al2o3cr
Apr 25, 01:43 PM
Hope nobody tells these lawyers that anybody who can access the location data can also get at the address book and text messages - OMG PRIVACY VIOLATION!
HecubusPro
Aug 26, 04:22 PM
same here! I just hope Sept 5th or sooner:D
I would hope within the first few weeks of September at least. I shipments Apple was supposed to receive from overseas will reportedly hit on the 5th of September. After that, it would seem that all Apple has to do is ship products to the resellers and their online warehouses and begin selling them. I'm thinking the merom MBP's will start shipping to coincide with the Paris Expo next month though.
Still, it's getting close. I went ahead and dropped some cash on my first .mac account/software. I just can't wait to start using it on my new merom MPB 2.33ghz 17".:cool:
I would hope within the first few weeks of September at least. I shipments Apple was supposed to receive from overseas will reportedly hit on the 5th of September. After that, it would seem that all Apple has to do is ship products to the resellers and their online warehouses and begin selling them. I'm thinking the merom MBP's will start shipping to coincide with the Paris Expo next month though.
Still, it's getting close. I went ahead and dropped some cash on my first .mac account/software. I just can't wait to start using it on my new merom MPB 2.33ghz 17".:cool:
SiliconAddict
Aug 7, 07:50 PM
Not very innovative so-far. The Intel change took the OS's soul and the inspiration.
Give me a fracking break. Intel has NOTHING to do with this. NOTHING. I wish PPC fanbois would just give it up. Soon they will be claiming that ozone depletion is due too Intel chips.
does upgrading to leopard cost money for tiger users?
Yes.
Give me a fracking break. Intel has NOTHING to do with this. NOTHING. I wish PPC fanbois would just give it up. Soon they will be claiming that ozone depletion is due too Intel chips.
does upgrading to leopard cost money for tiger users?
Yes.
bradc
Jul 27, 11:19 AM
"...Core 2 Duo chips need less electricity, drawing just 65 watts compared to the Pentium 4�s 95 watts and Pentium D�s 130 watts"
Good Lord - does anybody know what the G5 is? I'd imagine that the elaborate cooling system in the current G5 towers probably won't be needed it it's running anything like the D's...
Don't ask! Hahahaha, the G5's run hot, I'd hate to know how much they're sucking but with a 600W power supply...it's a lot;)
Good Lord - does anybody know what the G5 is? I'd imagine that the elaborate cooling system in the current G5 towers probably won't be needed it it's running anything like the D's...
Don't ask! Hahahaha, the G5's run hot, I'd hate to know how much they're sucking but with a 600W power supply...it's a lot;)
Chrisse
Aug 5, 05:10 PM
No MacRumors IRC channel?
wmmk
Jul 14, 06:07 PM
the question still remains--will the powermacs be able to use standard, off the shelf, pc video cards?
i know that you couldn't do so in the power architecture due to the bios irregularities. now that they're using efi, does this still mean we have to buy mac based cards? because that's really the question nobody seems to ask and nobody seems to have an answer for.
what this new mac workstation will mean is the chance to upgrade your macs based on commodity parts. no more mac tax for hardware. i remember when the radeon 9700 was king, the price was around $299 for pc version and $399 for mac version.
think about this, the ability to upgrade processor, video card, and sound card without having to pay the apple tax.
that's what it really comes down to. the speculative "good" version of the mac pro has a so-so video card, but it's not really worth the $600 more just to get a 1800, i'd rather just get the 1600 and upgrade on my own.
oh, btw, i did some of my own investigations and found this site:
http://www.nvidia.com/object/7_series_techspecs.html
which may mean that the standard cards are compatible with mac os x now.
i'v actually heard that with a normal PC, you can make almost any NVIDIA card compatible with mac, but it takes a bit of geekery and hackery.
i know that you couldn't do so in the power architecture due to the bios irregularities. now that they're using efi, does this still mean we have to buy mac based cards? because that's really the question nobody seems to ask and nobody seems to have an answer for.
what this new mac workstation will mean is the chance to upgrade your macs based on commodity parts. no more mac tax for hardware. i remember when the radeon 9700 was king, the price was around $299 for pc version and $399 for mac version.
think about this, the ability to upgrade processor, video card, and sound card without having to pay the apple tax.
that's what it really comes down to. the speculative "good" version of the mac pro has a so-so video card, but it's not really worth the $600 more just to get a 1800, i'd rather just get the 1600 and upgrade on my own.
oh, btw, i did some of my own investigations and found this site:
http://www.nvidia.com/object/7_series_techspecs.html
which may mean that the standard cards are compatible with mac os x now.
i'v actually heard that with a normal PC, you can make almost any NVIDIA card compatible with mac, but it takes a bit of geekery and hackery.
ThunderSkunk
Apr 25, 03:14 PM
http://thenextweb.com/us/2011/04/20/us-police-can-copy-your-iphones-contents-in-under-two-minutes/
Holy ****.
We had stuff like this when I was in the service, a but its use was strictly observed across and up the chain of command, and we're held accountable for each use. Civilian officers with little or no supervision getting their hands on this level of equipment scares the %^$& out of me.
Holy ****.
We had stuff like this when I was in the service, a but its use was strictly observed across and up the chain of command, and we're held accountable for each use. Civilian officers with little or no supervision getting their hands on this level of equipment scares the %^$& out of me.
Porco
Aug 6, 06:25 PM
Why sell a new keyboard for front row, if you can sell a new Mac to the same person? Including the sensor in the Cinema Displays would enable Apple to sell more of their display, on which they probably have a very good profit margin (when you compare to other manufacturers).
Because people would buy a new keyboard for some extra functionality; they wouldn't dump their entire system for one feature. And besides, my idea was a solution to the Mac Pro specific issue - therefore it would have to be available as a replacement part for the Mac Pro, making it sensible as an optional purchase for every mac owner. But regardless of that, it would be included with the new computer! If all the other macs have an integrated IR sensor, are you suggesting Apple will want people to buy an iMac rather than a Mac Pro? Really? Also, everyone needs a keyboard, it's on the low-end of the price scale as an upgradable item and it would be easy to add IR.
They could also just put it into the tower. Even if that is under the desk, it might not be that much of a problem. In my experience the sensor responds very nicely to the remote even if the line of sight between them is somewhat obstructed.
They could, but the keyboard is, I would have thought, much much more likely to be in a predictably close position to the screen in the vast majority of cases.
However the best solution I think, was suggested by someone on these forums. I don't know, whether it has been quoted here already, because I did not go through all the messages. This poster suggested to combine the sensor with an external iSight. That could be connected to any monitor and would probably have a good IR reception because of beeing on top of the monitor and thus very exposed.
Not everyone needs or wants an external iSight. Everyone uses a keyboard. I think my solution works not only because of the exposure/position, but also in the ubiquity of the item. The IR sensors in the other machines are on the machines themselves because that's where it makes sense - but they are there, accessible, whatever your set-up is, wherever you put it (with the possible exception of the mini I guess if you really wanted that hidden away). The keyboard solution would just take the most predictably accessible (and standard) element of the system for a Mac Pro and puts the IR there - a display is optional, an external iSight is optional, the keyboard that comes with every machine - well that's standard.
Because people would buy a new keyboard for some extra functionality; they wouldn't dump their entire system for one feature. And besides, my idea was a solution to the Mac Pro specific issue - therefore it would have to be available as a replacement part for the Mac Pro, making it sensible as an optional purchase for every mac owner. But regardless of that, it would be included with the new computer! If all the other macs have an integrated IR sensor, are you suggesting Apple will want people to buy an iMac rather than a Mac Pro? Really? Also, everyone needs a keyboard, it's on the low-end of the price scale as an upgradable item and it would be easy to add IR.
They could also just put it into the tower. Even if that is under the desk, it might not be that much of a problem. In my experience the sensor responds very nicely to the remote even if the line of sight between them is somewhat obstructed.
They could, but the keyboard is, I would have thought, much much more likely to be in a predictably close position to the screen in the vast majority of cases.
However the best solution I think, was suggested by someone on these forums. I don't know, whether it has been quoted here already, because I did not go through all the messages. This poster suggested to combine the sensor with an external iSight. That could be connected to any monitor and would probably have a good IR reception because of beeing on top of the monitor and thus very exposed.
Not everyone needs or wants an external iSight. Everyone uses a keyboard. I think my solution works not only because of the exposure/position, but also in the ubiquity of the item. The IR sensors in the other machines are on the machines themselves because that's where it makes sense - but they are there, accessible, whatever your set-up is, wherever you put it (with the possible exception of the mini I guess if you really wanted that hidden away). The keyboard solution would just take the most predictably accessible (and standard) element of the system for a Mac Pro and puts the IR there - a display is optional, an external iSight is optional, the keyboard that comes with every machine - well that's standard.
notjustjay
Sep 19, 01:04 PM
It's more along the lines of "We see all these other laptop manufacturers releasing new CPU's in their products. We see that Apple has already recieved these chips. We feel that it is extremely likely that Apple's laptop lines will be updated with these CPU's, and soon. Finally, We don't want to buy a product that will be outdated in just a month or two.
...
As for "needing it yesterday", that is a product of the hype; but I think, for the most part, we feel that the laptops could have been ready earlier - and certainly would have liked Apple to have come out and said "MBP updates soonish" (of course that makes no business sense for clearing inventory though).
Absolutely. I don't disagree with you one bit. i'm waiting patiently too, as I'm one of those that could stand for a new machine -- my 1 GHz Powerbook G4 is starting to feel sluggish for dealing with the volumes of photos and video I throw at it. It is, however, still doing the same job as it did 3 years ago when I bought it, so my desire for a new machine is tempered by the fact that I don't realistically NEED a new machine in the immediate future.
There are those who post in these threads who, without having any kind of photo as a reference, I imagine are sitting at their keyboards frothing at the mouth! These are the folks who exclaim that they NEED 64-bit computing RIGHT NOW, 32-bit is CRAP and they just can't stand it any longer, Yonah SUCKS now that Merom is out, and Apple BY GOLLY had better deliver or they're buying a Dell tomorrow. You'd think that all the previous-generation machines suddenly stopped working or slowed down when Merom was announced.
...
As for "needing it yesterday", that is a product of the hype; but I think, for the most part, we feel that the laptops could have been ready earlier - and certainly would have liked Apple to have come out and said "MBP updates soonish" (of course that makes no business sense for clearing inventory though).
Absolutely. I don't disagree with you one bit. i'm waiting patiently too, as I'm one of those that could stand for a new machine -- my 1 GHz Powerbook G4 is starting to feel sluggish for dealing with the volumes of photos and video I throw at it. It is, however, still doing the same job as it did 3 years ago when I bought it, so my desire for a new machine is tempered by the fact that I don't realistically NEED a new machine in the immediate future.
There are those who post in these threads who, without having any kind of photo as a reference, I imagine are sitting at their keyboards frothing at the mouth! These are the folks who exclaim that they NEED 64-bit computing RIGHT NOW, 32-bit is CRAP and they just can't stand it any longer, Yonah SUCKS now that Merom is out, and Apple BY GOLLY had better deliver or they're buying a Dell tomorrow. You'd think that all the previous-generation machines suddenly stopped working or slowed down when Merom was announced.
Hamish
Apr 11, 10:36 PM
Looking forward to the new final cut studio.
if apple is smart they will allow access to individual parts of the suite
as seperate Mac App Store downloads.
If it were possible to buy apple Motion on it's own I think many existing After Effects would be very happy to have something else to play with that can take adavantage of their hardware and deliver some fun realtime workflows...
it could be a halo product for such editors as well to end up using the whole suite...
I bought motion for 300 when it used to be sold individually, and I have spent a tonne of money since simply because I love that product.
do it apple. please.
if apple is smart they will allow access to individual parts of the suite
as seperate Mac App Store downloads.
If it were possible to buy apple Motion on it's own I think many existing After Effects would be very happy to have something else to play with that can take adavantage of their hardware and deliver some fun realtime workflows...
it could be a halo product for such editors as well to end up using the whole suite...
I bought motion for 300 when it used to be sold individually, and I have spent a tonne of money since simply because I love that product.
do it apple. please.
arkmannj
Aug 5, 08:09 PM
I am excited for 10.5, mac pros, displays, core 2 duo, etc...
but for the practicle side of my wallet I feel like I've been waiting FOREVER for an airport upgrade. (as in, an upgrade to the airport extreme, express) I'm not expecting faster speeds, but it would be very nice if they could add features like
* the ability for USB 2.0 / firewire external storage devices to connect, or even like 2GB built in storage for shared files.
* streaming video
* etc :-)
but for the practicle side of my wallet I feel like I've been waiting FOREVER for an airport upgrade. (as in, an upgrade to the airport extreme, express) I'm not expecting faster speeds, but it would be very nice if they could add features like
* the ability for USB 2.0 / firewire external storage devices to connect, or even like 2GB built in storage for shared files.
* streaming video
* etc :-)
DoFoT9
Aug 8, 07:12 PM
i don't know, i still think the Gran Turismo series is the best as far as real driving simulation. by far. and the number of copies sold backs that up
given that its been out for 10 years, i think it would have sold a fair few no matter what :rolleyes: i preferred GT3 A-Spec over anything else.
yeah i still might pre-order the special edition one. i'm not sure yet
do we have an official date yet? or will that be pushed back too :D
given that its been out for 10 years, i think it would have sold a fair few no matter what :rolleyes: i preferred GT3 A-Spec over anything else.
yeah i still might pre-order the special edition one. i'm not sure yet
do we have an official date yet? or will that be pushed back too :D
HecubusPro
Sep 19, 09:20 AM
It's not going to happen today. No worries. We have Photokina ahead of us.
janstett
Oct 23, 11:44 AM
Unfortunately not many multithreaded apps - yet. For a long time most of the multi-threaded apps were just a select few pro level things. 3D/Visualization software, CAD, database systems, etc.. Those of us who had multiprocessor systems bought them because we had a specific software in mind or group of software applications that could take advantage of multiple processors. As current CPU manufacturing processes started hitting a wall right around the 3GHz mark, chip makers started to transition to multiple CPU cores to boost power - makes sense. Software developers have been lazy for years, just riding the wave of ever-increasing MHz. Now the multi-core CPUs are here and the software is behind as many applications need to have serious re-writes done in order to take advantage of multiple processors. Intel tried to get a jump on this with their HT (Hyper Threading) implementation that essentially simulated dual-cores on a CPU by way of two virtual CPUs. Software developers didn't exactly jump on this and warm up to it. But I also don't think the software industry truly believed that CPUs would go multi-core on a mass scale so fast... Intel and AMD both said they would, don't know why the software industry doubted. Intel and AMD are uncommonly good about telling the truth about upcoming products. Both will be shipping quad-core CPU offerings by year's end.
What you're saying isn't entirely true and may give some people the wrong idea.
First, a multicore system is helpful when running multiple CPU-intensive single-threaded applications on a proper multitasking operating system. For example, right now I'm ripping CDs on iTunes. One processor gets used a lot and the other three are idle. I could be using this CPU power for another app.
The reality is that to take advantage of multiple cores, you had to take advantage of threads. Now, I was doing this in my programs with OS/2 back in 1992. I've been writing multithreaded apps my entire career. But writing a threaded application requires thought and work, so naturally many programmers are lazy and avoid threads. Plus it is harder to debug and synchronize a multithreaded application. Windows and Linux people have been doing this since the stone age, and Windows/Linux have had usable multiprocessor systems for more than a decade (it didn't start with Hyperthreading). I had a dual-processor 486 running NT 3.5 circa 1995. It's just been more of an optional "cool trick" to write threaded applications that the timid programmer avoids. Also it's worth noting that it's possible to go overboard with excessive threading and that leads to problems (context switching, thrashing, synchronization, etc).
Now, on the Mac side, OS 9 and below couldn't properly support SMP and it required a hacked version of the OS and a special version of the application. So the history of the Mac world has been, until recently with OSX, to avoid threading and multiprocessing unless specially called for and then at great pain to do so.
So it goes back to getting developers to write threaded applications. Now that we're getting to 4 and 8 core systems, it also presents a problem.
The classic reason to create a thread is to prevent the GUI from locking up while processing. Let's say I write a GUI program that has a calculation that takes 20 seconds. If I do it the lazy way, the GUI will lock up for 20 seconds because it can't process window messages during that time. If I write a thread, the calculation can take place there and leave the GUI thread able to process messages and keep the application alive, and then signal the other thread when it's done.
But now with more than 4 or 8 cores, the problem is how do you break up the work? 9 women can't have a baby in a month. So if your process is still serialized, you still have to wait with 1 processor doing all the work and the others sitting idle. For example, if you encode a video, it is a very serialized process. I hear some work has been done to simultaneously encode macroblocks in parallel, but getting 8 processors to chew on a single video is an interesting problem.
What you're saying isn't entirely true and may give some people the wrong idea.
First, a multicore system is helpful when running multiple CPU-intensive single-threaded applications on a proper multitasking operating system. For example, right now I'm ripping CDs on iTunes. One processor gets used a lot and the other three are idle. I could be using this CPU power for another app.
The reality is that to take advantage of multiple cores, you had to take advantage of threads. Now, I was doing this in my programs with OS/2 back in 1992. I've been writing multithreaded apps my entire career. But writing a threaded application requires thought and work, so naturally many programmers are lazy and avoid threads. Plus it is harder to debug and synchronize a multithreaded application. Windows and Linux people have been doing this since the stone age, and Windows/Linux have had usable multiprocessor systems for more than a decade (it didn't start with Hyperthreading). I had a dual-processor 486 running NT 3.5 circa 1995. It's just been more of an optional "cool trick" to write threaded applications that the timid programmer avoids. Also it's worth noting that it's possible to go overboard with excessive threading and that leads to problems (context switching, thrashing, synchronization, etc).
Now, on the Mac side, OS 9 and below couldn't properly support SMP and it required a hacked version of the OS and a special version of the application. So the history of the Mac world has been, until recently with OSX, to avoid threading and multiprocessing unless specially called for and then at great pain to do so.
So it goes back to getting developers to write threaded applications. Now that we're getting to 4 and 8 core systems, it also presents a problem.
The classic reason to create a thread is to prevent the GUI from locking up while processing. Let's say I write a GUI program that has a calculation that takes 20 seconds. If I do it the lazy way, the GUI will lock up for 20 seconds because it can't process window messages during that time. If I write a thread, the calculation can take place there and leave the GUI thread able to process messages and keep the application alive, and then signal the other thread when it's done.
But now with more than 4 or 8 cores, the problem is how do you break up the work? 9 women can't have a baby in a month. So if your process is still serialized, you still have to wait with 1 processor doing all the work and the others sitting idle. For example, if you encode a video, it is a very serialized process. I hear some work has been done to simultaneously encode macroblocks in parallel, but getting 8 processors to chew on a single video is an interesting problem.
bousozoku
Aug 7, 05:27 PM
I'm glad that Leopard will be completely (that's what they say, at least) 64-bit. I'm not sure why it's important to go on about the applications as if they were important to the operating system itself. Increased integration like what was displayed would cause the anti-trust machine to whip into action, if it was Microsoft instead of Apple.
Time Machine is not exactly revolutionary, considering that there were a few 3rd party products available--Rewind comes to mind--that journaled changes and allowed them to be restored. Still, it should stop the various threads "I accidentally deleted..." :)
Hopefully, the features not mentioned will include a better kernel that actually performs well. It would be nice to see operating system benchmarks that don't make me cringe when I look at the Mac OS X results.
Xcode version 3.0 looks good but they still haven't provided many details.
Time Machine is not exactly revolutionary, considering that there were a few 3rd party products available--Rewind comes to mind--that journaled changes and allowed them to be restored. Still, it should stop the various threads "I accidentally deleted..." :)
Hopefully, the features not mentioned will include a better kernel that actually performs well. It would be nice to see operating system benchmarks that don't make me cringe when I look at the Mac OS X results.
Xcode version 3.0 looks good but they still haven't provided many details.
troop231
Mar 22, 12:56 PM
I agree.
But who in their right minds would want to own something called a Playbook? :o
Hugh Hefner of course.. :cool:
But who in their right minds would want to own something called a Playbook? :o
Hugh Hefner of course.. :cool:
Macnoviz
Jul 20, 12:14 PM
Sorry I don't see that happening... Apple has basically always given developers a few months (to several months) lead time with the next major version of Mac OS X. That has taken place yet... so I don't see it being released at WWDC 2006.
I thought we were talking MWSF here, in January, so that's on par with expectations
I thought we were talking MWSF here, in January, so that's on par with expectations
Nuvi
Apr 11, 12:07 PM
So wouldn't that make the recent pushes with iMovie, particularly on the iOS redundant? That' doesn't seem a very smart use of resources or use of branding...
Really? Had lunch with SJ lately? Care to share more?
I guess time will tell. I remember reading comments like yours from industry "experts" when I first started playing around with PageMaker 1.0 on my school's Mac Plus - dismissing it as a toy and not a serious or professional tool.
Perhaps "old timers" problems like yours is that you have been in your box for so long that you can't possibly imagine how it could be different and useful? The panel touched on that - I think it was in Part 2. It was fun to see who embraced that notation and which members of the panel dismissed it (either verbally or by their body language).
Final thought: evolve or die; be prepared to get out of your comfort zone. Heck, you might even like it!
iMovie on Mac or iOS are not about creating a movie for a paying customer. They are all about sharing your personal moments with those who are more or less interested about it. FCP is all about putting food on the table, selling the story to those who have never heard about it. Its all about art of story telling.
Regarding the usefulness of FCP to Apple; times have changed a lot. When FCP first came out Apple was trying its best to find its way in Win dominated market place. Enter the FCP, pro editing at fraction of price of competition. Today Apple is doing extremely strong in consumer market place so cornering hard market like moving image isn't promissing.*
Regarding changes anything Apple will bring is small change compared to continues changes in the industry. However, change for the sake of it is meaningless or sometimes very much counter productive. Regarding FCP, Apple NEEDS to make huge changes however these changes need add on productivity and not making it some semi half way creation trying to serve advanced consumers and professionals at same time. Apple needs to bring it now!
Really? Had lunch with SJ lately? Care to share more?
I guess time will tell. I remember reading comments like yours from industry "experts" when I first started playing around with PageMaker 1.0 on my school's Mac Plus - dismissing it as a toy and not a serious or professional tool.
Perhaps "old timers" problems like yours is that you have been in your box for so long that you can't possibly imagine how it could be different and useful? The panel touched on that - I think it was in Part 2. It was fun to see who embraced that notation and which members of the panel dismissed it (either verbally or by their body language).
Final thought: evolve or die; be prepared to get out of your comfort zone. Heck, you might even like it!
iMovie on Mac or iOS are not about creating a movie for a paying customer. They are all about sharing your personal moments with those who are more or less interested about it. FCP is all about putting food on the table, selling the story to those who have never heard about it. Its all about art of story telling.
Regarding the usefulness of FCP to Apple; times have changed a lot. When FCP first came out Apple was trying its best to find its way in Win dominated market place. Enter the FCP, pro editing at fraction of price of competition. Today Apple is doing extremely strong in consumer market place so cornering hard market like moving image isn't promissing.*
Regarding changes anything Apple will bring is small change compared to continues changes in the industry. However, change for the sake of it is meaningless or sometimes very much counter productive. Regarding FCP, Apple NEEDS to make huge changes however these changes need add on productivity and not making it some semi half way creation trying to serve advanced consumers and professionals at same time. Apple needs to bring it now!
rmwebs
Mar 26, 04:43 AM
Looks like they are going for another Snow Leopard (aka disappointingly small) release.
Not sure about what everyone else wants out of the OS, but I certainly don't want ANY of the iOS style features they have announced. I can see launchpad becoming another unused feature (I'm looking at you dashboard!) that people forget about.
I guess we'll know just how committed Apple are to the Mac after this. We already know they couldn't give a damn about the hardware side of the business any more. The final stab in the back would be XCode for windows.
I really do fear that within 3-5 years Apple will have a tiny mac lineup with all focus on iOS. No more yearly OS updates, no more updates to iLife, etc. They make peanuts from it compared to the iOS income.
Not sure about what everyone else wants out of the OS, but I certainly don't want ANY of the iOS style features they have announced. I can see launchpad becoming another unused feature (I'm looking at you dashboard!) that people forget about.
I guess we'll know just how committed Apple are to the Mac after this. We already know they couldn't give a damn about the hardware side of the business any more. The final stab in the back would be XCode for windows.
I really do fear that within 3-5 years Apple will have a tiny mac lineup with all focus on iOS. No more yearly OS updates, no more updates to iLife, etc. They make peanuts from it compared to the iOS income.
shawnce
Jul 14, 11:20 PM
AARGH MY EARS!
Whoever came up with that abomination should be SHOT! UGH! they could have put together a nice little slideshow or whatever...but no, they had to make some stupid video with a horrible song i'll NEVER be able to get out of my head!
School House Rock - "Oh, I'm just a bill, a lonely old bill, sitting here on Capitol Hill" (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1569494088/002-8458341-9463244?redirect=true)
Whoever came up with that abomination should be SHOT! UGH! they could have put together a nice little slideshow or whatever...but no, they had to make some stupid video with a horrible song i'll NEVER be able to get out of my head!
School House Rock - "Oh, I'm just a bill, a lonely old bill, sitting here on Capitol Hill" (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1569494088/002-8458341-9463244?redirect=true)
whatever
Jul 20, 12:10 PM
Hmm, would make for an awesome rev b. MacPro on or around MWSF (probably "around" as MWSF is really a big consumer event).
Bring on the serious grunt!!
I hate to burst everyone's bubble, but Kentsfield will not be appearing in any of the Pro machines for some time.
Apple will be using them exclusively in the Xserves, at for the most part of 2007. This will finally give Apple another way to distinguish their server line from their pro line.
Bring on the serious grunt!!
I hate to burst everyone's bubble, but Kentsfield will not be appearing in any of the Pro machines for some time.
Apple will be using them exclusively in the Xserves, at for the most part of 2007. This will finally give Apple another way to distinguish their server line from their pro line.
ugp
Jun 23, 12:41 PM
If the whole Region down here for Florida only got 139 I doubt Radio Shack got many iPhone 4s at all. Either that or all of them went to the huge Markets like New York and other areas like such.
Multimedia
Jul 21, 12:51 PM
All I will say is that you are not a typical user. You are not even close to typical.
OK. So maybe you need ten thousand cores and three million gigabytes of RAM. Don't think for an instant that the majority of the world shares your requirements.I may not be typical today, but in future a majority of Western Pop-Culture type users - not the world - will want to be able to archive HDTV to mp4 off their original recordings in a flash and only more cores will solve that problem.
And I never said anything about needing ten thousand cores etc. I think it is quite realistic for the majority of Western Pop-Culture Type Nationalities ONLY users to need 16 or more cores by 2010. Thank God we will begin to get them by 2008. :eek:
I don't begin to pretend we are discussing the world's users' needs here. Only Westerners with heavy Pop-Culture Multimedia type usage - Video iPods HDTV Sat Radio etc.
I believe that there is a fundamental lack of imagination on this front - because it hasn't been possible to date, therefore it isn't in the consciousness of many users yet as a possibility they would think of doing. It's not so much that I'm atypical as it is I am already thinking outside the box of how we've been doing stuff to date. Soon many will begin to see the new ways we will be able to get stuff done faster thanks to more Cores inside.
OK. So maybe you need ten thousand cores and three million gigabytes of RAM. Don't think for an instant that the majority of the world shares your requirements.I may not be typical today, but in future a majority of Western Pop-Culture type users - not the world - will want to be able to archive HDTV to mp4 off their original recordings in a flash and only more cores will solve that problem.
And I never said anything about needing ten thousand cores etc. I think it is quite realistic for the majority of Western Pop-Culture Type Nationalities ONLY users to need 16 or more cores by 2010. Thank God we will begin to get them by 2008. :eek:
I don't begin to pretend we are discussing the world's users' needs here. Only Westerners with heavy Pop-Culture Multimedia type usage - Video iPods HDTV Sat Radio etc.
I believe that there is a fundamental lack of imagination on this front - because it hasn't been possible to date, therefore it isn't in the consciousness of many users yet as a possibility they would think of doing. It's not so much that I'm atypical as it is I am already thinking outside the box of how we've been doing stuff to date. Soon many will begin to see the new ways we will be able to get stuff done faster thanks to more Cores inside.
Vegasman
Apr 27, 09:27 AM
For those of us who regularly travel for work between locations but stay away for more than a week, it will be a hit in performance. I just hope there is a setting that allows a larger data file to be kept.
Wow. Was your iPhone really THAT slow the first time you used it. I don't recall those complaints hitting the news (yet).
Wow. Was your iPhone really THAT slow the first time you used it. I don't recall those complaints hitting the news (yet).
