ezekielrage_99
Aug 27, 06:59 PM
i like the powerbook g5 jokes and have been around for a long time if that helps
I like them as well, but I think it's been replaced with Merom next tuesday, G6 Video iPod next next tuesday and the good old iPhone next tuesday rumors.
Still good for a laugh ;)
I like them as well, but I think it's been replaced with Merom next tuesday, G6 Video iPod next next tuesday and the good old iPhone next tuesday rumors.
Still good for a laugh ;)
SevenInchScrew
Sep 1, 11:38 AM
Time will tell i suppose, but it just doesnt make sense for them to gimp standard cars for no reason.
I think "gimping" the Standard™ cars is the wrong way to look at it. To me, it looks like they just chose to spend A LOT of effort modeling the Premium™ cars, and then just reuse what they had from before for the Standard™ cars.
Ideally, we would have 1,000 Premium™ cars, but that would either take a staff of about 500 people, or we'd be waiting for GT5 until 2015. Compromises had to be made. They could have done all 1,000 cars at an average detail level, or they could do a handful of them VERY high-res, and reuse some older cars. They obviously chose the 2nd option.
I think "gimping" the Standard™ cars is the wrong way to look at it. To me, it looks like they just chose to spend A LOT of effort modeling the Premium™ cars, and then just reuse what they had from before for the Standard™ cars.
Ideally, we would have 1,000 Premium™ cars, but that would either take a staff of about 500 people, or we'd be waiting for GT5 until 2015. Compromises had to be made. They could have done all 1,000 cars at an average detail level, or they could do a handful of them VERY high-res, and reuse some older cars. They obviously chose the 2nd option.
HecubusPro
Sep 19, 09:21 AM
That whole comment had the tone of a spoilt 13 year old...
You have no idea why some ppl are waiting for the next revision or upgrade - don't benchmark your rationale with others in way that dismisses other ppl who have equally legitimate reasons and opinions...
Some ppl (who don't have allot of money to drop every year for the next best thing) have to spend wisely - and perhaps just want a revB machine that is more stable and refined. I for one keep my macs until they die...so I will be waiting for revB to maximise my chances of a solid bug-free machine.
If that makes me spoilt - b/c I don't want to purchase new products year after year - then there is nothing I can do about your perceptions...
AMEN!!!! :D
You have no idea why some ppl are waiting for the next revision or upgrade - don't benchmark your rationale with others in way that dismisses other ppl who have equally legitimate reasons and opinions...
Some ppl (who don't have allot of money to drop every year for the next best thing) have to spend wisely - and perhaps just want a revB machine that is more stable and refined. I for one keep my macs until they die...so I will be waiting for revB to maximise my chances of a solid bug-free machine.
If that makes me spoilt - b/c I don't want to purchase new products year after year - then there is nothing I can do about your perceptions...
AMEN!!!! :D
deputy_doofy
Aug 6, 05:23 PM
As Apple applied for the trademark, it will not be approved.
It is up to Apple how they want to proceed. A fight that can't win, no matter how much money they have.
Mac Pro has been the premier Mac dealer in the same county as Apple since 1988. Out of all the names for this new line of computers, why choose one that they know they cannot have.
We are already getting countless support calls for the macbook pro. It seems they assume we made them When we can't help them, they seem to get very upset.
Mac Pro is in a position to file for a court order not to release any computer that bears our name.
So get ready WWDC, we will be watching.
Mike Ajlouny
President
MAC-PRO.com
Cool. Seems like ANTI-advertising to me. Not that I knew of the existence of mac-pro.com before, but now that I do, I'll stay away... and suggest my friends do the same.
It is up to Apple how they want to proceed. A fight that can't win, no matter how much money they have.
Mac Pro has been the premier Mac dealer in the same county as Apple since 1988. Out of all the names for this new line of computers, why choose one that they know they cannot have.
We are already getting countless support calls for the macbook pro. It seems they assume we made them When we can't help them, they seem to get very upset.
Mac Pro is in a position to file for a court order not to release any computer that bears our name.
So get ready WWDC, we will be watching.
Mike Ajlouny
President
MAC-PRO.com
Cool. Seems like ANTI-advertising to me. Not that I knew of the existence of mac-pro.com before, but now that I do, I'll stay away... and suggest my friends do the same.
MACRUS
Apr 10, 03:30 AM
hahaha the is the most ignorant thing I have heard today. where is support for blu-ray?
[QUOTE=ThunderSkunk;12363373]Wow. You'd think a FCP Users group would be able to track down a halfway decent graphic artist to make their banner graphic... No kidding. I could give for free just to stop my eyes from hurting every time I Visit the site... not offen though.
Interesting news, but the bit about booting competitors is downright disgusting.
I do like apple products but ohhhhh boy that one just reminded me of sony and their hackers crusade. boils my blod.
No idea, but I just don't get those tactics. I mean, other than being ruthless business people. :p
Just show your stuff without having to strong arm...
By the wording "Demanded" on the site I would say they twisted arm and leg
Hoping for some better multi-core support(although probably going to have to wait for Lion for the newer QuickTime engine) and a UI that isn't from the 90's:
http://www.candlerblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/03_ambit_fullscreen-300x232.jpg
^ Final Cut on Mac OS 9
Final Cut on Tiger/Leopard/Snow Leopard:
http://adobe-discount.com/product_images/o/apple_final_cut_express_hd_4__90390.jpg
Only thing that's changed is the scroll bars.
it is said that lion will be announced at WWDC to ship on september. so FCS will have to wait at least for the first bug fixing update... talk about old UI. gee.
[QUOTE=ThunderSkunk;12363373]Wow. You'd think a FCP Users group would be able to track down a halfway decent graphic artist to make their banner graphic... No kidding. I could give for free just to stop my eyes from hurting every time I Visit the site... not offen though.
Interesting news, but the bit about booting competitors is downright disgusting.
I do like apple products but ohhhhh boy that one just reminded me of sony and their hackers crusade. boils my blod.
No idea, but I just don't get those tactics. I mean, other than being ruthless business people. :p
Just show your stuff without having to strong arm...
By the wording "Demanded" on the site I would say they twisted arm and leg
Hoping for some better multi-core support(although probably going to have to wait for Lion for the newer QuickTime engine) and a UI that isn't from the 90's:
http://www.candlerblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/03_ambit_fullscreen-300x232.jpg
^ Final Cut on Mac OS 9
Final Cut on Tiger/Leopard/Snow Leopard:
http://adobe-discount.com/product_images/o/apple_final_cut_express_hd_4__90390.jpg
Only thing that's changed is the scroll bars.
it is said that lion will be announced at WWDC to ship on september. so FCS will have to wait at least for the first bug fixing update... talk about old UI. gee.
shamino
Jul 20, 09:32 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.
Actually, this is well documented.
There are serious electrical and physical problems with jacking up clock speeds much further than they are now. Intel managed to push their chips to 3.4GHz, but the power consumed was tremendous.
When you can't ramp up the clock speed, your next best alternative is to go for as much parallelism as you can - increase the number of instructions you can execute in a single clock.
Chip makers achieve this in a wide variety of ways, including multiple CPU packages on a motherboard, multiple cores per CPU package, multiple threads per core, and multiple functional units per thread.
And yes, a single CPU at 3GHz can easily consume more power than two CPUs (or two cores) at 1.5GHz.
As for your theoretical 24GHz processor, such a thing is simply not possible with today's technology. (Well, there were some university experiments that hit insanely fast speeds, but don't expect commercial products any time soon.) Given the heat/power curves of today's chips, I wouldn't want to think about the cooling requirements of a 24GHz chip if you could somehow manage to build one.
Of course, breakthroughs do happen, and higher clock speeds might become practical in the future. But multi-core tech isn't going away - we'll simply end up with multiple cores at higher clock speeds.
Actually, this is well documented.
There are serious electrical and physical problems with jacking up clock speeds much further than they are now. Intel managed to push their chips to 3.4GHz, but the power consumed was tremendous.
When you can't ramp up the clock speed, your next best alternative is to go for as much parallelism as you can - increase the number of instructions you can execute in a single clock.
Chip makers achieve this in a wide variety of ways, including multiple CPU packages on a motherboard, multiple cores per CPU package, multiple threads per core, and multiple functional units per thread.
And yes, a single CPU at 3GHz can easily consume more power than two CPUs (or two cores) at 1.5GHz.
As for your theoretical 24GHz processor, such a thing is simply not possible with today's technology. (Well, there were some university experiments that hit insanely fast speeds, but don't expect commercial products any time soon.) Given the heat/power curves of today's chips, I wouldn't want to think about the cooling requirements of a 24GHz chip if you could somehow manage to build one.
Of course, breakthroughs do happen, and higher clock speeds might become practical in the future. But multi-core tech isn't going away - we'll simply end up with multiple cores at higher clock speeds.
bankshot
Aug 7, 07:12 PM
As others have said, Time Machine is likely either a direct port of Sun's ZFS, or an equivalent implementation in HFS+. Actually, that's an interesting point -- if it's ZFS, it'll require a reformat in order to use it. If they did it themselves in HFS+, that's a lot more useful for anything besides brand new machines. Though ZFS is a much more modern design, despite all the things Apple's done to extend HFS+ in recent years (journaling, case-sensitive option, etc). Might be good to make a clean break and move forward.
Anyway, no real surprise there, unless you count the fancy glitz that Apple put on top of it. And of course, who's surprised when they do that? ;)
What I'd like to know more about is Spotlight. It was one of the most disappointing features in Tiger for me. It was supposed to revolutionize how you use the computer, but it turned out to be extremely slow and almost useless to me. I suggested from day one -- in fact from the day Steve demoed Tiger at WWDC in 2004 -- that Spotlight should not only index your online drives, but also network drives and offline media (backup CDs and DVDs). The latter two are far more useful to me personally, as I have data scattered across several different computers and on dozens of backups.
According to today's keynote, Apple has finally added support for network drives. But I wonder -- does this mean only other Leopard Macs, or any shared drive that the Mac can connect to? Can I index a Windows shared drive from my Mac, or even a Unix NFS mount? Or is it only other Macs? Once again, if it's limited to other Leopard Macs, then this would be useless for a lot of people (mostly ME! :D).
Also, will they add indexing of offline media? There's no mention of it on the Leopard Spotlight page. Do I still have time to suggest it (again)? Hmmm....
Finally, gotta wonder what those "top secret" features are, and why so secret? Maybe they might not get done in time for release, and therefore Apple doesn't want to look bad like MS pulling Vista features left and right? Surely there's not enough time for a competitor to steal the idea and get it out before Apple does? Even if "next spring" means early June... That's no time at all in large scale software projects.
Anyway, no real surprise there, unless you count the fancy glitz that Apple put on top of it. And of course, who's surprised when they do that? ;)
What I'd like to know more about is Spotlight. It was one of the most disappointing features in Tiger for me. It was supposed to revolutionize how you use the computer, but it turned out to be extremely slow and almost useless to me. I suggested from day one -- in fact from the day Steve demoed Tiger at WWDC in 2004 -- that Spotlight should not only index your online drives, but also network drives and offline media (backup CDs and DVDs). The latter two are far more useful to me personally, as I have data scattered across several different computers and on dozens of backups.
According to today's keynote, Apple has finally added support for network drives. But I wonder -- does this mean only other Leopard Macs, or any shared drive that the Mac can connect to? Can I index a Windows shared drive from my Mac, or even a Unix NFS mount? Or is it only other Macs? Once again, if it's limited to other Leopard Macs, then this would be useless for a lot of people (mostly ME! :D).
Also, will they add indexing of offline media? There's no mention of it on the Leopard Spotlight page. Do I still have time to suggest it (again)? Hmmm....
Finally, gotta wonder what those "top secret" features are, and why so secret? Maybe they might not get done in time for release, and therefore Apple doesn't want to look bad like MS pulling Vista features left and right? Surely there's not enough time for a competitor to steal the idea and get it out before Apple does? Even if "next spring" means early June... That's no time at all in large scale software projects.
wizard
Mar 26, 10:35 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)
It is pretty incredible that the ignorance around Mac OS releases never stops. For one thing if you loose data on a computer, the only person to blame is the one staring at you in the mirror.
Even the whine about nothing worthwhile for the user is a bit old and reflects what we heard about SL. Yet SL on my early 2008 MBP was a drastic improvement for the user right out of the box and just got better with each update. User facing features are the only reason to update, fixes to underlying facilities can go a long way to justifying the software update.
As to the server integration, it hasn't and never will be a product worth $500. It is great that Apple is adding support to the base install but people need to realize a few things. One is that Mac OS is UNIX, people need to get that through their heads. Thus Apples server product only really adds in what is already seen in many UNIX intallations in a base install. Speaking of which much of that functionality is well established open source. Second the pricing of "server" software seems to be tailored to fit the mentality of the corporate world, where they feel they need to pay big bucks for something trivial. It is no wonder that Linux as established itself as a server OS in the SOHO world and at some of the more forward thinking larger corporations. As others have pointed out the basics of UNIX have been around for ages now, very little new territory is being cleared here, thus little justification for up charges on server software.
Finally it is a bit cowardly to avoid the future because you see nothing of value there for you personally. It is frightenly similar to the attitude seen in those that cut their own wrists.
It is pretty incredible that the ignorance around Mac OS releases never stops. For one thing if you loose data on a computer, the only person to blame is the one staring at you in the mirror.
Even the whine about nothing worthwhile for the user is a bit old and reflects what we heard about SL. Yet SL on my early 2008 MBP was a drastic improvement for the user right out of the box and just got better with each update. User facing features are the only reason to update, fixes to underlying facilities can go a long way to justifying the software update.
As to the server integration, it hasn't and never will be a product worth $500. It is great that Apple is adding support to the base install but people need to realize a few things. One is that Mac OS is UNIX, people need to get that through their heads. Thus Apples server product only really adds in what is already seen in many UNIX intallations in a base install. Speaking of which much of that functionality is well established open source. Second the pricing of "server" software seems to be tailored to fit the mentality of the corporate world, where they feel they need to pay big bucks for something trivial. It is no wonder that Linux as established itself as a server OS in the SOHO world and at some of the more forward thinking larger corporations. As others have pointed out the basics of UNIX have been around for ages now, very little new territory is being cleared here, thus little justification for up charges on server software.
Finally it is a bit cowardly to avoid the future because you see nothing of value there for you personally. It is frightenly similar to the attitude seen in those that cut their own wrists.
RMDI
Apr 27, 09:22 AM
Does Apple really think this double talk, where they say they keep a database of location but don't log the location is going to fly?
But it is true! They didn't log that I was at this date and hour in this restaurant and next hour I was at position xyz, but it was a cache of something related but also different. For example for every celltower-data there is only one timestamp. So you can't even determinate when a place was first (or even last) visited. For real location tracking this data is really inaccurate and useless. Location tracking was not the purpose of this cache and not the intention of Apple. I think it is legitim and important when they emphasize that in their Q&A.;
What this data is useable for is drawing nice circles on a google map and visualizing a path of traveling between cities if you have physical access to your personal computer. And all this points are adressed in a software update.
But it is true! They didn't log that I was at this date and hour in this restaurant and next hour I was at position xyz, but it was a cache of something related but also different. For example for every celltower-data there is only one timestamp. So you can't even determinate when a place was first (or even last) visited. For real location tracking this data is really inaccurate and useless. Location tracking was not the purpose of this cache and not the intention of Apple. I think it is legitim and important when they emphasize that in their Q&A.;
What this data is useable for is drawing nice circles on a google map and visualizing a path of traveling between cities if you have physical access to your personal computer. And all this points are adressed in a software update.
rezenclowd3
Dec 7, 02:53 PM
So another patch for today adding mechanical damage. Must have the newest firmware...
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.
krcbkidz
Mar 22, 05:10 PM
The difference is Samsung outsources it's OS development, it's developer community management, it's app ecosystem.
Cost competitive doesn't experience competitive.
I think for 'spec' people (hard core coders, corp types that need to control configuration), Samsung (and more importantly, when HP gets in the game HP), will compete there.... HOWEVER, this is a consumer run market, and much like a Sony WalkMan back in the day, or RollerBlades([tm]... the rest were 'inline skates'), Apple is 'defining' the market... and the rest are just knockoffs.
And unlike the old BMW pricing explanation(excuse) for Macs (equal specs and quality... from Apple HP and Dell are about the same in price) Apple is pushing iPad's experience at the BMW levels, but at Honda prices.
And RIM and samsung are pushing mid 80's GM quality against a 2012 BMW at honda prices, when the market will probably demand Kia prices for the 'experience'
Likes this :-)
Cost competitive doesn't experience competitive.
I think for 'spec' people (hard core coders, corp types that need to control configuration), Samsung (and more importantly, when HP gets in the game HP), will compete there.... HOWEVER, this is a consumer run market, and much like a Sony WalkMan back in the day, or RollerBlades([tm]... the rest were 'inline skates'), Apple is 'defining' the market... and the rest are just knockoffs.
And unlike the old BMW pricing explanation(excuse) for Macs (equal specs and quality... from Apple HP and Dell are about the same in price) Apple is pushing iPad's experience at the BMW levels, but at Honda prices.
And RIM and samsung are pushing mid 80's GM quality against a 2012 BMW at honda prices, when the market will probably demand Kia prices for the 'experience'
Likes this :-)
NT1440
Mar 23, 10:27 AM
Good for Samsung!
To the industry: THIS is the approach you take to new markets. Don't just come up with an answer to the original (iPad in this case), get you engineers engaged and push to define where the market will go, not where it currently is.
This is honestly the first tablet introduced by the industry that I feel is a competitor to the iPad.
That said, sales wise iPad will be king of the castle for quite some time. You can't really price the apple ecosystem, or beat the usability of iOS. iPad definitely has the mindshare, which is what you need in emerging markets. Take a look at the category definers Apple has introduced. Basically they set the standard for whatever market they are in (with exceptions for a few).
To the industry: THIS is the approach you take to new markets. Don't just come up with an answer to the original (iPad in this case), get you engineers engaged and push to define where the market will go, not where it currently is.
This is honestly the first tablet introduced by the industry that I feel is a competitor to the iPad.
That said, sales wise iPad will be king of the castle for quite some time. You can't really price the apple ecosystem, or beat the usability of iOS. iPad definitely has the mindshare, which is what you need in emerging markets. Take a look at the category definers Apple has introduced. Basically they set the standard for whatever market they are in (with exceptions for a few).
Foxglove9
Jul 14, 02:52 PM
If those specs are real then I'm glad I didn't hold out for the Mac Pro and bought a used G5 a few months ago. Dual optical drive slots are nice but for me not necessary.
Silentwave
Jul 14, 05:34 PM
It's worth noting that Intel has shipped P4-series chips at 3.4GHz. But the new chips (Woodcrest and Conroe) aren't being sold at speeds above 3GHz.
Pay attention. The answer is "sooner than you think".
Quarter 4 this year will see the X6900 conroe extreme at 3.2GHz.
So when will we start seeing 8 chips in a computer? Perhaps this will become the new measurement...not processor speeds, but the number of processors (or cores).
There have already been technology briefings from Intel that talk about 4-core chips in early and 32-core chips by 2010. Similar offerings are expected from AMD.
And the Xeon-MP series processors (which will, of course, eventually get all this tech) are designed with 8-way SMP in mind. A theoretical Xeon-MP based on this 32-core tech would produce a system with 256 cores. Of course, it is doubtful that anything other than a large server would be able to take proper advantage of this, so I wouldn't ever expect to find one on a desktop.
8 core should be out sometime between end of 2006 and beginning of 2007 with the quad core Clovertown processors (based on woodcrest) available in dual chip configurations. And it'll only get better from there.
Which reminds me, though slightly OT... this is a good reason why iMac may well get Conroe now or perhaps get Merom now but transition to a desktop chip by the time Santa Rosa comes out. The new chipset/socket means new logic board, and by the time that comes out the Kenstfield quad core chips on the consumer desktop end will start arriving. I don't yet know how far kentsfield will be scaling either up or down as far as clock speed/heat, but if quad core starts moving into the consumer dekstop market, they will need a very powerful processor: either Conroe or Kentsfield.
Pay attention. The answer is "sooner than you think".
Quarter 4 this year will see the X6900 conroe extreme at 3.2GHz.
So when will we start seeing 8 chips in a computer? Perhaps this will become the new measurement...not processor speeds, but the number of processors (or cores).
There have already been technology briefings from Intel that talk about 4-core chips in early and 32-core chips by 2010. Similar offerings are expected from AMD.
And the Xeon-MP series processors (which will, of course, eventually get all this tech) are designed with 8-way SMP in mind. A theoretical Xeon-MP based on this 32-core tech would produce a system with 256 cores. Of course, it is doubtful that anything other than a large server would be able to take proper advantage of this, so I wouldn't ever expect to find one on a desktop.
8 core should be out sometime between end of 2006 and beginning of 2007 with the quad core Clovertown processors (based on woodcrest) available in dual chip configurations. And it'll only get better from there.
Which reminds me, though slightly OT... this is a good reason why iMac may well get Conroe now or perhaps get Merom now but transition to a desktop chip by the time Santa Rosa comes out. The new chipset/socket means new logic board, and by the time that comes out the Kenstfield quad core chips on the consumer desktop end will start arriving. I don't yet know how far kentsfield will be scaling either up or down as far as clock speed/heat, but if quad core starts moving into the consumer dekstop market, they will need a very powerful processor: either Conroe or Kentsfield.
CaptMurdock
Mar 23, 12:08 AM
Which fact do you deny?
Considering the shellacking dished out by the others in this thread, I'm fairly sure you haven't presented any facts for me to deny.
Considering the shellacking dished out by the others in this thread, I'm fairly sure you haven't presented any facts for me to deny.
shawnce
Jul 20, 04:47 PM
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.
Kentsfield is not really targeted as a server class chip, it is targeted towards single socket desktop/workstation systems. I doubt we will ever see it an Xserve system.
Apple will likely use a single and dual Xeon 51xx (Woodcrest) in their Xserve systems possibly with the quad core Xeon a little farther down the road (aka Clovertown and later Tigerton).
Review... roadmap (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Core_Microarchitecture#Road_map)
They both realize that these chips belong in real servers and also requires an OS that can support such chips.
Mac OS X already can deal with quad core systems and can support more cores without any real issues.
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.
Kentsfield is not really targeted as a server class chip, it is targeted towards single socket desktop/workstation systems. I doubt we will ever see it an Xserve system.
Apple will likely use a single and dual Xeon 51xx (Woodcrest) in their Xserve systems possibly with the quad core Xeon a little farther down the road (aka Clovertown and later Tigerton).
Review... roadmap (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Core_Microarchitecture#Road_map)
They both realize that these chips belong in real servers and also requires an OS that can support such chips.
Mac OS X already can deal with quad core systems and can support more cores without any real issues.
srxtr
Mar 31, 03:54 PM
This wont end androids openness. It will make is so that there is more of a consistent experience amung all android devices.
We will still be able to install from "unknown sources" for example.
Relaz macrumors.. not as big as deal as you are making it.
Openness means it should not matter whether it's consistent or not.
If every android device out there was consistent with each other, that defies the definition of openness.
Being able to install whatever you want from "unknown sources" is not the "open" OS this article is referring to.
We will still be able to install from "unknown sources" for example.
Relaz macrumors.. not as big as deal as you are making it.
Openness means it should not matter whether it's consistent or not.
If every android device out there was consistent with each other, that defies the definition of openness.
Being able to install whatever you want from "unknown sources" is not the "open" OS this article is referring to.
33scottie33
Aug 27, 02:06 PM
That is interesting because I ordered a Macbook on Tuesday (the 22nd) and mine is also scheduled to ship on the 31st. It is suspiciously strange and hopefully it means that we'll get Meroms because I was waiting for the Merom MBP when I decided to just order a Yonah MB.
I ordered a 17" MBP on Thursday and it originally had a ship date for the 31st. Then today I got an email with a tracking number saying that it shipped today.:confused: I was hoping that mine would be a Merom too, but it does not look like it. The delivery date is now the 30th; I'll try to not open it for a couple of days or until I hear some new news.
I ordered a 17" MBP on Thursday and it originally had a ship date for the 31st. Then today I got an email with a tracking number saying that it shipped today.:confused: I was hoping that mine would be a Merom too, but it does not look like it. The delivery date is now the 30th; I'll try to not open it for a couple of days or until I hear some new news.
mccldwll
Apr 27, 08:38 AM
Apple's solution is fine by me. They wouldn't have done anything if there wasn't so much press about it, but I guess that's a good reason (one of the only ones) for the press to exist. Still, they all managed to get it a bit wrong, though. I noticed (like so many others out there), that the map wasn't recording my EXACT location, but just cell towers and wifi spots I may have accessed. The info didn't really bother me. It wasn't like it had me pegged at my local pub - or did it?!?! =)
I looked at the map from a recent road trip. It showed cell towers 50 miles off the route I was on--probably next towers over in case I headed that direction. It's the apple bashing trolls who are blowing this way out of proportion.
I looked at the map from a recent road trip. It showed cell towers 50 miles off the route I was on--probably next towers over in case I headed that direction. It's the apple bashing trolls who are blowing this way out of proportion.
Tomaz
Aug 7, 03:55 PM
Time machine isn't even similar to MS's System Restore. Time Machine is basically like having CVS or Subversion underneath the file system. It rocks. I don't believe there's ever been anything like it on a client-type computer (a similar feature was present in the server OS VMS, I believe).
You might want to do some reading about CVS and Subversion.
Edit: Now that I think about it, it wouldn't be surprising to find that CVS/Subversion code is the foundation for Time Machine.
Maybe not in a client type computer but it exists in Windows Server 2003 and it is called Volume Shadow Copy.
Of curse it doesn't look as nice !
You might want to do some reading about CVS and Subversion.
Edit: Now that I think about it, it wouldn't be surprising to find that CVS/Subversion code is the foundation for Time Machine.
Maybe not in a client type computer but it exists in Windows Server 2003 and it is called Volume Shadow Copy.
Of curse it doesn't look as nice !
IceMacMac
Apr 7, 04:38 AM
Everything depends on your work and needs right? For me...I'm short format and tweak every frame.
In terms of full disclosure I own FCP 4 suite and CS 5 master suite and own all the major Apple products (hardware and software). I also run Windows 7 in bootcamp.
Short format work is all about After Effects. Motion is 5 years behind and offers an incomplete feature set in comparison. After Effects marries up well with the tools from big 3d players, like Maxon and C4D. Its a great pipeline.
I'll watch with interest the announcements next week, but the release of an "iMovie Pro" won't interest me...and it seems like that's where Apple is headed. They now are fixated on Consumers Lite and Consumers Plus.
Apple is also doing everything to push me away from it's platform, with it's anti-Flash crusade, and it's complete inability to support Any (I mean ANY of the top 5-7) professional GPUs.
For the serious Pro Apple is living on borrowed time and the Steve Jobs reality-distortion field is weakening. Redmond is calling. Increasingly serious content professionals are listening. I never imagined these words coming from my mouth. But it's the truth.
In terms of full disclosure I own FCP 4 suite and CS 5 master suite and own all the major Apple products (hardware and software). I also run Windows 7 in bootcamp.
Short format work is all about After Effects. Motion is 5 years behind and offers an incomplete feature set in comparison. After Effects marries up well with the tools from big 3d players, like Maxon and C4D. Its a great pipeline.
I'll watch with interest the announcements next week, but the release of an "iMovie Pro" won't interest me...and it seems like that's where Apple is headed. They now are fixated on Consumers Lite and Consumers Plus.
Apple is also doing everything to push me away from it's platform, with it's anti-Flash crusade, and it's complete inability to support Any (I mean ANY of the top 5-7) professional GPUs.
For the serious Pro Apple is living on borrowed time and the Steve Jobs reality-distortion field is weakening. Redmond is calling. Increasingly serious content professionals are listening. I never imagined these words coming from my mouth. But it's the truth.
33scottie33
Aug 27, 02:06 PM
That is interesting because I ordered a Macbook on Tuesday (the 22nd) and mine is also scheduled to ship on the 31st. It is suspiciously strange and hopefully it means that we'll get Meroms because I was waiting for the Merom MBP when I decided to just order a Yonah MB.
I ordered a 17" MBP on Thursday and it originally had a ship date for the 31st. Then today I got an email with a tracking number saying that it shipped today.:confused: I was hoping that mine would be a Merom too, but it does not look like it. The delivery date is now the 30th; I'll try to not open it for a couple of days or until I hear some new news.
I ordered a 17" MBP on Thursday and it originally had a ship date for the 31st. Then today I got an email with a tracking number saying that it shipped today.:confused: I was hoping that mine would be a Merom too, but it does not look like it. The delivery date is now the 30th; I'll try to not open it for a couple of days or until I hear some new news.
buffalo
Aug 11, 11:11 AM
Is it possible for Apple to release a phone sold in their stores that would work on all networks? Or have several versions of the phone that will work for Verizon, Cingular...
