick), then a single big core will do better. This is because single-threaded apps will be able to use the full power (whereas multiple threads are needed to take advantagte of multiple cores.) Also, the operating system can get rid of the overhead that is needed to keep software running on the multiple cores from stepping on each other.
If you mean energy efficiency (amount of processing per watt of electricity consumed), then it could go either way, depending on how the chips are made. But given today's manufacturing processes and the non-linear power curve that we see as clock speeds are increased, the multiple-core solution will almost definitely use less power.
I remember hearing about how it is possible to make multiple cores act like one (Idon't remember where I heard this). Anyways, whether 8 cores acting separately or together like 1 big processor has an advantage depends on the program you use. If the program is multi-threaded, then the cores acting separately might have the advantage while single threaded apps will have an advantage if the cores are acting like one. However, many apps today won't see that much improvement either way (like a simple calculator, or solitare and word processing).
But assuming such a chip exists, the answer depends on what kind of efficiency you're thinking of.
If you mean computational efficiency (meaning the most useful processing per clock-tick), then a single big core will do better. This is because single-threaded apps will be able to use the full power (whereas multiple threads are needed to take advantagte of multiple cores.) Also, the operating system can get rid of the overhead that is needed to keep software running on the multiple cores from stepping on each other.
If you mean energy efficiency (amount of processing per watt of electricity consumed), then it could go either way, depending on how the chips are made. But given today's manufacturing processes and the non-linear power curve that we see as clock speeds are increased, the multiple-core solution will almost definitely use less power.
I remember hearing about how it is possible to make multiple cores act like one (Idon't remember where I heard this). Anyways, whether 8 cores acting separately or together like 1 big processor has an advantage depends on the program you use. If the program is multi-threaded, then the cores acting separately might have the advantage while single threaded apps will have an advantage if the cores are acting like one. However, many apps today won't see that much improvement either way (like a simple calculator, or solitare and word processing).
relimw
Sep 12, 11:15 AM
Very cool. Now to find apps (os10.5 direct blind support?) that can make use of all those cores. :cool:
Popeye206
Apr 8, 08:16 AM
Hummm... I would think by them throttling the sales, they get people back into the store over and over again trying to get one. So, take their "hot product" and dish a few out everyday to keep the eager hunters coming back in day after day and hope they buy something else in the mean time.
Also, I can see from the sales incentive standpoint that if you've hit your quota for the day selling 20 ipads in an hour, but have another 40 in stock, hold them for the next day to ensure you have consecutive days of hitting your sales quota making you look better and probably getting other bonuses? I would think they compensate managers based on daily sales and consecutive days of sales above quota.
So... basically, I see BB messing with stock to manipulate their sales and Apple being mad because they are so far behind on keeping up with demand and one of their big partners is holding out and using the iPad as sales bait.
Also, I can see from the sales incentive standpoint that if you've hit your quota for the day selling 20 ipads in an hour, but have another 40 in stock, hold them for the next day to ensure you have consecutive days of hitting your sales quota making you look better and probably getting other bonuses? I would think they compensate managers based on daily sales and consecutive days of sales above quota.
So... basically, I see BB messing with stock to manipulate their sales and Apple being mad because they are so far behind on keeping up with demand and one of their big partners is holding out and using the iPad as sales bait.
zoran
Oct 15, 01:05 PM
How long did macPro delay compared to HPs similar workstation?
KnightWRX
Apr 9, 06:17 AM
Most people use their MBA for browsing, youtube videos, email, office apps and perhaps video conferencing. None of which will be bottlenecked by the Intel IGP. If you're doing something above and beyond this that will be negatively affected by the CPU, you are in fact, the minority.
Fixed that there for you. ;)
Goes both ways really. It's just that more casual tasks (ie, gaming and watching videos) max out the GPU more than they do the CPU. CPU bottlenecks are usually caused by niche tasks like video editing/raw photo editing/scientific number crunching.
Fixed that there for you. ;)
Goes both ways really. It's just that more casual tasks (ie, gaming and watching videos) max out the GPU more than they do the CPU. CPU bottlenecks are usually caused by niche tasks like video editing/raw photo editing/scientific number crunching.