Cheffy Dave
Apr 22, 03:17 PM
Because part of releasing a new, backwards approaching, IGP in the 13" MBP required saving face for both its MacBook "PRO" name and Intel's IGP capabilities itself.
If the resolution is upgraded to 1440x900, the IGP is going to perform worse in comparison to the prior 13" MBP...
I also fear Apple's ridiculous 10.6.7 downgrade was somehow to show the MBA's IGP isn't as bad as it is going to be with SB IGP. Look at OpenGL performance on it, as it dropped 30% from 10.6.6. Now, we have seen Apple screw these things up before, but they also market their new products based upon prior products and list an OS X version tested on the prior gen. If they reverse course with 10.6.8 or 10.7, in the new MBA, then they might show only a 20% loss in IGP performance vs. the prior Nvidia 320m... when in reality, it might be more like a 50% plus loss in performance.
The big thing here, that NOBODY likes to think about is the 13" MBP uses a standard voltage CPU, while the MBA will use either ULV and LV or just ULV depending on who we believe. The ULV SB IGP operates at a greater than 50% loss than the Nvidia 320m. We can see this from competing products, that yes are running Windows but still have better OpenGL capabilities in the first place.
I think the big advantage to this downgrade will be buying clearance and refurbished Nvidia-based MBAs for 25% discounts... Unless Apple somehow fits a standard voltage SB CPU in the 13" MBA, I think most will be better off with C2D and Nvidia 320m at discounts.
Apple has been down the path of using a low voltage Intel CPU and IGP in the MBA before, and it was the worst Mac created since the Intel transition. It wasn't until Nvidia 9400m that the MBA became even usable. Yes, the SB IGP is better than prior Intel IGPs, but it's still utterly disappointing in LV/ULV variants. I guess the smart buyers will be buying clearance MBAs with Nvidia 320m and skip Sandy Bridge for a more reliable Ivy Bridge model. It depends on how each person uses the MBA, but I believe the vast majority are much better off with Nvidia and C2D. I just hope Apple doesn't destroy the MBA brand to try to make Intel's inferior IGP work... especially in LV and ULV variants.
I heartly concur, which is why my wife and I jumped on two 11" MBA refurbs now. I don't care for any Intel graphics. As wild as you are for the 13" MBA we are for the 11'MBA. I agree the sweet spot, at least until 2012 will be the 2010 MBA. We have gone minimalist and are thrilled:cool::D:apple::apple:
If the resolution is upgraded to 1440x900, the IGP is going to perform worse in comparison to the prior 13" MBP...
I also fear Apple's ridiculous 10.6.7 downgrade was somehow to show the MBA's IGP isn't as bad as it is going to be with SB IGP. Look at OpenGL performance on it, as it dropped 30% from 10.6.6. Now, we have seen Apple screw these things up before, but they also market their new products based upon prior products and list an OS X version tested on the prior gen. If they reverse course with 10.6.8 or 10.7, in the new MBA, then they might show only a 20% loss in IGP performance vs. the prior Nvidia 320m... when in reality, it might be more like a 50% plus loss in performance.
The big thing here, that NOBODY likes to think about is the 13" MBP uses a standard voltage CPU, while the MBA will use either ULV and LV or just ULV depending on who we believe. The ULV SB IGP operates at a greater than 50% loss than the Nvidia 320m. We can see this from competing products, that yes are running Windows but still have better OpenGL capabilities in the first place.
I think the big advantage to this downgrade will be buying clearance and refurbished Nvidia-based MBAs for 25% discounts... Unless Apple somehow fits a standard voltage SB CPU in the 13" MBA, I think most will be better off with C2D and Nvidia 320m at discounts.
Apple has been down the path of using a low voltage Intel CPU and IGP in the MBA before, and it was the worst Mac created since the Intel transition. It wasn't until Nvidia 9400m that the MBA became even usable. Yes, the SB IGP is better than prior Intel IGPs, but it's still utterly disappointing in LV/ULV variants. I guess the smart buyers will be buying clearance MBAs with Nvidia 320m and skip Sandy Bridge for a more reliable Ivy Bridge model. It depends on how each person uses the MBA, but I believe the vast majority are much better off with Nvidia and C2D. I just hope Apple doesn't destroy the MBA brand to try to make Intel's inferior IGP work... especially in LV and ULV variants.
I heartly concur, which is why my wife and I jumped on two 11" MBA refurbs now. I don't care for any Intel graphics. As wild as you are for the 13" MBA we are for the 11'MBA. I agree the sweet spot, at least until 2012 will be the 2010 MBA. We have gone minimalist and are thrilled:cool::D:apple::apple:
iJaz
Sep 14, 03:58 AM
I want one :cool:
hoonu
May 3, 12:48 PM
I use my 2010 27" iMac as a monitor for a PC gaming rig that utilizes the mini-display port and I must say that this will be the last iMac I own until they change this. This was one of main selling points for me since I could still use a pc and not have to suffer with the iMac's poor gaming performance.
No matter how you slice it, the integrated video card with the current iMacs CANNOT drive the resolution these displays use.
The only option is build a high end PC that can push that kinda resolution at decent framerates.
Now that they have removed the option and restricted it to TB only display ports, we are now forced to "upgrade" to a new mac tho it still cant hold a candle to whats available to system builders today.
I made the switch to Mac years and years ago but I think it's finally run it's course. When this thing takes a **** and they offer me a new one through my Apple Care, I'll sell it and buy a real display an perhaps mac mini.
Apple has fallen so far behind the desktop computing business and its clear they want to funnel their remaining customers through this purchase path.
No matter how you slice it, the integrated video card with the current iMacs CANNOT drive the resolution these displays use.
The only option is build a high end PC that can push that kinda resolution at decent framerates.
Now that they have removed the option and restricted it to TB only display ports, we are now forced to "upgrade" to a new mac tho it still cant hold a candle to whats available to system builders today.
I made the switch to Mac years and years ago but I think it's finally run it's course. When this thing takes a **** and they offer me a new one through my Apple Care, I'll sell it and buy a real display an perhaps mac mini.
Apple has fallen so far behind the desktop computing business and its clear they want to funnel their remaining customers through this purchase path.
MrFirework
Oct 27, 01:19 PM
I guess I'm at a loss for what rights we have actually lost under the Bush Presidency...
BUT... BUT... BUT...
...uhhhh...
...but... ummmmmm...
...he's really STUPID!
;)
BUT... BUT... BUT...
...uhhhh...
...but... ummmmmm...
...he's really STUPID!
;)
xionxiox
Apr 4, 11:56 AM
Was It really necessary to kill him?
No
The robbers were armed and dangerous. So yes, it was necessary.
No
The robbers were armed and dangerous. So yes, it was necessary.
Chundles
Oct 12, 12:39 PM
http://flickr.com/photos/vi2867/267917812/
If it is a 4 GB iPod, it has to be a Nano, right???
What else, could it be??
http://flickr.com/photos/vi2867/267917812/
You have to link to the images, not the flickr page.
And that's just the U2 special edition iPod.
If it is a 4 GB iPod, it has to be a Nano, right???
What else, could it be??
http://flickr.com/photos/vi2867/267917812/
You have to link to the images, not the flickr page.
And that's just the U2 special edition iPod.
MarcelV
Sep 5, 04:59 AM
:confused:
What is this....
www.apple.com/movies
comes up with
Forbidden
You don't have permission to access /movies on this server.
What might this mean
:eek: I knew it, i knew it......... someone would find this link. It's an old link. old like in several years.
What is this....
www.apple.com/movies
comes up with
Forbidden
You don't have permission to access /movies on this server.
What might this mean
:eek: I knew it, i knew it......... someone would find this link. It's an old link. old like in several years.
BlizzardBomb
Aug 28, 12:38 PM
Why so many negative votes?
Maybe because most manufacturers have started selling Core 2 Duo computers but Apple hasn't.
Maybe because most manufacturers have started selling Core 2 Duo computers but Apple hasn't.
rmhop81
Apr 22, 09:23 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
The best thing about listening to music on my iPod is I can listen to it wherever I am, such as in the car. Can't get wifi in the car, and no way am I tethering to my phone just to listen to music.
why would you tether to ur phone if u have an iphone?
The best thing about listening to music on my iPod is I can listen to it wherever I am, such as in the car. Can't get wifi in the car, and no way am I tethering to my phone just to listen to music.
why would you tether to ur phone if u have an iphone?
Sydde
Apr 11, 08:09 PM
Is it emissions regulation or just plain laziness by the automakers?
The more paranoid might suggest that oil companies are collaborating with auto makers and the government to keep efficiency as low as they can get away with. Remember, the record for fuel economy was set in the mid 70s in a slightly modified Opel: something like 237 miles on a gallon (US) of gasoline. Highly idealized conditions no doubt, but my goodness, the average automobile today should be at least a third of the way there.
The more paranoid might suggest that oil companies are collaborating with auto makers and the government to keep efficiency as low as they can get away with. Remember, the record for fuel economy was set in the mid 70s in a slightly modified Opel: something like 237 miles on a gallon (US) of gasoline. Highly idealized conditions no doubt, but my goodness, the average automobile today should be at least a third of the way there.
EagerDragon
Sep 14, 07:52 PM
If you'd followed the dSLR world at all over the past two years, you wouldn't ask this question. :) Canon and Nikon are doing well; most everyone else is dropping like flies. Sony is trying to pick up the pieces that were Konica-Minolta's dSLR business, but at best they're going to be a distant third behind the Big Two. Pentax and Olympus are holding on as far as I know, but they are not doing well.
It would be a very poor move for Apple, and I have no doubt they realize this. You might think Apple has a rabid fan base to draw on - go read any "Nikon vs. Canon" thread on any photo discussion board sometime to see REAL rabidity. :D
I can see why they are not doing that well...... A film SLR is a heck of a lot cheaper and they were harder to make. They are charging way too much. Back in the old times we all had film SLR's for the quality, ability to change lens (not that different from todays lenses), etc. Unless you are a pro the prices are way out of most people budget. You spend 700 to 4000 for a body and every lens is 500. Crazy.
It would be a very poor move for Apple, and I have no doubt they realize this. You might think Apple has a rabid fan base to draw on - go read any "Nikon vs. Canon" thread on any photo discussion board sometime to see REAL rabidity. :D
I can see why they are not doing that well...... A film SLR is a heck of a lot cheaper and they were harder to make. They are charging way too much. Back in the old times we all had film SLR's for the quality, ability to change lens (not that different from todays lenses), etc. Unless you are a pro the prices are way out of most people budget. You spend 700 to 4000 for a body and every lens is 500. Crazy.
dolph0291
Mar 30, 01:22 PM
Disagree because "Ope System" is not the accepted abbreviation: "OS" is. Do you think Microsoft should be able to rename Windows OS and then trademark OS? Of course not, and accordingly Apple shouldn't get a trademark on App Store.
Apple should lose this dispute on the merits. Whether they do or not will depend on the caliber of their lawyers. On the two briefs we've seen so far, Apple clearly has some advantage, so they might pull this out nonetheless.
Apple has always had apps, Windows has programs and never had apps. MS NEVER called them apps or applications. Until now. They have no basis for this claim, the word "app" is as foreign to the windows world as a cron job.
Apple should lose this dispute on the merits. Whether they do or not will depend on the caliber of their lawyers. On the two briefs we've seen so far, Apple clearly has some advantage, so they might pull this out nonetheless.
Apple has always had apps, Windows has programs and never had apps. MS NEVER called them apps or applications. Until now. They have no basis for this claim, the word "app" is as foreign to the windows world as a cron job.
dondark
Sep 13, 11:46 PM
EDIT:
9) Quit asking about live iChat video chat, it AIN'T GONNA HAPPEN. A possible related item would be iChat texting (similar to current AOL, Yahoo, ICQ).[/QUOTE]
Its just some kind of 3G and Skype technology, It s not hard to do it. But I think Apple isnt rich enuf to do that in the market.
9) Quit asking about live iChat video chat, it AIN'T GONNA HAPPEN. A possible related item would be iChat texting (similar to current AOL, Yahoo, ICQ).[/QUOTE]
Its just some kind of 3G and Skype technology, It s not hard to do it. But I think Apple isnt rich enuf to do that in the market.
Buschmaster
Oct 28, 09:04 AM
It isn't like I "hate the world" or anything, even though reading through this thread some people might thing so just by my saying this...
If I payed all that money to get into that expo (it is as expensive as the ones in the States, right?) and someone was being annoying? I'd want them gone, as well. We just got rid of all solicitation on my floor at college, and it isn't like every candidate who stopped by I hated, but they were sure hoping they could make it that way. And the vegans... man do they not give up. I wanted to start heating hot dogs in the microwave just so they'd get out!!
If I'm enjoying myself at the time they come in, they can change some of that. And I don't know the whole story, but if people were complaining about them, then they should be kicked out.
Maybe they're still just searching for Elaine Bennis...? They never leave a message undelivered, I hear.
If I payed all that money to get into that expo (it is as expensive as the ones in the States, right?) and someone was being annoying? I'd want them gone, as well. We just got rid of all solicitation on my floor at college, and it isn't like every candidate who stopped by I hated, but they were sure hoping they could make it that way. And the vegans... man do they not give up. I wanted to start heating hot dogs in the microwave just so they'd get out!!
If I'm enjoying myself at the time they come in, they can change some of that. And I don't know the whole story, but if people were complaining about them, then they should be kicked out.
Maybe they're still just searching for Elaine Bennis...? They never leave a message undelivered, I hear.
MacRumors
Sep 10, 04:46 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
TG Daily news (http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/09/09/preview_kentsfield_processor/) reports that Tom's Hardware will be posting preliminary benchmarks for Intel's upcoming Kenstfield processor on Monday.
Kentsfield is Intel's next revision of their "Core" processors which was originally scheduled to be released in the 1st Quarter of 2007. According to the article, it is now planned for late 2006 availability.
Kentsfield is a Quad-core chip and essentially combines two Conroe chips. It is expected to be a Conroe "drop-in" and should work with the same motherboards as Conroe. More details about the chip are expected at the fall Intel Developer Forum (http://www.intel.com/idf/) which takes place between September 26-28 in San Francisco.
Apple originally used the Core Duo (Yonah) processor in first Intel Macs released in January of 2006. In the past month, Intel introduced the Core 2 Duo Mobile (Merom) and Desktop (Conroe) processors as a successor to the Core Duo (Yonah). Last week, Apple incorporated the Core 2 Duo Mobile (Merom) into the new iMacs (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060906091309.shtml). Apple has not yet utilized the Core 2 Duo Desktop (Conroe) processors for any Macs. Meanwhile, the Mac Pro, introduced in August (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060807144713.shtml), uses the higher-end Xeon (Woodcrest) processor.
Apple's current line up is as follows:
Mac mini - Core Duo (Yonah)
iMac - Core 2 Duo (Merom)
MacBook - Core Duo (Yonah)*
MacBook Pro - Core Duo (Yonah)*
Mac Pro - Xeon (Woodcrest)
Xserve - Xeon (Woodcrest)
* Unlike the other models, the MacBook and MacBook Pro have not seen updates (http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/) for 4-5 months. As a result, many are speculating that they will see updates soon.
TG Daily news (http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/09/09/preview_kentsfield_processor/) reports that Tom's Hardware will be posting preliminary benchmarks for Intel's upcoming Kenstfield processor on Monday.
Kentsfield is Intel's next revision of their "Core" processors which was originally scheduled to be released in the 1st Quarter of 2007. According to the article, it is now planned for late 2006 availability.
Kentsfield is a Quad-core chip and essentially combines two Conroe chips. It is expected to be a Conroe "drop-in" and should work with the same motherboards as Conroe. More details about the chip are expected at the fall Intel Developer Forum (http://www.intel.com/idf/) which takes place between September 26-28 in San Francisco.
Apple originally used the Core Duo (Yonah) processor in first Intel Macs released in January of 2006. In the past month, Intel introduced the Core 2 Duo Mobile (Merom) and Desktop (Conroe) processors as a successor to the Core Duo (Yonah). Last week, Apple incorporated the Core 2 Duo Mobile (Merom) into the new iMacs (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060906091309.shtml). Apple has not yet utilized the Core 2 Duo Desktop (Conroe) processors for any Macs. Meanwhile, the Mac Pro, introduced in August (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060807144713.shtml), uses the higher-end Xeon (Woodcrest) processor.
Apple's current line up is as follows:
Mac mini - Core Duo (Yonah)
iMac - Core 2 Duo (Merom)
MacBook - Core Duo (Yonah)*
MacBook Pro - Core Duo (Yonah)*
Mac Pro - Xeon (Woodcrest)
Xserve - Xeon (Woodcrest)
* Unlike the other models, the MacBook and MacBook Pro have not seen updates (http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/) for 4-5 months. As a result, many are speculating that they will see updates soon.
DrFlax
Apr 22, 06:21 PM
I also fear Apple's ridiculous 10.6.7 downgrade was somehow to show the MBA's IGP isn't as bad as it is going to be with SB IGP. Look at OpenGL performance on it, as it dropped 30% from 10.6.6. Now, we have seen Apple screw these things up before, but they also market their new products based upon prior products and list an OS X version tested on the prior gen. If they reverse course with 10.6.8 or 10.7, in the new MBA, then they might show only a 20% loss in IGP performance vs. the prior Nvidia 320m... when in reality, it might be more like a 50% plus loss in performance.
100% Agree.
100% Agree.
X38
Apr 15, 01:00 AM
This is most unfortunate. Now that TB is a reality, it would be far better if Intel just kills USB 3.0 completely as fast as possible. There is absolutely no advantage whatsoever in having USB survive past 2.0 at this point. With 3.0 barely entering the market, there is no value in letting it get a foothold. It is pathetically obsolete compared to TB.
What is with the comments about wanting USB 3.0 on Macs? What a huge waste of time and money - you should be wanting TB on more peripherals. Even if Intel is going to be dumb enough to keep USB 3.0 around, hopefully Apple will hold the line and refuse to put it in Macs. With Apple's resurgent strength in the computer market while everyone else is tanking, that would be enough incentive to get the peripheral makers to adopt TB.
What is with the comments about wanting USB 3.0 on Macs? What a huge waste of time and money - you should be wanting TB on more peripherals. Even if Intel is going to be dumb enough to keep USB 3.0 around, hopefully Apple will hold the line and refuse to put it in Macs. With Apple's resurgent strength in the computer market while everyone else is tanking, that would be enough incentive to get the peripheral makers to adopt TB.
Seasought
Sep 26, 10:46 AM
I'll have to check and see what Cingular is offering deal-wise at the time, but being T-Mobile currently I won't be getting the phone until it expands after that 6 month period.
Assuming I can tolerate the phone in the first place. I've yet to see a cell phone that's impressed me. If anyone can however, it's Apple.
Assuming I can tolerate the phone in the first place. I've yet to see a cell phone that's impressed me. If anyone can however, it's Apple.
freedevil
Nov 14, 12:31 PM
Boo Hoo Rogue Amoeba. How stupid? Devs need to grow up.
LagunaSol
Apr 20, 07:32 PM
Sorry [/puts on apple shades] WHOA! I see now! Steve Jobs is actually GOD!!!!
Now you're getting it!
Would you guys get a room already?
(The trolling grows tiresome.)
Now you're getting it!
Would you guys get a room already?
(The trolling grows tiresome.)
zap2
Mar 29, 01:09 PM
I think its pretty reasonable...Nokia has a big market share...its a huge company, I highly expect that Nokia will pass iOS, considering Nokia has a range of devices(many of which will run Windows Phone 7) while Apple likes to keep one or two models around, both of which are rather pricey devices.
I'm going to be that Nokia is going to press Microsoft to let Windows Phone 7 to have requirements lower then top of the line in an effort to get their devices through out the world.
I'm going to be that Nokia is going to press Microsoft to let Windows Phone 7 to have requirements lower then top of the line in an effort to get their devices through out the world.
roland.g
Apr 4, 11:43 AM
Wow. Just to dumb for their own good.
owengot
Apr 14, 02:01 PM
I have a Rev D MacBook Air (11") and also think the Ivy Bridge will be a worthwhile upgrade. There is now no reason why that one shouldn't have USB 3.0, or Thunderbolt, plus Ivy Bridge, unlike Sandy Bridge, will have a GPU as fast as the NVIDIA 320m.
Amen to that :cool: As well as official support for OpenCL.
So when will Ivy Bridge be released?
Amen to that :cool: As well as official support for OpenCL.
So when will Ivy Bridge be released?
4God
Aug 28, 02:41 PM
Unfortunately, cats are known liars.
DOH!!!! 55999
DOH!!!! 55999