mwswami
Jul 21, 01:31 PM
I strongly disagree. I could use 16 cores right now for notihng more than simple consumer electronics video compression routines. There will be a Mac Pro with 8 cores this Winter 2007.
Hey Multimedia, just curious, I wonder what's your current (something you want to use for the next 1-2 years) idea of the ultimate machine wrt number of Cores, Memory, Storage, etc. And, how much are you willing to pay for it?
Hey Multimedia, just curious, I wonder what's your current (something you want to use for the next 1-2 years) idea of the ultimate machine wrt number of Cores, Memory, Storage, etc. And, how much are you willing to pay for it?
Multimedia
Aug 6, 07:20 PM
I have satellite internet and have not been able to see keynote streams since getting it. Quicktime just opens up and says "Connecting" but never does.
Is there some other source that I can expect to show the keynote (in its entirety, please)... Living in the country is a love/hate thing these days.
Thanks.It won't be a live video stream. In the afternoon Apple will begin streaming a compressed HD recording of it. I guess you'll have to go to a terrestrial caf� system. Have you complained to your Satellite provider?
Final Eagles 10 Raiders 16 :p
Is there some other source that I can expect to show the keynote (in its entirety, please)... Living in the country is a love/hate thing these days.
Thanks.It won't be a live video stream. In the afternoon Apple will begin streaming a compressed HD recording of it. I guess you'll have to go to a terrestrial caf� system. Have you complained to your Satellite provider?
Final Eagles 10 Raiders 16 :p
iMeowbot
Sep 19, 08:43 AM
All you people who keep whining about "But I want 64 bit!!!" need to step back and think about what possible benefit a 64-bit system will give you. Those of you who need to address more than 4 gigs of RAM are excused. The rest of you, tell me WHY you need 64-bit computing.
There is a general unease about the AMD64 instruction set. We are already seeing a few programs that only run on Intel Macs. What's to stop developers from ignoring the x86 target in new software, especially on the high end, given the short sales cycle of x86-only Macs? The Mac Pro didn't even have a 32-bit version.
There is a general unease about the AMD64 instruction set. We are already seeing a few programs that only run on Intel Macs. What's to stop developers from ignoring the x86 target in new software, especially on the high end, given the short sales cycle of x86-only Macs? The Mac Pro didn't even have a 32-bit version.
BornAgainMac
Aug 17, 09:19 AM
Won't Adobe use Core Image when the Universal Binaries come out? If both Quads had the same high powered graphics card, the benchmarks may show them to be the same with Core Image tasks.
NoSmokingBandit
Nov 29, 10:10 AM
The problem with a lot of reviews is that they wanted to publish theirs before everyone else instead of actually playing the game first and knowing what they are talking about.
As far as damage goes, you'd be broke at the end of the first series if they made you pay for repairs right away. This is why they dsq you for hitting opponents or running off track in the license tests and spec events.
As far as damage goes, you'd be broke at the end of the first series if they made you pay for repairs right away. This is why they dsq you for hitting opponents or running off track in the license tests and spec events.
iStudentUK
Mar 26, 06:16 AM
Can't wait. Hope it's awesome
Got to wait for the results from the beta testers who buy 10.7 on release. Learn the lessons of 10.6, I waited until 10.6.2 was out!
Wish my MB had a multitouch track pad though! :(
Got to wait for the results from the beta testers who buy 10.7 on release. Learn the lessons of 10.6, I waited until 10.6.2 was out!
Wish my MB had a multitouch track pad though! :(
Popeye206
Apr 11, 02:17 PM
LOL at all of the people saying it's a big mistake and bad move on Apple's part. They know what they are doing. Why would they do something that would hurt their iPhone sales?!
They just put out the iPhone 4 verizon. If they refresh in June they will have to do both AT&T and Verizon. Otherwise, Verizon will always play second fiddle with updates. Dumb move. They are waiting for enough time to pass where it won't be just 6 months between verizon updates.
I don't think Apple is waiting because of the Verizon phone. I think they just are making more changes than just simple upgrades and it's going to take longer. I think they also see that iPhone4 sales are still heathy so why rush it?
Release iOS 5.0 this summer, then follow-up with the new iPhone5 in the fall. Keep up the momentum and slaughter the competition in the fall during the busiest season for gadgets.
I see nothing wrong with the iPhone5 in the fall. "Na sayers" can say what they want, but in the long run it does not matter as long as the iPhone5 is a healthy upgrade.
The only downside is, Apple may be so darn busy in the fall with new products, that you won't even be able to get in their stores!
They just put out the iPhone 4 verizon. If they refresh in June they will have to do both AT&T and Verizon. Otherwise, Verizon will always play second fiddle with updates. Dumb move. They are waiting for enough time to pass where it won't be just 6 months between verizon updates.
I don't think Apple is waiting because of the Verizon phone. I think they just are making more changes than just simple upgrades and it's going to take longer. I think they also see that iPhone4 sales are still heathy so why rush it?
Release iOS 5.0 this summer, then follow-up with the new iPhone5 in the fall. Keep up the momentum and slaughter the competition in the fall during the busiest season for gadgets.
I see nothing wrong with the iPhone5 in the fall. "Na sayers" can say what they want, but in the long run it does not matter as long as the iPhone5 is a healthy upgrade.
The only downside is, Apple may be so darn busy in the fall with new products, that you won't even be able to get in their stores!
yoak
Apr 12, 09:28 AM
http://applecritictv.blogspot.com/20...l-cut-pro.html
This was posted by another member, relaytv in another thread.
Interesting read while we wait
This was posted by another member, relaytv in another thread.
Interesting read while we wait
GekkePrutser
Apr 6, 11:31 AM
There are with 18 Watts. Besides, wouldnt be the first time intel made special Cpus for Apple. So it isnt impossible an i3 even less than 18 special made for apple.
I think you mean the 380UM? But those aren't Sandy Bridge, they're Arrandales, and hopefully Apple won't go near them (they have left them alone so far even though they were already available at the time of the last update)
In Sandy Bridge there's only the i5/i7's mentioned already, and a celeron of 1.1 Ghz (called B847). That one's not even labeled i3. I really hope that one won't make it to the MBA. But even then there's only one so hopefully they'll offer an upgrade to i5/i7 in that case as the high-end CPU.
I think you mean the 380UM? But those aren't Sandy Bridge, they're Arrandales, and hopefully Apple won't go near them (they have left them alone so far even though they were already available at the time of the last update)
In Sandy Bridge there's only the i5/i7's mentioned already, and a celeron of 1.1 Ghz (called B847). That one's not even labeled i3. I really hope that one won't make it to the MBA. But even then there's only one so hopefully they'll offer an upgrade to i5/i7 in that case as the high-end CPU.
ergle2
Sep 15, 12:50 PM
More pedantic details for those who are interested... :)
NT actually started as OS/2 3.0. Its lead architect was OS guru Dave Cutler, who is famous for architecting VMS for DEC, and naturally its design influenced NT. And the N-10 (Where "NT" comes from, "N" "T"en) Intel RISC processor was never intended to be a mainstream product; Dave Cutler insisted on the development team NOT using an X86 processor to make sure they would have no excuse to fall back on legacy code or thought. In fact, the N-10 build that was the default work environment for the team was never intended to leave the Microsoft campus. NT over its life has run on X86, DEC Alpha, MIPS, PowerPC, Itanium, and x64.
IBM and Microsoft worked together on OS/2 1.0 from 1985-1989. Much maligned, it did suck because it was targeted for the 286 not the 386, but it did break new ground -- preemptive multitasking and an advanced GUI (Presentation Manager). By 1989 they wanted to move on to something that would take advantage of the 386's 32-bit architecture, flat memory model, and virtual machine support. Simultaneously they started OS/2 2.0 (extend the current 16-bit code to a 16-32-bit hybrid) and OS/2 3.0 (a ground up, platform independent version). When Windows 3.0 took off in 1990, Microsoft had second thoughts and eventually broke with IBM. OS/2 3.0 became Windows NT -- in the first days of the split, NT still had OS/2 Presentation Manager APIs for it's GUI. They ripped it out and created Win32 APIs. That's also why to this day NT/2K/XP supported OS/2 command line applications, and there was also a little known GUI pack that would support OS/2 1.x GUI applications.
All very true, but beyond that -- if you've ever looked closely VMS and at NT, you'll notice, it's a lot more than just "influenced". The core design was pretty much identical -- the way I/O worked, its interrupt handling, the scheduler, and so on -- they're all practically carbon copies. Some of the names changed, but how things work under the hood hadn't. Since then it's evolved, of course, but you'd expect that.
Quite amusing, really... how a heavyweight enterprise-class OS of the 80's became the desktop of the 00's :)
Those that were around in the dim and distant will recall that VMS and Unix were two of the main competitors in many marketplaces in the 80's and early 90's... and today we have OS X, Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris, etc. vs XP, W2K3 Server and (soon) Vista -- kind of ironic, dontcha think? :)
Of course, there's a lot still running VMS to this very day. I don't think HP wants them to tho' -- they just sent all the support to India, apparently, to a team with relatively little experience...
NT actually started as OS/2 3.0. Its lead architect was OS guru Dave Cutler, who is famous for architecting VMS for DEC, and naturally its design influenced NT. And the N-10 (Where "NT" comes from, "N" "T"en) Intel RISC processor was never intended to be a mainstream product; Dave Cutler insisted on the development team NOT using an X86 processor to make sure they would have no excuse to fall back on legacy code or thought. In fact, the N-10 build that was the default work environment for the team was never intended to leave the Microsoft campus. NT over its life has run on X86, DEC Alpha, MIPS, PowerPC, Itanium, and x64.
IBM and Microsoft worked together on OS/2 1.0 from 1985-1989. Much maligned, it did suck because it was targeted for the 286 not the 386, but it did break new ground -- preemptive multitasking and an advanced GUI (Presentation Manager). By 1989 they wanted to move on to something that would take advantage of the 386's 32-bit architecture, flat memory model, and virtual machine support. Simultaneously they started OS/2 2.0 (extend the current 16-bit code to a 16-32-bit hybrid) and OS/2 3.0 (a ground up, platform independent version). When Windows 3.0 took off in 1990, Microsoft had second thoughts and eventually broke with IBM. OS/2 3.0 became Windows NT -- in the first days of the split, NT still had OS/2 Presentation Manager APIs for it's GUI. They ripped it out and created Win32 APIs. That's also why to this day NT/2K/XP supported OS/2 command line applications, and there was also a little known GUI pack that would support OS/2 1.x GUI applications.
All very true, but beyond that -- if you've ever looked closely VMS and at NT, you'll notice, it's a lot more than just "influenced". The core design was pretty much identical -- the way I/O worked, its interrupt handling, the scheduler, and so on -- they're all practically carbon copies. Some of the names changed, but how things work under the hood hadn't. Since then it's evolved, of course, but you'd expect that.
Quite amusing, really... how a heavyweight enterprise-class OS of the 80's became the desktop of the 00's :)
Those that were around in the dim and distant will recall that VMS and Unix were two of the main competitors in many marketplaces in the 80's and early 90's... and today we have OS X, Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris, etc. vs XP, W2K3 Server and (soon) Vista -- kind of ironic, dontcha think? :)
Of course, there's a lot still running VMS to this very day. I don't think HP wants them to tho' -- they just sent all the support to India, apparently, to a team with relatively little experience...
Eraserhead
Jul 14, 02:35 PM
As usual though they come with 50% of the necessary RAM :rolleyes:, why Apple can't get this right I don't know.
Also I'm surprised the top model doesn't have Intel's fastest chip, surely Apple want to say they have the fastest possible computers?
Dual Optical drives is OK, good if you want to have a blu-ray drive as well I suppose...
Also I'm surprised the top model doesn't have Intel's fastest chip, surely Apple want to say they have the fastest possible computers?
Dual Optical drives is OK, good if you want to have a blu-ray drive as well I suppose...
cait-sith
Aug 11, 10:10 AM
Apple may or may not have a phone. It may launch this month, or a year from now.
Gee... :confused:
Gee... :confused:
lieb39
Aug 7, 06:47 PM
The new time machine feature looks really cool - and I'm sure that a option for 'secure delete' will be there - so it's not stored in the Time Machine..
Not much chatter about the preview of Leopard Server - Sneak Preview here (http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/leopard/) - Just supporting the new Leopard..
This is interesting; how do they figure that they can get the service to a mobile phone?
http://images.apple.com/au/server/macosx/leopard/images/podcastproducertop20060807.png
http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/leopard/podcastproducer.html
Discuss!
Cheers.
Not much chatter about the preview of Leopard Server - Sneak Preview here (http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/leopard/) - Just supporting the new Leopard..
This is interesting; how do they figure that they can get the service to a mobile phone?
http://images.apple.com/au/server/macosx/leopard/images/podcastproducertop20060807.png
http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/leopard/podcastproducer.html
Discuss!
Cheers.
VesperDEM
Aug 25, 03:33 PM
I have a 3 month old MacBook and a shiny new Mac Pro. No problems with the systems at all. When I got the Mac Pro, one of the RAM cards needed to be reseated, but that is expected with shipping.
The one time I called Apple support, it took about 20 minutes to get someone and I had solved the problem before the tech got there.
I verified that I solved the problem correctly and went on my way.
My joy was that the tech was American, or at least a person that spoke perfect English.
The problem with the surveys that they take is that I would suspect most satisfied customers don't fill them out, and the ones that are not satisfied after make sure to fill them out.
Let's face it, since the Intel line started coming out, there have been over 1 million units sold. Half of that number are new to Macintosh. If we are talking 10,000 unsatisfied customers, that's still only 2% of all the "new" customers and 1% of all the customers that have bought an Intel based system.
The one time I called Apple support, it took about 20 minutes to get someone and I had solved the problem before the tech got there.
I verified that I solved the problem correctly and went on my way.
My joy was that the tech was American, or at least a person that spoke perfect English.
The problem with the surveys that they take is that I would suspect most satisfied customers don't fill them out, and the ones that are not satisfied after make sure to fill them out.
Let's face it, since the Intel line started coming out, there have been over 1 million units sold. Half of that number are new to Macintosh. If we are talking 10,000 unsatisfied customers, that's still only 2% of all the "new" customers and 1% of all the customers that have bought an Intel based system.
X2468
Mar 31, 11:03 PM
Probably what bothers me the most about the discourse that Android is open is that underlying that logic is an implicit (or perhaps really explicit, depending on who is touting that discourse) assumption that it is democratic, liberal, progressive, and for "the people" and thus prevents a "draconian future" from happening because instead of letting corporations dictate our digital worlds, the people will a) have a say in it and b) have a choice.
Baloney!
This discourse makes a false link between software being open source and political ideology. The two are not necessarily corresponding. And furthermore, that Android is actually open source is highly debatable but I won't go there.
Why do so many technophiles fall for the discourse that open means choice means freedom mean democracy discourse? It's all BALONEY! Google isn't really interested in protecting your freedom, democracy etc.. It's really interested in surviving and making money. Let's try not to fall AGAIN for that political cover.
In this case, I find Apple much more honest. They don't talk about political ideologies like freedom, democracy etc. All they say is they want to make devices that are friendly and easy to use. They don't couch their products in political ideological terms.
Your verbose attempt to cloud the truth is impressive, even if wildly false. It's readily apparent you've gone to great lengths to cover up your lack of technical erudition.
I do agree that Apples current advantages are:
1) Brand Name
2) Excellent Product Design
3) Huge Population Of Cult Like Followers
4) Steve Jobs, Worlds Best Sales Person
Yet change is brewing, nothing lasts forever.
Be prepared.
Baloney!
This discourse makes a false link between software being open source and political ideology. The two are not necessarily corresponding. And furthermore, that Android is actually open source is highly debatable but I won't go there.
Why do so many technophiles fall for the discourse that open means choice means freedom mean democracy discourse? It's all BALONEY! Google isn't really interested in protecting your freedom, democracy etc.. It's really interested in surviving and making money. Let's try not to fall AGAIN for that political cover.
In this case, I find Apple much more honest. They don't talk about political ideologies like freedom, democracy etc. All they say is they want to make devices that are friendly and easy to use. They don't couch their products in political ideological terms.
Your verbose attempt to cloud the truth is impressive, even if wildly false. It's readily apparent you've gone to great lengths to cover up your lack of technical erudition.
I do agree that Apples current advantages are:
1) Brand Name
2) Excellent Product Design
3) Huge Population Of Cult Like Followers
4) Steve Jobs, Worlds Best Sales Person
Yet change is brewing, nothing lasts forever.
Be prepared.
NJRonbo
Jun 14, 06:04 PM
Wait a sec...
Had to read that again...
If I get a PIN tomorrow at 1pm EST I am guaranteed
a phone on launch day? I don't have to stand in line
that morning?
They told me differently when I called the store citing
NO RESERVATIONS.
Had to read that again...
If I get a PIN tomorrow at 1pm EST I am guaranteed
a phone on launch day? I don't have to stand in line
that morning?
They told me differently when I called the store citing
NO RESERVATIONS.
kresh
Nov 28, 10:47 PM
If this went into effect, I would have a defense in court when I downloaded the entire Universal Label Catalog (All Their Music) off the net. I would no longer buy anything from iTS that is Universal!
Wow, is the Music label the same as the Movie label. I could get all the movies too (to play on my iPod)!
I mean if the royalties are paid when the device is manufactured, there is no need for them to double dip and collect royalties again when I pay for content right? I think it would hold in court!
Wow, is the Music label the same as the Movie label. I could get all the movies too (to play on my iPod)!
I mean if the royalties are paid when the device is manufactured, there is no need for them to double dip and collect royalties again when I pay for content right? I think it would hold in court!
kingsmuse
Apr 6, 05:08 PM
This can't be right. MR posters have assured me that the Xoom is better than the iPad. I mean, if you can't trust MR posters, whom can you trust?
You don`t really use the opinion of the American public as a standard for what is "better" do you?
:)
You don`t really use the opinion of the American public as a standard for what is "better" do you?
:)
netdog
Aug 12, 02:40 AM
I'll be happy as long as it resurrects the Wild Eep.
designgeek
Apr 7, 01:55 AM
ULV CPUs (17W) will go to 11.6". The TDP of 320M is not known but 9400M has TDP of 12W so it is quite safe to assume that the TDP is similar to that. That means current 11.6" MBA has TDP of 22W (includes CPU, GPU, chipset) while SB 11.6" MBA would have a TDP of 21W (17W for the CPU and ~4W for the PCH).
13" will go with LV CPUs (25W). Again, currently it has 17W for the CPU and 12W for 320M. That's 29W. 25W CPU and ~4W for PCH gives you the same 29W.
11.6" - Core i5-2537M (option for Core i7-2657M)
13.3" - Core i7-2629M (option for Core i7-2649M)
Thank the gods for you sir, this is exactly what I was hoping to find in the comments. I'm also hoping they'll include Thunderbolt in the next revision. I'm totally going to get one in August if they do.
13" will go with LV CPUs (25W). Again, currently it has 17W for the CPU and 12W for 320M. That's 29W. 25W CPU and ~4W for PCH gives you the same 29W.
11.6" - Core i5-2537M (option for Core i7-2657M)
13.3" - Core i7-2629M (option for Core i7-2649M)
Thank the gods for you sir, this is exactly what I was hoping to find in the comments. I'm also hoping they'll include Thunderbolt in the next revision. I'm totally going to get one in August if they do.
bobbleheadbob
Apr 10, 11:06 AM
I hope the new version comes in a box with a free t-shirt.
Eidorian
Mar 26, 10:25 AM
I will wait to see what Spotlight is like.
Macky-Mac
Apr 27, 02:39 PM
Hopefully you're not insinuating that I am pointing to a conspiracy, I'm pretty sure I was quite clear on that account.
As for the 'auto-text' thing... interesting, why though would the several dates, etc. be on separate layers? And why would the signatures be separate from the typed text? Just slightly different colorations? My only thought was that the thing was retouched in order to improve the appearance of a poor quality scan... but why would they be so sloppy in reassembling? Why not make it a single layer image before releasing? I don't buy that it was simply overlooked... It's the White House for crying out loud. It's as if they WANT they want the controversy to continue???
do you even know who generated the PDF? Perhaps the state of Hawaii set up an editable blank form for their use?
As for the 'auto-text' thing... interesting, why though would the several dates, etc. be on separate layers? And why would the signatures be separate from the typed text? Just slightly different colorations? My only thought was that the thing was retouched in order to improve the appearance of a poor quality scan... but why would they be so sloppy in reassembling? Why not make it a single layer image before releasing? I don't buy that it was simply overlooked... It's the White House for crying out loud. It's as if they WANT they want the controversy to continue???
do you even know who generated the PDF? Perhaps the state of Hawaii set up an editable blank form for their use?
DeathChill
Apr 19, 08:06 PM
Me, Urg, first caveman to make rock round! Michelin and Firestone steal idea!
I'm not a lawyer but I play one on the Internet. You have a bulletproof case; let's sue.
I'm not a lawyer but I play one on the Internet. You have a bulletproof case; let's sue.