OdduWon
Sep 15, 05:22 PM
single 3ghz woodcrest MBP's next tuesday? drool..........
spicyapple
Jul 29, 11:37 PM
... have you seen Microsoft's demo of their technology?
Yeah. :p ;)
Yeah. :p ;)
yankeedoodle
Nov 22, 02:16 AM
Wasn't it exactly the same story with the iPod?
Yep. And Palm doen't even know how to make a PDA right... Sorry, just my 2 cents and as much as I hate Microsoft: If there is one single thing that Microsoft's dullness department has overlooked so far it's the Pocket PC... Have a look at them next time you are in a store, compare them; have a look at their multitasking features, watch online TV on them -- they are by far not perfect and tend to crash (that's the Microsoft part in it) -- but they are still worlds better than any Palm out there.
I wish Apple would not only enter the phone business but also come back into the PDA market and show the Microsoft folks how to do it the Apple way. The Newton was fantastic and much ahead of it's time. In 1993 people just didn't know how to handle a PDA and didn't know how to integrate it into their daily workflow. Today, we are used to carry our iPods around wherever we go -- so if Apple could manage to enter the phone and PDA business via the iPod as a well known, emotionally positive vector (people buy the iPod because they want to listen to music and find out that it can also do much more than just play back U2 tracks), they could have a tremendous success.
Yep. And Palm doen't even know how to make a PDA right... Sorry, just my 2 cents and as much as I hate Microsoft: If there is one single thing that Microsoft's dullness department has overlooked so far it's the Pocket PC... Have a look at them next time you are in a store, compare them; have a look at their multitasking features, watch online TV on them -- they are by far not perfect and tend to crash (that's the Microsoft part in it) -- but they are still worlds better than any Palm out there.
I wish Apple would not only enter the phone business but also come back into the PDA market and show the Microsoft folks how to do it the Apple way. The Newton was fantastic and much ahead of it's time. In 1993 people just didn't know how to handle a PDA and didn't know how to integrate it into their daily workflow. Today, we are used to carry our iPods around wherever we go -- so if Apple could manage to enter the phone and PDA business via the iPod as a well known, emotionally positive vector (people buy the iPod because they want to listen to music and find out that it can also do much more than just play back U2 tracks), they could have a tremendous success.
lilo777
Mar 29, 10:42 AM
And Amazon thinks crippling ioS compatibility will be good business? FAIL.
I agree. I am absolutely convinced that Amazon's decision has nothing to do with the fact that their new cloud service gives free storage for MP3 files purchased from Amazon. Those idiots at Amazon probably still think that iOS is a close ecosystem where Apple restricts competitors in order to be able to rip off their loyal customer base.
I agree. I am absolutely convinced that Amazon's decision has nothing to do with the fact that their new cloud service gives free storage for MP3 files purchased from Amazon. Those idiots at Amazon probably still think that iOS is a close ecosystem where Apple restricts competitors in order to be able to rip off their loyal customer base.
fishmoose
Apr 23, 04:59 PM
Good article on the subject: "Consider The Retina Display" (http://theelaborated.net/blog/2011/4/13/consider-the-retina-display.html)
Multimedia
Aug 7, 08:11 PM
Is it liquid cooled?Probably not.
SiliconAddict
Aug 12, 12:59 AM
I haven't read through all tghe posts but just in case someone hasn't posted it yet...
WAH! My MBP is obsolete! How could Jobs do this to me! :( ;) That being said bring on the quad cores in the MBP's in a couple years. Just when I will be getting ready to upgrade. :D
WAH! My MBP is obsolete! How could Jobs do this to me! :( ;) That being said bring on the quad cores in the MBP's in a couple years. Just when I will be getting ready to upgrade. :D
Thunderhawks
Apr 24, 09:13 PM
Given this. If these "typical consumers, who don't care or really know about specs" are today, looking at their current 1920x1080 screens, or 1920x1200 screens, and they cannot see the individual pixels from their normal, let's say two feet away viewing distance, then what on earth would be the point in increasing costs, and slowing down an iMac by lumbering it with a higher resolution screen?
What is the point, for these consumers, to increase the screen resolution when they can't make out the individual pixels currently?
This is for a development in the future and the cost may not go up.
Apple usually outwaits developments until the cost fall into their range.
BTW: I do find it funny that you want to fault Apple for "gaming" a field that they clearly did not want to be in.
BTW2: The iMac for the masses is a clever space saving design. Their sales success shows it!
The Pro type tower boxes with separate monitor are just big clunky boxes.
They take up desk space or are usually hidden under the desk.
Also, in any good design Form follows Function. Apple follows that principle well and then some.
The secret of excellent design is actually what is not there:-)
What is the point, for these consumers, to increase the screen resolution when they can't make out the individual pixels currently?
This is for a development in the future and the cost may not go up.
Apple usually outwaits developments until the cost fall into their range.
BTW: I do find it funny that you want to fault Apple for "gaming" a field that they clearly did not want to be in.
BTW2: The iMac for the masses is a clever space saving design. Their sales success shows it!
The Pro type tower boxes with separate monitor are just big clunky boxes.
They take up desk space or are usually hidden under the desk.
Also, in any good design Form follows Function. Apple follows that principle well and then some.
The secret of excellent design is actually what is not there:-)
markfc
Dec 15, 06:21 AM
Will this scan for windows viri too?
Could be hand for those infected autorun usb drives viri currently circulating.
Could be hand for those infected autorun usb drives viri currently circulating.
sunspot42
Apr 21, 02:45 PM
With Thunderbolt I/O and so much stuff coming standard on the motherboard, you no longer need so much room for internal expansion. So it makes sense that Apple would take this opportunity to shrink the Mac Pro form factor. Those few who need a slew of high speed drives will be able to connect to some external RAID box, and a smaller case should still be able to house all of the expansion cards required by 99% of Mac users. (With Thunderbolt, you could use an external cage to house expansion cards as well, if you needed a slew of 'em for some reason.)
I hope this is true because I'd like to replace my going-on 4 year-old PC with a Mac Pro at some point, but the current case just won't fit in the IKEA wardrobe I'm using as a workstation. It sounds like this new Mac Pro would be smaller than my existing PC. Yea Apple!
I hope this is true because I'd like to replace my going-on 4 year-old PC with a Mac Pro at some point, but the current case just won't fit in the IKEA wardrobe I'm using as a workstation. It sounds like this new Mac Pro would be smaller than my existing PC. Yea Apple!
roach
Nov 27, 04:16 PM
Wrong. Tablets will never exist on their own as slate devices. Again as I stated previously slate devices are vertical market devices only. Convertibles on the other hand take the best of both worlds and contain both a touchscreen AND a keyboard. As for use. Think back to college. How many drawings did you do in class? In the traditional model notebook its difficult at best to do this. Or how about business meetings? I've done more scribbling then I can count as we work out network topology designs.
HP's TC1100, a tablet PC I had for about 2 years is a slate with a removable keyboard that also acts a convertible. I think it is the best design of both worlds. I use it for art and just love it in slate mode. My main gripe is the lack of fat buttons on the side for hot keys. I think this tablet (in slate mode) is the best looking portable anywhere...PC or Macs. But I would pick (big buttons) function over looks.
Again I've used Microsoft's implementation of a tablet PC. To be blunt its a Bill G's pet project. That is all. Its XP with a few tweaked apps designed to work better on a tablet. No one has come because MS hasn't put ANY real resources into the project. Hell they let a memory leak languish in the tablet PC for over 6 months even though they were fully aware of it. That had TPC users screeching like mad.
People will come if someone does it right and with the patents that Apple has made over the last 2 years that do pertain to a tablet interface I believe that Apple is on the right track. Much more so then Microsoft who is tied up in Vista development.
MS heavily implemented tablet function into Vista. From login, explorer, writing, etc. I upgraded my HD to 7200rpm and installed Vista RC2 and it ran better than when it had XP. For long docs, I heavily relied on a keyboard, but with Vista, it's very easy to write long docs. Before, I wouldn't recommend tablet to anybody doing long docs, but Vista change my mind.
Why, it don't sell well? There's a lot of good reasons. Power, weak video card, and onother reason is I feel Tablet pc weren't displayed correctly. I would go to an Electronic store and they would have them displayed like normal laptops with weak spec and heavy price. One has to look very carefully to realize they're looking at a tablet...very easily to by pass. I think UMPC is also going through the same problem. I can't find one, how can I buy one?
HP's TC1100, a tablet PC I had for about 2 years is a slate with a removable keyboard that also acts a convertible. I think it is the best design of both worlds. I use it for art and just love it in slate mode. My main gripe is the lack of fat buttons on the side for hot keys. I think this tablet (in slate mode) is the best looking portable anywhere...PC or Macs. But I would pick (big buttons) function over looks.
Again I've used Microsoft's implementation of a tablet PC. To be blunt its a Bill G's pet project. That is all. Its XP with a few tweaked apps designed to work better on a tablet. No one has come because MS hasn't put ANY real resources into the project. Hell they let a memory leak languish in the tablet PC for over 6 months even though they were fully aware of it. That had TPC users screeching like mad.
People will come if someone does it right and with the patents that Apple has made over the last 2 years that do pertain to a tablet interface I believe that Apple is on the right track. Much more so then Microsoft who is tied up in Vista development.
MS heavily implemented tablet function into Vista. From login, explorer, writing, etc. I upgraded my HD to 7200rpm and installed Vista RC2 and it ran better than when it had XP. For long docs, I heavily relied on a keyboard, but with Vista, it's very easy to write long docs. Before, I wouldn't recommend tablet to anybody doing long docs, but Vista change my mind.
Why, it don't sell well? There's a lot of good reasons. Power, weak video card, and onother reason is I feel Tablet pc weren't displayed correctly. I would go to an Electronic store and they would have them displayed like normal laptops with weak spec and heavy price. One has to look very carefully to realize they're looking at a tablet...very easily to by pass. I think UMPC is also going through the same problem. I can't find one, how can I buy one?
caspersoong
May 6, 01:08 AM
This seems great. Hope ARM comes with a super-fast APU for computers before long.
shandowee
Aug 4, 04:54 AM
(Sorry but my english is only valid to read, not to write...)
por aqu� en Espa�a tambi�n estamos como locos esperando los nuevos merom aunque seamos realistas, coincido con los compa�eros que dicen que hasta que f�sicamente no dispongan de los nuevos MBP no los van a anunciar ya que Jobs no puede permitirse perder tanto dinero (la gente esperar�a por el nuevo si lo anuncia en la WWDC)
So I think the new MBP with merom is not going to appear the 7th because jobs would lost a lot of buyers waiting for the meroms, you know, If someone tells you that in a month you are going to have a new processor, sure you are not going to buy the "obsolet model". Anyway I still dreaming each nigth with a merom MBP...
por aqu� en Espa�a tambi�n estamos como locos esperando los nuevos merom aunque seamos realistas, coincido con los compa�eros que dicen que hasta que f�sicamente no dispongan de los nuevos MBP no los van a anunciar ya que Jobs no puede permitirse perder tanto dinero (la gente esperar�a por el nuevo si lo anuncia en la WWDC)
So I think the new MBP with merom is not going to appear the 7th because jobs would lost a lot of buyers waiting for the meroms, you know, If someone tells you that in a month you are going to have a new processor, sure you are not going to buy the "obsolet model". Anyway I still dreaming each nigth with a merom MBP...
adbe
Mar 29, 02:37 PM
I wasn't aware that other countries looked down on products manufactured here, that's a shame.
Most don't, but for the average Whereverian, two questions spring to mind when seeing a US flag on the side of the box:
1) shouldn't I really be buying stuff made right here in Wherever?
2) Alright, so the case was screwed together in the US, but isn't this still just Chinese engineering at its finest[1]?
At least Apple, with their 'Designed in California' motto, are being honest.
[1] Case in point, since someone already mentioned them, Chrysler. Their chassis were largely warmed over obsolete MB tech. Half their 'made in the US' line isn't. And, like just about everyone else in the industry, the lion's share of components in those cars came from global supply lines. It's remarkable given how much Chrysler had to do with things that they could still f-ck it up. :(
Most don't, but for the average Whereverian, two questions spring to mind when seeing a US flag on the side of the box:
1) shouldn't I really be buying stuff made right here in Wherever?
2) Alright, so the case was screwed together in the US, but isn't this still just Chinese engineering at its finest[1]?
At least Apple, with their 'Designed in California' motto, are being honest.
[1] Case in point, since someone already mentioned them, Chrysler. Their chassis were largely warmed over obsolete MB tech. Half their 'made in the US' line isn't. And, like just about everyone else in the industry, the lion's share of components in those cars came from global supply lines. It's remarkable given how much Chrysler had to do with things that they could still f-ck it up. :(
GeekLawyer
Mar 28, 09:33 AM
I'm not so sure about that interpretation.
Not introducing the new iPhone would be a serious break from Apple practice.
But I guess it's possible. My iPhone 4 still feels "magical" to me. Maybe Apple will hold pat with iPhone 4 - what with the CDMA version and the white model being "new" this year.
It would be a serious break from past practice.
And on Macs...
"Now that we've shown you Lion, with all these great features from iOS that we're bringing Back to the Mac, here's a look at our newest iMac that takes fullest advantage, yada, yada, yada."
Not introducing the new iPhone would be a serious break from Apple practice.
But I guess it's possible. My iPhone 4 still feels "magical" to me. Maybe Apple will hold pat with iPhone 4 - what with the CDMA version and the white model being "new" this year.
It would be a serious break from past practice.
And on Macs...
"Now that we've shown you Lion, with all these great features from iOS that we're bringing Back to the Mac, here's a look at our newest iMac that takes fullest advantage, yada, yada, yada."
Multimedia
Jul 21, 07:48 PM
up the chips in the MBPs and up the speeds in the MBs?
seems likely to me.Seems highly unlikely to me because above 2GHz, Merom's are way too expensive to go into MacBooks. But I would love to see 2GHz Meroms go into MacBooks sooner than later.
On the MBP front, we should see them go up to 2.16 and 2.33 GHz Meroms very soon.
seems likely to me.Seems highly unlikely to me because above 2GHz, Merom's are way too expensive to go into MacBooks. But I would love to see 2GHz Meroms go into MacBooks sooner than later.
On the MBP front, we should see them go up to 2.16 and 2.33 GHz Meroms very soon.
nuckinfutz
May 7, 08:00 PM
We disagree, but I'll guess we'll find out in a month.
Good info. Thanks. Any link you can provide with this info all in one spot?
Best link i've found is
http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/20100222/that�s-apple�s-new-data-center-where�s-the-giant-glass-cube/
&
http://www.cultofmac.com/interview-apples-gigantic-new-data-center-hints-at-cloud-computing/14680
salient quote from Rich Miller of Data Center Knowledge
Selena Gomez Bikini Monte
selena gomez bikini monte
Good info. Thanks. Any link you can provide with this info all in one spot?
Best link i've found is
http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/20100222/that�s-apple�s-new-data-center-where�s-the-giant-glass-cube/
&
http://www.cultofmac.com/interview-apples-gigantic-new-data-center-hints-at-cloud-computing/14680
salient quote from Rich Miller of Data Center Knowledge
ZZ Bottom
Mar 26, 10:09 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8C148)
Yay let us all surrender our privacy to the cloud... Sometimes I feel like the only one that understands the long term implications cloud based computer has when we allow our content and log files on others' servers. Thankfully I know I'm not the only one though.
Here's to hoping they correct the obvious problems like notifications, poor photo organizational control, a corrected USB voltage, and a simple central file system (I know, not holding my breath).
Yay let us all surrender our privacy to the cloud... Sometimes I feel like the only one that understands the long term implications cloud based computer has when we allow our content and log files on others' servers. Thankfully I know I'm not the only one though.
Here's to hoping they correct the obvious problems like notifications, poor photo organizational control, a corrected USB voltage, and a simple central file system (I know, not holding my breath).
PlipPlop
Apr 26, 03:26 PM
I wonder if there will be 400k new Android phone a day soon. The power of Android cannot be stopped now.
macindork
Apr 22, 10:24 AM
Citation needed.
Even our Active-Active cluster boxes have redundant power supplies plugged into seperate electrical circuits and wired to independant UPSes, never mind our Active-Passive cluster solutions...
The fact is, most data centers do go for maximum redundancies without single points of failure on the hardware side.
When you have a massively parallele solution with custom software that is built to run on non-redundant hardware like Google built with their search engine, yeah, you can afford to skimp on hardware. They don't care if 1 node out of their 10000 fails, and the software doesn't see the impact. But that 1 specialised custom application is not an industry standard and is far from the norm in building data centers.
The fact is, the Xserve wasn't selling well and it had all the server features. A rackable Mac Pro would sell even less to those Xserve buyers. Forget redundant power supplies if you don't believe in them, just lack of LOM or hot-swap drives is a killer by itself.
And seriously, Thunderbolt ? Host based storage ? Forget that, to get into my data center, you need multi-path Fiber Channel. Thank god at least Apple recognizes that and offers the option on the Mac Pro. Thunderbolt is not a SAN technology and it's not replacing SANs anytime soon. I don't want to manage hundreds of storage arrays for each hosts. I want to manage 1 unified storage array and then present LUNs to my hosts as needed. That way, I get better distribution of my existing storage and can even manage some over-provisionning depending on the technology I use.
A lot of people here never worked with enterprise-grade systems. A rackable Mac Pro would at best be used as someone else stated, to rack along video/audio equipement in a studio. Not to rack into a data center.
I work for a school district and even we go for redundant PS when possible, especially on our ESX boxes. Believe it or not though we are still gigabit to our SAN and while Fiber Channel may be awesome in this scenario do you not think Thunderbolt would have the throughput for say, a DAS box? Then again, we aren't as demanding in our environment. ESX is nice in this way because its all of our servers (well, almost all virtualized) and one Equallogic.
Even our Active-Active cluster boxes have redundant power supplies plugged into seperate electrical circuits and wired to independant UPSes, never mind our Active-Passive cluster solutions...
The fact is, most data centers do go for maximum redundancies without single points of failure on the hardware side.
When you have a massively parallele solution with custom software that is built to run on non-redundant hardware like Google built with their search engine, yeah, you can afford to skimp on hardware. They don't care if 1 node out of their 10000 fails, and the software doesn't see the impact. But that 1 specialised custom application is not an industry standard and is far from the norm in building data centers.
The fact is, the Xserve wasn't selling well and it had all the server features. A rackable Mac Pro would sell even less to those Xserve buyers. Forget redundant power supplies if you don't believe in them, just lack of LOM or hot-swap drives is a killer by itself.
And seriously, Thunderbolt ? Host based storage ? Forget that, to get into my data center, you need multi-path Fiber Channel. Thank god at least Apple recognizes that and offers the option on the Mac Pro. Thunderbolt is not a SAN technology and it's not replacing SANs anytime soon. I don't want to manage hundreds of storage arrays for each hosts. I want to manage 1 unified storage array and then present LUNs to my hosts as needed. That way, I get better distribution of my existing storage and can even manage some over-provisionning depending on the technology I use.
A lot of people here never worked with enterprise-grade systems. A rackable Mac Pro would at best be used as someone else stated, to rack along video/audio equipement in a studio. Not to rack into a data center.
I work for a school district and even we go for redundant PS when possible, especially on our ESX boxes. Believe it or not though we are still gigabit to our SAN and while Fiber Channel may be awesome in this scenario do you not think Thunderbolt would have the throughput for say, a DAS box? Then again, we aren't as demanding in our environment. ESX is nice in this way because its all of our servers (well, almost all virtualized) and one Equallogic.
Vegasman
Apr 18, 04:21 PM
Interesting that Samsung Group is a much larger corporation to Apple, but only have $4.5 billion in cash reserves. While Apple has $50 billion and counting.
Intersting how?
Intersting how?
Multimedia
Aug 7, 06:54 PM
this may be a dumb ? but . . .
as far as the empty drive bay, i already have a pionner 109 superdrive i bought for my old powermac g4. would that be compatible?Latest Pioneer DVR-111 is only $35.
as far as the empty drive bay, i already have a pionner 109 superdrive i bought for my old powermac g4. would that be compatible?Latest Pioneer DVR-111 is only $35.
DakotaGuy
Aug 7, 06:00 PM
About the cube pro or headless iMac
Yes, but quiet. Without fans, if possible.
I'm pretty much sure anything at this performance level will need fans. We are not dealing with a G3 processor anymore.
Anyhow I agree with the people that want a tower in between the iMac and these new Mac Pros. In fact, I would say these new models are probably complete overkill for 80% of Mac users. The 20% that really need this kind of power know who they are. The rest only need it for bragging rights.
I like the iMac it is perfect in my eyes, but many people like to have something that is expandable. Something they can get inside of and change things.
I don't even know if Apple needs a whole new case for that. Just a single dual core processor model would be fine. Either a single Xeon or a single Core 2 Duo. Something priced around $1,500 (+ or - a few dollars) fairly well equipped.
Like I said before these things are beasts almost to the point of overkill except for professionals. Not everyone wants an all-in-one and the Mac Mini is not comparable to a tower in any way. So I think these people's complants are justified.
Yes, but quiet. Without fans, if possible.
I'm pretty much sure anything at this performance level will need fans. We are not dealing with a G3 processor anymore.
Anyhow I agree with the people that want a tower in between the iMac and these new Mac Pros. In fact, I would say these new models are probably complete overkill for 80% of Mac users. The 20% that really need this kind of power know who they are. The rest only need it for bragging rights.
I like the iMac it is perfect in my eyes, but many people like to have something that is expandable. Something they can get inside of and change things.
I don't even know if Apple needs a whole new case for that. Just a single dual core processor model would be fine. Either a single Xeon or a single Core 2 Duo. Something priced around $1,500 (+ or - a few dollars) fairly well equipped.
Like I said before these things are beasts almost to the point of overkill except for professionals. Not everyone wants an all-in-one and the Mac Mini is not comparable to a tower in any way. So I think these people's complants are justified.
ClimbingTheLog
Nov 24, 01:32 AM
They do know whom they're talking about right? I mean they say PC manufacturers yet palm are producing windows mobile pieces of junk. Windows mobile is the biggest piece of shite operating system - it would not be hard to come up with something a lot better (for Apple at least). And the Palm OS is very dear to my heart, but not exactly cutting edge and palm don't even own that anymore.
Palm are washed out, end of story.
To illustrate your point, PalmOne (if that's what the PalmOS Group is called this month...) is doing the aforemnetioned ground-up rewrite of PalmOS now (it should be available to devs soon if they're on schedule) and it's based on Linux. Stable, massively featureful, full PalmOS 5 backward-compatibility, and futureproof.
Yet the hardware arm of Palm has said it might not buy the new sytem from the software arm. I have to imagine this has to do with posturing/playing the good little beoch to Microsoft. We know what happens to companies which partner with Microsoft... that they have proves prima facia that they're unequipped to run a company.
Palm are washed out, end of story.
To illustrate your point, PalmOne (if that's what the PalmOS Group is called this month...) is doing the aforemnetioned ground-up rewrite of PalmOS now (it should be available to devs soon if they're on schedule) and it's based on Linux. Stable, massively featureful, full PalmOS 5 backward-compatibility, and futureproof.
Yet the hardware arm of Palm has said it might not buy the new sytem from the software arm. I have to imagine this has to do with posturing/playing the good little beoch to Microsoft. We know what happens to companies which partner with Microsoft... that they have proves prima facia that they're unequipped to run a company.