Tomaz
Aug 7, 07:08 PM
sadly I cant by any more letters to complete a better signature.!
You should at least "by" a "u"... (and maybe an apostrophe) :D
You should at least "by" a "u"... (and maybe an apostrophe) :D
Lollypop
Jul 20, 09:03 AM
Is having more cores more energy efficient than having one big fat ass 24Ghz processor? Maybe thats a factor in the increasing core count.
It depends on the architecture, its possible to have 24 1ghz cores being more power hungry than a single 24ghz processor.
Processor manufacturers are having problems increasing the amount of instructions they can execute, intels latest goal is to have the most amount of instructions executed with the least energy consumtion, but given constraints manufacturers are finding it easier to add a second processor than to scale a single processor to deliver the same performance as two "simpler" processors.
It depends on the architecture, its possible to have 24 1ghz cores being more power hungry than a single 24ghz processor.
Processor manufacturers are having problems increasing the amount of instructions they can execute, intels latest goal is to have the most amount of instructions executed with the least energy consumtion, but given constraints manufacturers are finding it easier to add a second processor than to scale a single processor to deliver the same performance as two "simpler" processors.
Flowbee
Mar 22, 12:56 PM
Blackberry playbook = The IPad 2 killer - you heard it here first.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Yes, and RIM has a history of making excellent touch screen devices.
:rolleyes:
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Yes, and RIM has a history of making excellent touch screen devices.
:rolleyes:
daneoni
Aug 25, 02:58 PM
Well i guess they've become so popular it hurts...literally
Stridder44
Apr 10, 12:28 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
This should be interesting.
This should be interesting.
mwswami
Jul 21, 05:00 PM
One way to get eight cores is to get 4 Mac Minis (just wait for the lowest model to become dual core), stack them up, and put them on a KVM. You get 8 cores, and 4 optical drives for *cheap*. Just a thought.;)
Sorry, I just noticed that the $599 models doesn't have a SuperDrive. BUT going to the $799 model may still make a lot of sense for you. All the work units are independent of each other and hence easily distributable to the Minis form your existing PowerMac. Hey, you could even figure out how to use XGrid for this. I would love to hear from you if you research this further.
Sorry, I just noticed that the $599 models doesn't have a SuperDrive. BUT going to the $799 model may still make a lot of sense for you. All the work units are independent of each other and hence easily distributable to the Minis form your existing PowerMac. Hey, you could even figure out how to use XGrid for this. I would love to hear from you if you research this further.
orthodoc
Nov 28, 08:22 PM
Actually, they do. They also got paid on every blank tape sold when cassettes were big. I think it is crazy for everyone to think that the music industry is greedy when it getting squeezed out of all of their revenue streams. So, Apple makes hundreds of millions off of their back on the itunes site, and a billion off of iPod sales, and they cannot share in the wealth?
It doesn't cost the consumer any more, why wouldn't you want the people who actually make the music you are listening to get compensated?
This debate is stale. People want something for nothing.
Getting squeezed out of a revenue stream is just part of being in business. Either adapt or go away. Nothing entitles them to a portion of the iPod sales. They make their money off of the sale of the actual music they produce. Should they get a portion of each computer sold as well? After all, the computer is used to both download and play the music. Dumb argument.
It doesn't cost the consumer any more, why wouldn't you want the people who actually make the music you are listening to get compensated?
This debate is stale. People want something for nothing.
Getting squeezed out of a revenue stream is just part of being in business. Either adapt or go away. Nothing entitles them to a portion of the iPod sales. They make their money off of the sale of the actual music they produce. Should they get a portion of each computer sold as well? After all, the computer is used to both download and play the music. Dumb argument.
tmofee
Mar 25, 10:44 PM
i wonder if apple will release a version in the app store???
shawnce
Aug 16, 11:21 PM
Still waiting for game benchmarks...
I think you will be happy with rather amazing performance boost you will see from WoW in the near future when running on a Mac Pro (it isn't all a result of just hardware either). Expect other games to improve as well.
I think you will be happy with rather amazing performance boost you will see from WoW in the near future when running on a Mac Pro (it isn't all a result of just hardware either). Expect other games to improve as well.
backdraft
Aug 26, 02:49 PM
Call it what you want but these new MacBooks are crap. Yea there is people who are enjoying theirs without a hitch but look at all the reports of problems. Not once on this forum have we had a flood of problems with a single unit. Apple dropped the ball on this one. Poorly made unit
Apple is now getting their parts from the same bin that PC makers use. Intel = cheap parts. Cheap parts = low quality.
Same thing with the batteries....
OS X can run on PPC and X86. Apple should target X86 to consumers and PPC for pro's.
That $100 million that Apple just wasted on Creative could have meant new supercooled mobile G5's if it would have been pumped into IBM (Power.org). Instead we have these halfbaked Wintel parts to deal with MUCH fewer problems with PowerPC based Mac's.
http://www.appledefects.com/?cat=6
http://www.appledefects.com/wiki/index.php?title=MacBook_Pro
Apple is now getting their parts from the same bin that PC makers use. Intel = cheap parts. Cheap parts = low quality.
Same thing with the batteries....
OS X can run on PPC and X86. Apple should target X86 to consumers and PPC for pro's.
That $100 million that Apple just wasted on Creative could have meant new supercooled mobile G5's if it would have been pumped into IBM (Power.org). Instead we have these halfbaked Wintel parts to deal with MUCH fewer problems with PowerPC based Mac's.
http://www.appledefects.com/?cat=6
http://www.appledefects.com/wiki/index.php?title=MacBook_Pro
JS77
Mar 26, 08:23 AM
I'm really not looking forward to Lion at all. It just seems like a huge step backwards for those of us that use our computers as real computers and not toys. I have an ipad, an iphone and several macs, but they each have specific uses. I don't want my desktop machine to be anything like my ipad, one is for doing real work and doing my daily stuff on, the iOS gadgets are for fun games and browsing mostly.
I LOATH the whole idea of merging OSX and iOS, they shouldn't even be related. I hate how they are ruining expose, I really don't want my stuff groups by app, I want to see every window like it is now. I have no use for "full screen" apps, why would I waste all my screen real estate only showing one thing at a time? I hate the idea of getting programs through the app store on the Mac, I refuse to do that. I hate all the gesture crap going on, sure it's fine for laptop users, but it's of no use to me on my mac pro.
I think all this is just a dumbing down of what is an amazing OS. I don't use my mac with dual displays anything like I'd use an iPad, so why put that crap in there? I just don't like the direction they are taking OSX in general, and I doubt I will upgrade from snow leopard. To me this is very sad news, the day OSX and iOS merge is the day the mac dies.
110% with you buddy.
I LOATH the whole idea of merging OSX and iOS, they shouldn't even be related. I hate how they are ruining expose, I really don't want my stuff groups by app, I want to see every window like it is now. I have no use for "full screen" apps, why would I waste all my screen real estate only showing one thing at a time? I hate the idea of getting programs through the app store on the Mac, I refuse to do that. I hate all the gesture crap going on, sure it's fine for laptop users, but it's of no use to me on my mac pro.
I think all this is just a dumbing down of what is an amazing OS. I don't use my mac with dual displays anything like I'd use an iPad, so why put that crap in there? I just don't like the direction they are taking OSX in general, and I doubt I will upgrade from snow leopard. To me this is very sad news, the day OSX and iOS merge is the day the mac dies.
110% with you buddy.
VanNess
Aug 7, 04:24 PM
By the way, I don't want to say Leopard is a disappointment compared to Vista, obviously we were not shown Leopard in action to any great degree yet. But the keynote (at least the Leopard part) was definitely a disappointment. It hardly scratched the surface of just about everything that everybody was most interested in/concerned about.
http://www.misterbg.org/AppleProductCycle/CryBaby2.gif
http://www.misterbg.org/AppleProductCycle/CryBaby2.gif
BoyBach
Nov 29, 12:56 PM
We might hate to admit it as Apple fans, but Apple needs the labels for the iTunes store to work just as much as the label needs Apple.
Not true. Apple doesn't need the iTunes Store since all iPods are full of stolen music! ;)
Not true. Apple doesn't need the iTunes Store since all iPods are full of stolen music! ;)
Nuvi
Apr 11, 12:50 AM
He's also the guy that headed up Adobe Premiere. Sure, the iMovie revamp wasn't a high point but the guy laid the foundations for two of the three most popular NLE's so he can't be all bad. ;)
Lethal
And if Randy / Apple screws it up then we can always do this (http://www.avid.com/US/specialoffers/fcppromotion?intcmp=AV-HP-S3).
Lethal
And if Randy / Apple screws it up then we can always do this (http://www.avid.com/US/specialoffers/fcppromotion?intcmp=AV-HP-S3).
brianus
Sep 14, 12:56 PM
The server/desktop division with Windows - as with OS X - is one of marketing, not software. Windows "Workstation" and Windows "Server" use the same codebase.
True (today anyway; in the NT era they were indeed separate platforms though. Which brings me to my next point..)
Similarly, if you're one of the "Vista is just XP with a fancy skin" crowd, you've obviously not done much research. The changes in Vista are on par with the scale of changes Apple made to NeXT to get OS X.
I think people who say stuff like that are exhibiting a syndrome common to Mac folk who've never spent any time in the PC world -- they take negative comments they remember regarding versions of Windows or the PC experience from about 5 years back and assume they apply to today. XP, for example, really was for the most part a window-dressing of Windows 2000, but that is not the case for Vista. You see similar statements regarding "blue screens of death", overall system stability, etc, which suggest they haven't seen or used a PC since the late 90s/early 00's.
True (today anyway; in the NT era they were indeed separate platforms though. Which brings me to my next point..)
Similarly, if you're one of the "Vista is just XP with a fancy skin" crowd, you've obviously not done much research. The changes in Vista are on par with the scale of changes Apple made to NeXT to get OS X.
I think people who say stuff like that are exhibiting a syndrome common to Mac folk who've never spent any time in the PC world -- they take negative comments they remember regarding versions of Windows or the PC experience from about 5 years back and assume they apply to today. XP, for example, really was for the most part a window-dressing of Windows 2000, but that is not the case for Vista. You see similar statements regarding "blue screens of death", overall system stability, etc, which suggest they haven't seen or used a PC since the late 90s/early 00's.
littleman23408
Dec 1, 05:27 PM
Sorry, Bandit, I don't have tips for the licenses. I am not that far into them yet.
Took out the Lotus challenge in a snap. The first few times I came close to finishing it, I would have had 1st and beat it, but I either ran into the grass, or the person in first I was about to pass slowed down to much and I nailed him. But, the first time I actually completed the two laps, I was 1st. If someone needs tips I will post it.
Took out the Lotus challenge in a snap. The first few times I came close to finishing it, I would have had 1st and beat it, but I either ran into the grass, or the person in first I was about to pass slowed down to much and I nailed him. But, the first time I actually completed the two laps, I was 1st. If someone needs tips I will post it.
rezenclowd3
Aug 20, 01:16 PM
The Colin McRae series WAS great. With Dirt, its no longer a wold tour, more random than the last McRae game that was made.
I don't care for the hoppers because when I race, I don't want to sprint. I want 10+ laps. 20-30 is good. Also, when in the friggen hell will qualifying be added back into racing games???? That is half the racing experience. NOT fighting from dead last EVERY FING race! Luckily I get my fix there with the F1: Championship Edition for PS3, which really is a pretty damn good racing AND F1 game.
Oh and with Forza 3, oval is fun, which I refuse to watch in reality. BUT these guys running in the hoppers have MODIFIED their stock cars....ugh...
When I race my electric RC cars, our club has started to go to 7minute races. Still not cooking motors. Laps happens to be about 25 right now in stock timing class. I really think its the number of laps that one can do consistently makes racing more fun, not time overall IMO. Those 7minutes seem to last a VERY long time.
I don't care for the hoppers because when I race, I don't want to sprint. I want 10+ laps. 20-30 is good. Also, when in the friggen hell will qualifying be added back into racing games???? That is half the racing experience. NOT fighting from dead last EVERY FING race! Luckily I get my fix there with the F1: Championship Edition for PS3, which really is a pretty damn good racing AND F1 game.
Oh and with Forza 3, oval is fun, which I refuse to watch in reality. BUT these guys running in the hoppers have MODIFIED their stock cars....ugh...
When I race my electric RC cars, our club has started to go to 7minute races. Still not cooking motors. Laps happens to be about 25 right now in stock timing class. I really think its the number of laps that one can do consistently makes racing more fun, not time overall IMO. Those 7minutes seem to last a VERY long time.
RedTomato
Aug 11, 08:26 PM
I probably won't buy a phone without GPS capabilities. I will pay for the option, however.
Why not just ring someone and ask where you are? Or wait for the guy on the seat next to you to ring his girlfriend?
Why not just ring someone and ask where you are? Or wait for the guy on the seat next to you to ring his girlfriend?
littleman23408
Dec 7, 08:10 AM
I settled for 2nd on that test. Gold isnt worth the aggravation.
I found a youtube vid of a guy showing him get gold. I am getting oh so close to mimicing him and getting 1st. I almost decided to stay up all night last night if I had to, but then I chose otherwise. Maybe I will try a couple more times later tonight.
I found a youtube vid of a guy showing him get gold. I am getting oh so close to mimicing him and getting 1st. I almost decided to stay up all night last night if I had to, but then I chose otherwise. Maybe I will try a couple more times later tonight.
ergle2
Sep 14, 08:09 PM
Not sure about beyond 8 which can be paired into a 16 core Mac. Perhaps. Too far out to tell although it is casually mentioned in the roadmap.
New micro-arch -- Nehalem is due 2008.
New micro-arch -- Nehalem is due 2008.
bigmc6000
Jul 27, 09:59 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...
And about the WWDC, I think it is possible for Merom laptops, Core 2 iMacs, Leopard Preview, Mac Pro's and possibly Movie service. However, I think the movie thing could be replaced by a larger capacity nano but that's about it. Only 1, at most, iTunes/iPod announcement with all the Mac stuff that should be addressed.
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...
And about the WWDC, I think it is possible for Merom laptops, Core 2 iMacs, Leopard Preview, Mac Pro's and possibly Movie service. However, I think the movie thing could be replaced by a larger capacity nano but that's about it. Only 1, at most, iTunes/iPod announcement with all the Mac stuff that should be addressed.
milo
Aug 17, 09:21 AM
You're right. I'm extremely unimpressed that the fastest xeon only days old is actually slower mhz for mhz than a G5 that is pushing 4 year old technology. Really sad.
But overall it's not. Whenever you change chips, you'll probably always find a benchmark that favors the old one. Just because one app isn't faster doesn't mean the new chip is slower.
But it's not faster. Slower actually than the G5 at some apps. What's everyone looking at anyway? I'm pretty unimpressed. Other than Adobe's usage of cache (AE is a cache lover and will use all of it, hence the faster performance).
But the actual xeon processors are only as fast as the G5 processors. Look at the average specs... the 2.66 machines are only a teeny bit faster than the G5s except in a few apps like filemaker. But not in the biggies like Final Cut Pro where it actually appears that mhz for mhz the G5 is a faster machine hands down!
What are you talking about? The xeon is faster in every native benchmark, the only exception is one render where the slower xeon tied the G5. If you do indeed look at the average specs, the xeons blow away the G5.
Looks like the Xeons got killed by the G5 in Word in their tests.
Because it's running under rosetta, ram has nothing to do with it.
It's odd, seeing as Mac's are still the choice for many musicians that some kind of specs are never given that would be of interest to musicians. The released figures don't do much for me. I'd like to know the polyphony improvements say for Kontakt under both systems in Digital Performer 5.
There have been Logic benchmarks elsewhere, and they're pretty impressive. 1.4-1.5x improvements, pretty nice considering how fast the quad is already for audio plugins.
But overall it's not. Whenever you change chips, you'll probably always find a benchmark that favors the old one. Just because one app isn't faster doesn't mean the new chip is slower.
But it's not faster. Slower actually than the G5 at some apps. What's everyone looking at anyway? I'm pretty unimpressed. Other than Adobe's usage of cache (AE is a cache lover and will use all of it, hence the faster performance).
But the actual xeon processors are only as fast as the G5 processors. Look at the average specs... the 2.66 machines are only a teeny bit faster than the G5s except in a few apps like filemaker. But not in the biggies like Final Cut Pro where it actually appears that mhz for mhz the G5 is a faster machine hands down!
What are you talking about? The xeon is faster in every native benchmark, the only exception is one render where the slower xeon tied the G5. If you do indeed look at the average specs, the xeons blow away the G5.
Looks like the Xeons got killed by the G5 in Word in their tests.
Because it's running under rosetta, ram has nothing to do with it.
It's odd, seeing as Mac's are still the choice for many musicians that some kind of specs are never given that would be of interest to musicians. The released figures don't do much for me. I'd like to know the polyphony improvements say for Kontakt under both systems in Digital Performer 5.
There have been Logic benchmarks elsewhere, and they're pretty impressive. 1.4-1.5x improvements, pretty nice considering how fast the quad is already for audio plugins.
Daremo
Apr 19, 01:28 PM
The sales numbers are impressive, but not surprising.
tyroja00
Sep 19, 11:05 AM
My demanding you to give me a reason has about the same weight as all the people in this thread (and many others) demanding Apple provide them with the machine they think they needed yesterday.
Except we are going to pay Apple a lot of money. What are you paying me?
Except we are going to pay Apple a lot of money. What are you paying me?
