inkswamp
Jul 28, 04:34 AM
gnasher729, thanks for taking the time to explain that. I had to read it twice, but I get it.
So it seems that in many ways we're getting the best of the G5 and the best of Intel with the Core 2 Duo chips. As these kinds of things unfold, Apple's decision to switch to Intel chips makes more and more sense. They probably knew where Intel was going. Interesting.
So it seems that in many ways we're getting the best of the G5 and the best of Intel with the Core 2 Duo chips. As these kinds of things unfold, Apple's decision to switch to Intel chips makes more and more sense. They probably knew where Intel was going. Interesting.
kalun
Sep 18, 11:06 PM
In Macbook/Pro are updating in Novemeber...It means Apple is 3 months behind all laptop manufactures...
I seriously doubt that Apple will let that happen, but then again, they are apple, they think differently!
I seriously doubt that Apple will let that happen, but then again, they are apple, they think differently!
Stridder44
Aug 7, 05:24 PM
I'm sure I'm not going to hate it, it's probably gonna be fabulous, but it's not an innovation as Steve advertises it. In fact, not a single thing they showed about Leopard up to now is an innovation. Everything already exists somehow. I'm not complaining about the new features of the OS, but about how they present them. They're all (hopefully) improved versions of existing stuff!!
True, I guess we can only hope that the top secret stuff is top secret for a reason (or because it wasn't ready for the Keynote)
True, I guess we can only hope that the top secret stuff is top secret for a reason (or because it wasn't ready for the Keynote)
63dot
Aug 17, 08:21 PM
Lastly, OS X will always be superior to Windows based on the fact that it's built on a UNIX foundation. If I'm not mistaken, Windows code has just built on top of existing code year-after-year. :mad: I think the OS X was a fresh build.
windows has been, in the past building on existing code for many years and the last incarnation was windows ME, which followed windows 3.x, 95, 98, and 98SE
windows XP is built from windows 2000 which was built from windows NT which was written in what microsoft calls "NT" code, similar to UNIX but not as good, but more stable than the widely used windows 95/98
and os x is superior, and easier to use, than anything from microsoft
windows has been, in the past building on existing code for many years and the last incarnation was windows ME, which followed windows 3.x, 95, 98, and 98SE
windows XP is built from windows 2000 which was built from windows NT which was written in what microsoft calls "NT" code, similar to UNIX but not as good, but more stable than the widely used windows 95/98
and os x is superior, and easier to use, than anything from microsoft
nerveosu
Aug 7, 04:31 PM
The star field background for Spaces was Tacky.
yadmonkey
Aug 11, 03:17 PM
Apple's reasons for being secretive about product releases don't apply to their potential phone because they don't have a current product which they want people to buy in the meantime. In fact, this time around, it'll be advantageous to Apple for people to know it's coming, as they may hold out for one instead of getting something else. Once there is an iPhone, then they will probably be secretive about the next version.
greenstork
Jul 31, 12:49 PM
With the possible introduction of the iPhone, movie downloads, Leopard preview, and true video iPods, in addition to new Mac Pros and possibly other updated Macs with the Core 2 Duos, I'm putting my money on a product announcement tomorrow.
Steve's going to spend the keynote telling developers about what they'll be able to do with Leopard, it is a developers conference after all. I'll go out on a limb and say Mac Pros tomorrow or perhaps at the very least, new Xserves. There is every reason to just wait until August 7, but I'll chance my prediction for an update tomorrow. Who's with me!
Steve's going to spend the keynote telling developers about what they'll be able to do with Leopard, it is a developers conference after all. I'll go out on a limb and say Mac Pros tomorrow or perhaps at the very least, new Xserves. There is every reason to just wait until August 7, but I'll chance my prediction for an update tomorrow. Who's with me!
andrewag
Aug 7, 03:25 PM
Autumn is ages away!! Damn it!!!
Have to admit i'm not very impressed at the moment *cough* but i'm staying optimisitic that when i read more into it and as more information comes out there will be something that grabs my attention.
I'm kinda bummed that even with Vista sneaking up that Aqua hasn't changed much.
*stays optimistic*
Have to admit i'm not very impressed at the moment *cough* but i'm staying optimisitic that when i read more into it and as more information comes out there will be something that grabs my attention.
I'm kinda bummed that even with Vista sneaking up that Aqua hasn't changed much.
*stays optimistic*
~Shard~
Jul 15, 12:37 AM
Personally I go the BTO route at Apple.com for my PowerMacs and downgrade all RAM to the minimum cost and buy my RAM from a trusted 3rd party vendor for a savings of at least 10% if not more so.
Exactly - this is one of the reasons I'm glad Apple is going with a minimum RAM configuration. I'd much rather buy RAM from a reputable 3rd party dealer than have to succumb myself to Apple's significant premiums. Always buy 3rd party, never from Apple. :cool:
I agree as I am waiting for the 8 core model with Leopard while I continue to limp along on the Quad G5.
Are you just going to hold out for a Dunnington PowerMac? :p ;)
Exactly - this is one of the reasons I'm glad Apple is going with a minimum RAM configuration. I'd much rather buy RAM from a reputable 3rd party dealer than have to succumb myself to Apple's significant premiums. Always buy 3rd party, never from Apple. :cool:
I agree as I am waiting for the 8 core model with Leopard while I continue to limp along on the Quad G5.
Are you just going to hold out for a Dunnington PowerMac? :p ;)
HecubusPro
Aug 26, 12:01 PM
The best way to let a company know that you're not satisfied with them is to drop their product and go with a competitor. That's one of the reasons why I'm switching from PC to Mac (not that Bill Gates really cares :) )
The worst way to let a company know you're not satisfied with them is to gripe about it on a web board that they don't read (i.e. not their support site.)
If you're dissatisfied, go with something else. I know that's hard for a lot of the followers of the cult of Mac, but if you're that upset, drop Apple and go with a competitor. If it's not that bad, then we'll just have to deal with it whether it improves or not.
Macs and the Mac OS still are the superior products and system. Hopefully Apple will step up to the challenge of a larger user base sooner than later and fix their broken support system.
The worst way to let a company know you're not satisfied with them is to gripe about it on a web board that they don't read (i.e. not their support site.)
If you're dissatisfied, go with something else. I know that's hard for a lot of the followers of the cult of Mac, but if you're that upset, drop Apple and go with a competitor. If it's not that bad, then we'll just have to deal with it whether it improves or not.
Macs and the Mac OS still are the superior products and system. Hopefully Apple will step up to the challenge of a larger user base sooner than later and fix their broken support system.
waldobushman
Mar 26, 04:40 PM
It's this mentality that makes me smile.
Without knowing any of the details as to what the final shipping version will be, mezmerized (hypnotized ?) by Apple, enthusiasts are ready to pay whatever Apple demands for the product.
I get to sit back without any effort, and watch with delight as they pour the money into Apples coffers. In turn, my vast amount of Apple stock climbs higher & higher as they brag about Apples Billions.
Their blind trust pays me well. Thanks Apple !
Of course one should upgrade to the next OS X release. Apple makes substantial changes in each major release; if not functionally, then in refactoring code for future enhancements. I'll wait until it is known to be stable, and know that the software I use will run under the new version.
Apple is not MS. I stayed with Windows XP until Windows 7 was reasonably stable. The only reason to not move to the new OS would be lack of support for current hardware. Not likely to happen with Lion.
Without knowing any of the details as to what the final shipping version will be, mezmerized (hypnotized ?) by Apple, enthusiasts are ready to pay whatever Apple demands for the product.
I get to sit back without any effort, and watch with delight as they pour the money into Apples coffers. In turn, my vast amount of Apple stock climbs higher & higher as they brag about Apples Billions.
Their blind trust pays me well. Thanks Apple !
Of course one should upgrade to the next OS X release. Apple makes substantial changes in each major release; if not functionally, then in refactoring code for future enhancements. I'll wait until it is known to be stable, and know that the software I use will run under the new version.
Apple is not MS. I stayed with Windows XP until Windows 7 was reasonably stable. The only reason to not move to the new OS would be lack of support for current hardware. Not likely to happen with Lion.
killr_b
Apr 25, 02:13 PM
And the next time somebody calls you, make sure you get their permission to store their phone number. Don't want to record their data without their consent.
They consented to me retaining their data when they didn't block their number before calling. Which is possible and an option. There was no option for this "tracking list" other than a stupid TOS that you can't op out of partially.
They consented to me retaining their data when they didn't block their number before calling. Which is possible and an option. There was no option for this "tracking list" other than a stupid TOS that you can't op out of partially.
KnightWRX
Mar 26, 07:58 AM
2) $129 is too much. This one cracks me up. Apple is bundling a $500 product into the OS (and other OS based servers are far more expensive) and people think $129 is too much?
Apple is bundling a bunch of GUI management tools, akin to Webmin. Was that worth 500$ before ? Nope. Is it more expensive elsewhere ? No. Let's face it, OS X Server was always a toy Unix compared to other big-Iron Unix systems and even to Linux as far as enterprise support goes. Volume management, hello Cupertino ?
Their old archaic way of managing storage is atrocious and no, I don't necessarily want to hook up with a huge array and run Xsan, I just want to intelligently manage my local storage. No, just RAID1 volumes is not enough, I want my volumes logical and independant of my physical volumes. I want to be able to move logical extents to new physical extents without having to take down anything on the box.
And what about those GUI tools ? I can't even just do X11 tunneling over SSH to my desktop to run them, I have either run their Remote Desktop stuff or use a 3rd party solution like VNC... What good are they ? At least make them web based (HP Systems Management Homepage type stuff) and join in to what the rest of the industry got clued into years ago if you don't want to code GUI stuff over X11.
And other OS based servers are not more expensive. Solaris is free (http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/server-storage/solaris/downloads/index.html). I won't even bother linking to all the free distributions of Linux that are ready for the server (Fedora, OpenSuSE, Arch, Ubuntu). The BSDs. Unix server product vendors make their money off of support contracts, not the actual software itself, an arena Apple obviously wants no part of.
All the bits and pieces of server software is mostly re-packaged open source components nowadays anyhow. Most every vendor out there is using Apache and Tomcat in their web-based products, Postfix on the mail side, I've seen a lot of MySQL and PostgreSQL based products (HP uses both, MySQL I've seen in their Output Manager product, PostgreSQL in their System Fault Management, Symantec uses MySQL for Brightmail), and let's not even get into OpenSSL and OpenSSH...
Heck, even Apple does this. OS X server is just a bunch of open source components packaged up together. Apache, OpenLDAP, OpenSSH, ClamAV...
So please, pretty please, with a cherry on top, let's not call OS X Server something worth 500$ and compare it to "others that are more expensive but in actuality are free to download and run and only expensive to get vendor support for".
This rant was longer than it should have been. I love OS X as a desktop OS. I'd pay 129$ for a Lion upgrade with my eyes closed. Best of both worlds. Unix underpinnings and powerful command-line (everything is there!) with integration for all my server products yet fast and easy to setup GUI that is mostly consistent so as to attract a large user base that makes it a good proposition for commercial software vendors to port their packages to. Apple just never got really serious about the server side of it (and lets face it, it's not their business and they obviously want no part of the entreprise market) and I'm not faulting them for that. Let's not be as disingenious as to claim their selling you a 500$ product for 129$ though.
I'm shocked at how many people are so willing to just wave away all the nice under-the-hood changes and improvements that Snow Leopard offers just because there aren't any super-radical UI changes... really disappointing to be honest. Does it really have to be all flashy to be of interest to you? What, the functional side of things doesn't matter any more?
See how this little change in your comment still makes it apply very much to the MacRumors crowd ? ;) The fact is, you're not really dealing with technical people on MacRumors, no matter how much some of them pretend they are. Heck, some of them still believe that HTML is a programming language and that they are web developers because their tools of choice are PhotoShop and Dreamweaver.
Apple is bundling a bunch of GUI management tools, akin to Webmin. Was that worth 500$ before ? Nope. Is it more expensive elsewhere ? No. Let's face it, OS X Server was always a toy Unix compared to other big-Iron Unix systems and even to Linux as far as enterprise support goes. Volume management, hello Cupertino ?
Their old archaic way of managing storage is atrocious and no, I don't necessarily want to hook up with a huge array and run Xsan, I just want to intelligently manage my local storage. No, just RAID1 volumes is not enough, I want my volumes logical and independant of my physical volumes. I want to be able to move logical extents to new physical extents without having to take down anything on the box.
And what about those GUI tools ? I can't even just do X11 tunneling over SSH to my desktop to run them, I have either run their Remote Desktop stuff or use a 3rd party solution like VNC... What good are they ? At least make them web based (HP Systems Management Homepage type stuff) and join in to what the rest of the industry got clued into years ago if you don't want to code GUI stuff over X11.
And other OS based servers are not more expensive. Solaris is free (http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/server-storage/solaris/downloads/index.html). I won't even bother linking to all the free distributions of Linux that are ready for the server (Fedora, OpenSuSE, Arch, Ubuntu). The BSDs. Unix server product vendors make their money off of support contracts, not the actual software itself, an arena Apple obviously wants no part of.
All the bits and pieces of server software is mostly re-packaged open source components nowadays anyhow. Most every vendor out there is using Apache and Tomcat in their web-based products, Postfix on the mail side, I've seen a lot of MySQL and PostgreSQL based products (HP uses both, MySQL I've seen in their Output Manager product, PostgreSQL in their System Fault Management, Symantec uses MySQL for Brightmail), and let's not even get into OpenSSL and OpenSSH...
Heck, even Apple does this. OS X server is just a bunch of open source components packaged up together. Apache, OpenLDAP, OpenSSH, ClamAV...
So please, pretty please, with a cherry on top, let's not call OS X Server something worth 500$ and compare it to "others that are more expensive but in actuality are free to download and run and only expensive to get vendor support for".
This rant was longer than it should have been. I love OS X as a desktop OS. I'd pay 129$ for a Lion upgrade with my eyes closed. Best of both worlds. Unix underpinnings and powerful command-line (everything is there!) with integration for all my server products yet fast and easy to setup GUI that is mostly consistent so as to attract a large user base that makes it a good proposition for commercial software vendors to port their packages to. Apple just never got really serious about the server side of it (and lets face it, it's not their business and they obviously want no part of the entreprise market) and I'm not faulting them for that. Let's not be as disingenious as to claim their selling you a 500$ product for 129$ though.
I'm shocked at how many people are so willing to just wave away all the nice under-the-hood changes and improvements that Snow Leopard offers just because there aren't any super-radical UI changes... really disappointing to be honest. Does it really have to be all flashy to be of interest to you? What, the functional side of things doesn't matter any more?
See how this little change in your comment still makes it apply very much to the MacRumors crowd ? ;) The fact is, you're not really dealing with technical people on MacRumors, no matter how much some of them pretend they are. Heck, some of them still believe that HTML is a programming language and that they are web developers because their tools of choice are PhotoShop and Dreamweaver.
infidel69
Apr 11, 11:57 AM
I don't think so.
Apple will announce iOS 5 at WWDC. It will have a lot of new features people whose contracts are ending will drool over.
They will announce that iOS 5 will be available with the new iPhone 5 in September/October. This will give enough time for developers to make new apps and people to not jump to new contracts, because of what is promised coming soon.
Of course, hackers will get beta versions of iOS 5 installed on their iPhone 3s and 4s to keep them happy, for the summer.
Those new features will have been available on competing phones for months by the time the iphone5 is available. They won't really be new for anybody but Apple. Sure the die hard Apple fans will wait an eternity for the next iphone but alot of people wont.
Apple will announce iOS 5 at WWDC. It will have a lot of new features people whose contracts are ending will drool over.
They will announce that iOS 5 will be available with the new iPhone 5 in September/October. This will give enough time for developers to make new apps and people to not jump to new contracts, because of what is promised coming soon.
Of course, hackers will get beta versions of iOS 5 installed on their iPhone 3s and 4s to keep them happy, for the summer.
Those new features will have been available on competing phones for months by the time the iphone5 is available. They won't really be new for anybody but Apple. Sure the die hard Apple fans will wait an eternity for the next iphone but alot of people wont.
scaredpoet
Apr 7, 11:05 PM
The difference to the customer is zero. Unavailable for purchase either way.
Wrong. Every iPad 2 that was being held back by best Buy could've been sold to someone who ordered at Apple's site online, or at an Apple Store... or perhaps some other retailer who knows better than to artificially restrict supply when there's already a supply issue in evidence.
If this report has any truth to it, Apple should be ashamed to nick-pick over semantics.
If this report has any truth to it, Apple should be applauded for taking action against a retailer that was hoarding stock.
I was considering buying an iPad2 from Best Buy. Glad I didn't. And know i'm reminded not to consider them again in the future.
Every day Apple stores get shipments of iPads....but they don't sell them when the arrive. They hold them for the line that forms the next morning.
Seems odd to me. Like they are purposely making a spectacle in front of the store every morning.
Actually, the point (which was made clear when they started doing this, but you apparently missed) was to avoid a day-long spectacle of people standing in line in front of the store all day in the hopes that a shipment would come in mid day... meanwhile preventing other people from buying other things at the store, and causing disruptions throughout the day in shopping malls for other vendors. If you had seen the 2+ months of lines in front of Apple Stores when the iPhone 4 came out, you'd probably understand better.
Selling the stock (and selling out of it) in the morning and making that clear to people is different from saying "we don't have any" when in fact you do and just would rather not sell them.
Wrong. Every iPad 2 that was being held back by best Buy could've been sold to someone who ordered at Apple's site online, or at an Apple Store... or perhaps some other retailer who knows better than to artificially restrict supply when there's already a supply issue in evidence.
If this report has any truth to it, Apple should be ashamed to nick-pick over semantics.
If this report has any truth to it, Apple should be applauded for taking action against a retailer that was hoarding stock.
I was considering buying an iPad2 from Best Buy. Glad I didn't. And know i'm reminded not to consider them again in the future.
Every day Apple stores get shipments of iPads....but they don't sell them when the arrive. They hold them for the line that forms the next morning.
Seems odd to me. Like they are purposely making a spectacle in front of the store every morning.
Actually, the point (which was made clear when they started doing this, but you apparently missed) was to avoid a day-long spectacle of people standing in line in front of the store all day in the hopes that a shipment would come in mid day... meanwhile preventing other people from buying other things at the store, and causing disruptions throughout the day in shopping malls for other vendors. If you had seen the 2+ months of lines in front of Apple Stores when the iPhone 4 came out, you'd probably understand better.
Selling the stock (and selling out of it) in the morning and making that clear to people is different from saying "we don't have any" when in fact you do and just would rather not sell them.
spicyapple
Sep 12, 11:05 AM
I was going to buy the quad-core Mac Pro 3.0 GHz when it hit the mid-price point, but I think I'll wait out for the dual quad-core (8 core) Mac Pro, instead. :) Hopefully by then, FB-DIMM will be cheap enough to buy 8 GB worth of RAM without breaking the bank.
janstett
Sep 13, 01:37 PM
The OS takes advantage of the extra 4 cores already therefore its ahead of the technology curve, correct? Gee, no innovation here...please move along folks. :rolleyes:
As for using a Dell, sure they could've used that. Would Windows use the extra 4 cores? Highly doubtful. Microsoft has sketchy 64 bit support let alone dual core support; I'm not saying "impossible" but I haven't read jack squat about any version of Windows working well with quad cores. You think those fools (the same idiots who came up with Genuine Advantage) actually optimized their OS to run in an 8 core setup? Please pass along what you're smoking. :rolleyes:
Sorry to burst your reality distortion field, but see my previous post. I ran a dual processor Pentium II NT setup ten years ago and Windows handled it just fine THEN -- back when Apple barely supported it with a hack to its cooperatively-multitasked OS and required specially written applications with special library support.
BTW my 2 year old Smithfield handles 4 processors fine (Dual Core Pentium Extreme with hyperthreading = 4 cores).
The only limit with Windows is they keep the low end XP home to 2 processors on the same die. There is probably an architectural limit on both OSX and XP and if it's not 8 it's 16. It's probably 8.
As for using a Dell, sure they could've used that. Would Windows use the extra 4 cores? Highly doubtful. Microsoft has sketchy 64 bit support let alone dual core support; I'm not saying "impossible" but I haven't read jack squat about any version of Windows working well with quad cores. You think those fools (the same idiots who came up with Genuine Advantage) actually optimized their OS to run in an 8 core setup? Please pass along what you're smoking. :rolleyes:
Sorry to burst your reality distortion field, but see my previous post. I ran a dual processor Pentium II NT setup ten years ago and Windows handled it just fine THEN -- back when Apple barely supported it with a hack to its cooperatively-multitasked OS and required specially written applications with special library support.
BTW my 2 year old Smithfield handles 4 processors fine (Dual Core Pentium Extreme with hyperthreading = 4 cores).
The only limit with Windows is they keep the low end XP home to 2 processors on the same die. There is probably an architectural limit on both OSX and XP and if it's not 8 it's 16. It's probably 8.
ATD
Sep 13, 03:20 PM
A lot of 3d programs will use as many cores as are available when rendering.
And I would say that the next versions of many programs will be better suited for multiple core processors.* They are way too common for software developers to ignore them any longer.
Yep. Not all of the software I use taps all the cores but the 3D renders I do shallow every inch of the CPUs. I have Maya with Mental Ray hooked to 2 computers, a quad and a dual. When I hit render the CPU usage hits 100% on all 6 processors. While having all these processors working is great I have noticed that my quad has lots of pauses in the finder doing simple things, even if nothing is running. Everyone else I know that has a quad has the same issue. I have to believe that there is a trade off for having all these processors, it seems they trip over each other on the small stuff. I hope the next version of OSX will take a look at this, in light of the fact we will be jumping to 8 or more processors.
And I would say that the next versions of many programs will be better suited for multiple core processors.* They are way too common for software developers to ignore them any longer.
Yep. Not all of the software I use taps all the cores but the 3D renders I do shallow every inch of the CPUs. I have Maya with Mental Ray hooked to 2 computers, a quad and a dual. When I hit render the CPU usage hits 100% on all 6 processors. While having all these processors working is great I have noticed that my quad has lots of pauses in the finder doing simple things, even if nothing is running. Everyone else I know that has a quad has the same issue. I have to believe that there is a trade off for having all these processors, it seems they trip over each other on the small stuff. I hope the next version of OSX will take a look at this, in light of the fact we will be jumping to 8 or more processors.
arkitect
Apr 27, 12:02 PM
I'm not a birther. But I would love to know why the certificate looks new when the president is nearly 50. Now I'm about five months older than he, my original birth certificate has faded. The certificate he produced clearly isn't the original. Or if it is the original, it's astoundingly well-preserved.
:rolleyes:
If you'd care to read the stamp at the bottom of the document.
It is a true copy of the record on file in the Hawaiian State Department of Health. Dated 25 April 2011.
I doubt they leave their
records lying about to get faded and illegible so of course a scanned copy is going to look pretty good.
Not that I'd take you as a birther, of course…
Link to a download copy (http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/Sections/NEWS/A_Politics/longformbirthcertificate.pdf)
:rolleyes:
If you'd care to read the stamp at the bottom of the document.
It is a true copy of the record on file in the Hawaiian State Department of Health. Dated 25 April 2011.
I doubt they leave their
records lying about to get faded and illegible so of course a scanned copy is going to look pretty good.
Not that I'd take you as a birther, of course…
Link to a download copy (http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/Sections/NEWS/A_Politics/longformbirthcertificate.pdf)
daneoni
Aug 27, 03:38 PM
One reason Apple switched to Intel was because they couldn't get a G5 in a notebook, they kept saying they would do this for ages so a joke that powerbook G5's coming out Tuesday emerged. This *hilarious* joke has come back for an encore now we are all Intel chips which are quicker than the G5, especially as no-one knows exactly which Tuesday (28th August / 5th September / 12th September) the Merom MB/MBP will arrive.
It isn't the G5 part that's funny about it. The whole point of the joke is to make fun of the Rumor Article --> Wild Speculation --> Guessing the Specific Release Date cycle.
Finally people who grasp it
It isn't the G5 part that's funny about it. The whole point of the joke is to make fun of the Rumor Article --> Wild Speculation --> Guessing the Specific Release Date cycle.
Finally people who grasp it
shamino
Jul 14, 04:17 PM
According to Appleinsider, the Mac Pro would have 2 4x and 1 8x PCIe slots. I see two problems with this. (1) All higher-end PC mobos out now have at least 1 16x slot, some have 2 for SLI/Crossfire.
Re-read the article.
It says there will be three available slots - 2 4x and 1 8x. These are the slots that will not be used by factory-bundled devices.
The bundled ATI X1800/X1900 video card will be in a 16x slot. It probably won't physically fit anywhere else!
(2) Why only 3 slots? PCs have 6 or so (as did the Power Mac 9500 & 9600) with a few regular PCI slots.
4 slots. 3 unused. Not 3 total.
Most PCs don't have more slots, either. Sure you can find a few counter-examples, but 6-slot systems are not common. And with the exception of the PM 9500/9600, Apple has never shipped a 6-slot system. (The Quadra 950 had 5. Everything else shipped with 4 or less.)
Why would Apple shoot itself in the foot like this? The Mac Pro is supposed to be a lot better than all other PCs. It would be nice to have 2 16x lanes for SLI and a few PCI slots for older expansion cards and cards that don't need the bandwidth of PCIe. Besides, this is supposed to be a Pro Mac, which means professional people would want to add a bunch of cards, not just 3. I'd expect a person working in something like movie production would want to have dual graphics cards, a fiber channel card to connect to an xServe RAID and maybe an M-Audio sound card for audio input. Since I don't work in movie production, I wouldn't know, but it would make sense.
You seem to think that a Pro system must have the capability of accepting every hardware device ever invented. (And how do you do this without making the case six feet tall?)
Dual video cards are only used by gamers. I doubt gamers are going to be interested in buying one of these, for the same reason they don't buy other Macs - the software comes out for other platforms first.
As for FC interfaces, they can work fine in any of the available slots. And there's no need for audio cards when you've got S/PDIF optical audio in/out.
Remember also that a studio won't be doing both video and audio editing on the same console! The people who are expert at one job are not going to be expert at the other. And if your studio is so strapped for cash that the different editors have to share a single computer, then you're in pretty sad shape!
I don't think you realize what you're asking for. A system that is capable of performing all possible tasks at once is just unrealistic. Nobody will ever equip a system like that, because no user will have those kinds of requirements.
Even in the PC world, where more slots are common, you almost never find a system that has actually filled all those slots with devices.
Re-read the article.
It says there will be three available slots - 2 4x and 1 8x. These are the slots that will not be used by factory-bundled devices.
The bundled ATI X1800/X1900 video card will be in a 16x slot. It probably won't physically fit anywhere else!
(2) Why only 3 slots? PCs have 6 or so (as did the Power Mac 9500 & 9600) with a few regular PCI slots.
4 slots. 3 unused. Not 3 total.
Most PCs don't have more slots, either. Sure you can find a few counter-examples, but 6-slot systems are not common. And with the exception of the PM 9500/9600, Apple has never shipped a 6-slot system. (The Quadra 950 had 5. Everything else shipped with 4 or less.)
Why would Apple shoot itself in the foot like this? The Mac Pro is supposed to be a lot better than all other PCs. It would be nice to have 2 16x lanes for SLI and a few PCI slots for older expansion cards and cards that don't need the bandwidth of PCIe. Besides, this is supposed to be a Pro Mac, which means professional people would want to add a bunch of cards, not just 3. I'd expect a person working in something like movie production would want to have dual graphics cards, a fiber channel card to connect to an xServe RAID and maybe an M-Audio sound card for audio input. Since I don't work in movie production, I wouldn't know, but it would make sense.
You seem to think that a Pro system must have the capability of accepting every hardware device ever invented. (And how do you do this without making the case six feet tall?)
Dual video cards are only used by gamers. I doubt gamers are going to be interested in buying one of these, for the same reason they don't buy other Macs - the software comes out for other platforms first.
As for FC interfaces, they can work fine in any of the available slots. And there's no need for audio cards when you've got S/PDIF optical audio in/out.
Remember also that a studio won't be doing both video and audio editing on the same console! The people who are expert at one job are not going to be expert at the other. And if your studio is so strapped for cash that the different editors have to share a single computer, then you're in pretty sad shape!
I don't think you realize what you're asking for. A system that is capable of performing all possible tasks at once is just unrealistic. Nobody will ever equip a system like that, because no user will have those kinds of requirements.
Even in the PC world, where more slots are common, you almost never find a system that has actually filled all those slots with devices.
SPUY767
Aug 17, 10:48 AM
I would have thought that the Final Cut Pro benchmark would have really blown away the G5 - not so much, right?
Awesome on FileMaker and I can't wait to see how this stuff runs Adobe PS Natively.
The vague manner in which they described the test, it seems like this may have been more of an I/O problem than a processing one. Can't say for sure.
Awesome on FileMaker and I can't wait to see how this stuff runs Adobe PS Natively.
The vague manner in which they described the test, it seems like this may have been more of an I/O problem than a processing one. Can't say for sure.
BryanBensing
Apr 6, 03:11 PM
Rotfl
apple also sold about 100k ipad's - yesterday.
apple also sold about 100k ipad's - yesterday.
twoodcc
Aug 5, 08:41 PM
NO iPODS OR iPHONE I DON'T CARE FOR THEM ONE JOT
Ok, Stevie J, You can introduce the Mac Pro, the new XServe, and Leopard on Monday.
But please don't deny us our new conroe iMac with x1800XT! Release it on Tuesday!!! And Merom Macbooks and Macbook Pros. You will lose too many sales and potential switchers if you wait until the end of September!
Plus I'll cry.
We beggs of you Stevie J, we wants it, we needs it, it must come to me!
The iMac Ultra is mine. My own. My precious.
Alright, give precious back to master now......
Ok, Stevie J, You can introduce the Mac Pro, the new XServe, and Leopard on Monday.
But please don't deny us our new conroe iMac with x1800XT! Release it on Tuesday!!! And Merom Macbooks and Macbook Pros. You will lose too many sales and potential switchers if you wait until the end of September!
Plus I'll cry.
We beggs of you Stevie J, we wants it, we needs it, it must come to me!
The iMac Ultra is mine. My own. My precious.
Alright, give precious back to master now......
