Lord Blackadder
Mar 23, 12:02 PM
Pull your fingers out of your ears (or in this case your eyes) fivepoint, and pay attention to our responses. They would answer your question/accusation/calumny.
dernhelm
Aug 26, 07:13 PM
I'm Really hoping for a new iMac this Tues. But I might jump on a Core 2 Duo mini if they offer that instead...
Anyone have any idea if they'll be using "laptop chips" in the iMac and mini still - or if they'll move the iMac to a "desktop" chip instead?
Anyone have any idea if they'll be using "laptop chips" in the iMac and mini still - or if they'll move the iMac to a "desktop" chip instead?
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.
Chaszmyr
Jul 27, 09:36 AM
All of the reviews of the Core 2 Duo say that it crushes AMD in the desktop arena. This is good news, now we just need new iMacs, MacBook Pros, and Mac Pros.
uv23
Jul 31, 12:07 PM
Apple will never ship a desktop machine so close in size to the mini. Impractical and too much market confusion. I'm expecting a ~25% decrease in size of the current G5 tower, making it more mid-tower sized. This would still be an improvement to the current behemoths.
skunk
Mar 22, 07:39 PM
I don't think Obama was "dragged" into this at all, the US has gotten willingly involved - but to what extent do you think it was stage-managed?As far as necessary to make it appear that he was the "last piece of the jigsaw" rather than its inventor.
prady16
Aug 26, 04:13 PM
Yippee.....
Definitely buying a MBP asap.....not gonna wait for santa rosa!
Definitely buying a MBP asap.....not gonna wait for santa rosa!
milozauckerman
Jul 27, 06:49 PM
looking at reference systems - for $2049, Gateway's Core 2 Duo gets the 2.4GHz/4MB L2 cache Conroe, 2GB of RAM from the factory, an x1900 512MB graphics card, 320GB hard drive, card reader and DL DVD burner.
Apple had better step its game up compared to the prices/specs rumored last week. A weak graphics card and 512MB of RAM aren't going to cut it in the low tower, even if it does have XEON INSIDE or whatever the marketing pitch will be to distract us.
EDIT: Dell would be even cheaper, with a lesser video card, but there doesn't seem to be a way to separate the XPS 410 from the included 20in monitor as of now.
Apple had better step its game up compared to the prices/specs rumored last week. A weak graphics card and 512MB of RAM aren't going to cut it in the low tower, even if it does have XEON INSIDE or whatever the marketing pitch will be to distract us.
EDIT: Dell would be even cheaper, with a lesser video card, but there doesn't seem to be a way to separate the XPS 410 from the included 20in monitor as of now.
Multimedia
Aug 27, 04:03 PM
I really hope that they keep the option for a matte screen open when the upgraded MacBook Pros finally arrive.
I have been waiting a while now to upgrade to a MacBook Pro but have held off primarily as i would like to see if the enclosure gets a few nips and tucks a la Macbook!
The switchable HD bay would be awesome, and the magnetic latch and updated keyboard also would be nice but PLEASE DO NOT make glossy screen a standard on Pro notebooks!
I have a few friends who own PC laptops with glossy screens and all of them have keyboards imprinted on their screens! I cannot say from experience if this happens with the MacBooks but i'd rather not risk it....Closing A Laptop Without The Foam Barrier it ships with Or A Cloth Barrier Is Poor Maintenance. I would NEVER close my laptop without a barrier between the keyboard and the screen. I don't understand those who do. :rolleyes:
I still have the foam barrier and slipcase that came with my 3 year old PowerBook and always use them in addition to two iKlear (http://iKlear.com) cloth barriers on the keyboard as well as on the trackpad.
I have been waiting a while now to upgrade to a MacBook Pro but have held off primarily as i would like to see if the enclosure gets a few nips and tucks a la Macbook!
The switchable HD bay would be awesome, and the magnetic latch and updated keyboard also would be nice but PLEASE DO NOT make glossy screen a standard on Pro notebooks!
I have a few friends who own PC laptops with glossy screens and all of them have keyboards imprinted on their screens! I cannot say from experience if this happens with the MacBooks but i'd rather not risk it....Closing A Laptop Without The Foam Barrier it ships with Or A Cloth Barrier Is Poor Maintenance. I would NEVER close my laptop without a barrier between the keyboard and the screen. I don't understand those who do. :rolleyes:
I still have the foam barrier and slipcase that came with my 3 year old PowerBook and always use them in addition to two iKlear (http://iKlear.com) cloth barriers on the keyboard as well as on the trackpad.
ergle2
Sep 19, 10:17 PM
Why shouldnt I?
Why should it bother you that new processors come out?
Why should it bother you that new processors come out?
SPUY767
Jul 27, 03:38 PM
Sorry if i missed it, but at what speeds do these run? Don't they know just because they keep bumping and bumping the chip speed don't really mean they have a faster system. Seem just like yesterday when a better design was more important than a super fast chip. Oh well, everyone is buying into the Mhz myth now. Funny that just a year or so ago, Apple was trying to shoot down the Mhz myth, now they have people cheering for it. I guess power consumption is good though.
This is a positively thoughtless remark. No one's cheering the MHz myth on, in fact, Intel itself has abandoned the concept. Until the 3Ghz woodies get dropped in a MacPro, the 2.7 GHZ G5 will still be the fastest chip ever put in a Macintosh. I have a dual core Pentium D in a bastard Mac at the house, it runs at 3.8 GHz. I'm pretty sure that even it is slower in a lot of areas than these Core 2's. So no, you're absolutely wrong, the MHz myth is all but dead.
This is a positively thoughtless remark. No one's cheering the MHz myth on, in fact, Intel itself has abandoned the concept. Until the 3Ghz woodies get dropped in a MacPro, the 2.7 GHZ G5 will still be the fastest chip ever put in a Macintosh. I have a dual core Pentium D in a bastard Mac at the house, it runs at 3.8 GHz. I'm pretty sure that even it is slower in a lot of areas than these Core 2's. So no, you're absolutely wrong, the MHz myth is all but dead.
borisadmin
Jul 28, 08:00 AM
The question for the developers would be: If I switch to 64 bit exclusively, so my code runs ten percent faster on Core 2 Duo, but 1-2 million Macintosh users cannot use it at all, how many sales will I gain because it is faster, and how many sales will I lose because 2 million people cannot use it? Three years from now, the answer will still be that you lose more sales running 64 bit only.
Thanks heaps gnasher729, that's exactly the kind of perspective I was looking for! I'll wait until WWDC to see if there's a bump, but I need to upgrade my PB G4 12" because the optical drive has broken, so I think I'll get a Macbook then regardless.
Thanks heaps gnasher729, that's exactly the kind of perspective I was looking for! I'll wait until WWDC to see if there's a bump, but I need to upgrade my PB G4 12" because the optical drive has broken, so I think I'll get a Macbook then regardless.
DakotaGuy
Aug 11, 02:39 PM
It is more like 81% of the world market.
MS Windows has about 95% of the world market...doesn't mean the technology is better.:)
MS Windows has about 95% of the world market...doesn't mean the technology is better.:)
Tomaz
Aug 7, 07:10 PM
Did anyone else think it was odd that many of the features seemed so poorly presented. We didn't actually get to see anything new in Spotlight. And no new features of the actual Dashboard were even discussed.
It just doesn't seem that Leopard is as far along as Tiger was when previewed even though Leopard is suppose to ship in the spring just as Tiger did.
Maybe they moved the spotlight bar to the top left and don't want MS to do the same before the Vista release ;)
It just doesn't seem that Leopard is as far along as Tiger was when previewed even though Leopard is suppose to ship in the spring just as Tiger did.
Maybe they moved the spotlight bar to the top left and don't want MS to do the same before the Vista release ;)
Al Coholic
Mar 26, 06:03 PM
Maybe not the worst, but definitely the most useless.
Spotlight does a so much better job.
Agreed. I keep my dock pretty sparse so if the app ain't there it's only a few keystrokes away.
The new Launcher is just one of those eye-candy apps. It'll be the first thing I delete.
Spotlight does a so much better job.
Agreed. I keep my dock pretty sparse so if the app ain't there it's only a few keystrokes away.
The new Launcher is just one of those eye-candy apps. It'll be the first thing I delete.
Benjy91
Mar 26, 10:28 AM
People seem to have "Simple & Easier" and "Dumbed-Down" confused with each other.
shamino
Jul 22, 12:18 PM
So I read in this thread that Kentsfield and Clovertown ARE compatible with Conroe and Woodcrest sockets (respectively) (Cloverton or Clovertown?)
Well, people here have mentioned it. I haven't seen any sources for these claims, however.
It's worth noting that the Pentium 4 shipped in several different socket packages over the years. The fact that the cores might be electrically compatible does not necessarily mean you're going to be able to perform a chip-swap upgrade on your Mac!
Hope for upgrading an iMac to Quad Core is kindled! At least if Apple releases Conroe iMacs.
And assuming they don't solder the chip to the motherboard, or hardwire the clock-multiplier chips, or hard-wire the voltage regulator settings, etc.
There are a lot of things that can be done to a motherboard to make these kinds of upgrades painful or even impossible.
With any kind of rumor like this, "I'll believe it when I see it" should be your mantra. Sure, these kinds of upgrades would be great, and it may even be possible to perform them on generic PC motherbaords, but this doesn't necessarily mean it will be easy or even possible on the systems Apple ends up shipping.
BTW, In my opinion, one thing a person should never, ever say is some computer has too much power, and that it will never be needed.
"Never" is always too strong a word. But there are plenty of good reasons to say "useless for today's applications" or "not worth the cost".
When applications start demanding more, and when costs come down, then the equations change. As they always do.
When we will be able to download our entire lives, and even conciousness into a computer, as is said to happen in about 40 years (very much looking forward to)...
You're looking forward to this? Let's hope for your sake that Microsoft has nothing to do with the system software.
I don't think it will be possible, even in 40 years, despite what sci-fi authors are predicting. And there's no way I'd ever have such a system installed even if it would be come possible. The possibility of dying or becoming comatose, or even worse, as a result of a software glitch is something I'm not going to allow. To quote McCoy from Star Trek: "Let's see how it scrambles your molecules first."
So as a conclusion to my most recent rant, Please, never tell me a computer is too powerfu, has too many cores, or has too much storage capacity. If it is there to be used, it will be used. It always is.
But do you want to be the first person to have to pay for it?
Well, people here have mentioned it. I haven't seen any sources for these claims, however.
It's worth noting that the Pentium 4 shipped in several different socket packages over the years. The fact that the cores might be electrically compatible does not necessarily mean you're going to be able to perform a chip-swap upgrade on your Mac!
Hope for upgrading an iMac to Quad Core is kindled! At least if Apple releases Conroe iMacs.
And assuming they don't solder the chip to the motherboard, or hardwire the clock-multiplier chips, or hard-wire the voltage regulator settings, etc.
There are a lot of things that can be done to a motherboard to make these kinds of upgrades painful or even impossible.
With any kind of rumor like this, "I'll believe it when I see it" should be your mantra. Sure, these kinds of upgrades would be great, and it may even be possible to perform them on generic PC motherbaords, but this doesn't necessarily mean it will be easy or even possible on the systems Apple ends up shipping.
BTW, In my opinion, one thing a person should never, ever say is some computer has too much power, and that it will never be needed.
"Never" is always too strong a word. But there are plenty of good reasons to say "useless for today's applications" or "not worth the cost".
When applications start demanding more, and when costs come down, then the equations change. As they always do.
When we will be able to download our entire lives, and even conciousness into a computer, as is said to happen in about 40 years (very much looking forward to)...
You're looking forward to this? Let's hope for your sake that Microsoft has nothing to do with the system software.
I don't think it will be possible, even in 40 years, despite what sci-fi authors are predicting. And there's no way I'd ever have such a system installed even if it would be come possible. The possibility of dying or becoming comatose, or even worse, as a result of a software glitch is something I'm not going to allow. To quote McCoy from Star Trek: "Let's see how it scrambles your molecules first."
So as a conclusion to my most recent rant, Please, never tell me a computer is too powerfu, has too many cores, or has too much storage capacity. If it is there to be used, it will be used. It always is.
But do you want to be the first person to have to pay for it?
NATO
Nov 28, 06:18 PM
I think they'll be a long way off getting money from every iPod sold. For a start its such an illogical thing to ask for (Did the music companies ask for money for every CD player or Tape Recorder sold? Nope), plus I suspect the main reason that Microsoft agreed to pay money in the first place is that they needed to get the music labels on board to boost the Zune Music Store, Microsoft was in the weaker position here and I believe the labels exploited that weakness.
If the labels were to go to Apple and demand a royalty on every iPod and threatening to pull their catalogue if they didn't get it, they would actually come off worse than Apple in terms of lost revenue and it's because of this I reckon they haven't a chance...
If the labels were to go to Apple and demand a royalty on every iPod and threatening to pull their catalogue if they didn't get it, they would actually come off worse than Apple in terms of lost revenue and it's because of this I reckon they haven't a chance...
mkruck
Apr 6, 02:56 PM
I remember when I was a kid and I asked my father for a toy and he came with a different one... I was the saddest kid on earth.
I believe that who ever asked for an iPad and got a Motorola would feel the same.
(Dad, I love you)
Funny, and true.
By the same token, if I explicitly told my wife I wanted a Xoom, Playbook, Tab 10.1 and she came home with an iPad, I wouldn't be the saddest kid on earth, but I do know that I'd be returning it for something I want.
Of course, I also hate it when she brings me home a cheeseburger when I wanted a hamburger.
I believe that who ever asked for an iPad and got a Motorola would feel the same.
(Dad, I love you)
Funny, and true.
By the same token, if I explicitly told my wife I wanted a Xoom, Playbook, Tab 10.1 and she came home with an iPad, I wouldn't be the saddest kid on earth, but I do know that I'd be returning it for something I want.
Of course, I also hate it when she brings me home a cheeseburger when I wanted a hamburger.
guzhogi
Jul 20, 10:07 AM
First of all, you assume that it is possible to make "one big core equal in processing power to the 8 cores". I don't think it is possible to do this (at least not with the x86 architecture using today's technology.)
But assuming such a chip exists, the answer depends on what kind of efficiency you're thinking of.
If you mean computational efficiency (meaning the most useful processing per clock-tick), then a single big core will do better. This is because single-threaded apps will be able to use the full power (whereas multiple threads are needed to take advantagte of multiple cores.) Also, the operating system can get rid of the overhead that is needed to keep software running on the multiple cores from stepping on each other.
If you mean energy efficiency (amount of processing per watt of electricity consumed), then it could go either way, depending on how the chips are made. But given today's manufacturing processes and the non-linear power curve that we see as clock speeds are increased, the multiple-core solution will almost definitely use less power.
I remember hearing about how it is possible to make multiple cores act like one (Idon't remember where I heard this). Anyways, whether 8 cores acting separately or together like 1 big processor has an advantage depends on the program you use. If the program is multi-threaded, then the cores acting separately might have the advantage while single threaded apps will have an advantage if the cores are acting like one. However, many apps today won't see that much improvement either way (like a simple calculator, or solitare and word processing).
But assuming such a chip exists, the answer depends on what kind of efficiency you're thinking of.
If you mean computational efficiency (meaning the most useful processing per clock-tick), then a single big core will do better. This is because single-threaded apps will be able to use the full power (whereas multiple threads are needed to take advantagte of multiple cores.) Also, the operating system can get rid of the overhead that is needed to keep software running on the multiple cores from stepping on each other.
If you mean energy efficiency (amount of processing per watt of electricity consumed), then it could go either way, depending on how the chips are made. But given today's manufacturing processes and the non-linear power curve that we see as clock speeds are increased, the multiple-core solution will almost definitely use less power.
I remember hearing about how it is possible to make multiple cores act like one (Idon't remember where I heard this). Anyways, whether 8 cores acting separately or together like 1 big processor has an advantage depends on the program you use. If the program is multi-threaded, then the cores acting separately might have the advantage while single threaded apps will have an advantage if the cores are acting like one. However, many apps today won't see that much improvement either way (like a simple calculator, or solitare and word processing).
mashinhead
Aug 20, 06:25 PM
Yeah, now all we have to do is be able to afford it. Wonder what the price point on tigerton or clovertown is going to be.
Yeah thats what i want to know. Because right now i have a dual-core powermac. I'm interested in this mac pro now, if i have huge upgradability options in the future, and also depending on price. I can wait til january, but if all that will happen by then is that there will be a 1K bto clovertown/kentsfield bto, I probably couldn't afford that anyway, and don't want to wait, but if they are going to upgrade everything, to the octo-core chip and prices are around the same, even if they increase, i would wait.
Yeah thats what i want to know. Because right now i have a dual-core powermac. I'm interested in this mac pro now, if i have huge upgradability options in the future, and also depending on price. I can wait til january, but if all that will happen by then is that there will be a 1K bto clovertown/kentsfield bto, I probably couldn't afford that anyway, and don't want to wait, but if they are going to upgrade everything, to the octo-core chip and prices are around the same, even if they increase, i would wait.
jettredmont
Apr 10, 05:26 PM
Interesting news, but the bit about booting competitors is downright disgusting.
Umm, it's a Final Cut Users' Group, not an Avid user's group. I think they are a little more interested in the next big step in Fincal Cut Pro, moreso than what Avid and Adobe are doing. Apple demanded all stage time, because they have a lot to cover, and want the rest of the meet available to talk about what they demo. Seems completely kosher to me.
Now, if this was Apple going to something like NAB and telling them to boot out all their non-Apple demos, that would be different. But while this is at NAB, it is quite specifically the group of self-identified folks who care more about FCP than anything else. So no big deal.
Umm, it's a Final Cut Users' Group, not an Avid user's group. I think they are a little more interested in the next big step in Fincal Cut Pro, moreso than what Avid and Adobe are doing. Apple demanded all stage time, because they have a lot to cover, and want the rest of the meet available to talk about what they demo. Seems completely kosher to me.
Now, if this was Apple going to something like NAB and telling them to boot out all their non-Apple demos, that would be different. But while this is at NAB, it is quite specifically the group of self-identified folks who care more about FCP than anything else. So no big deal.
eoblaed
Apr 25, 02:48 PM
Thinking it's only stored on the device and not used by Apple is naive. What's the point of logging your every location if it's not going to be used in some way.
When you bought your device (even if you didn't purchase one, I'm speaking to the general 'you'), you knew that it had GPS capabilities. You knew that the phone knew where you were at any given time.
You also knew it had network capabilities. Nothing stops any GPS device with networking capabilities from broadcasting this data without you knowing. We trust the manufacturers of these devices to not do that.
Saying you don't trust Apple/Google/etc to not secretly broadcast your data just because it's backed up like your contacts/phone-conversation-information/texts/etc runs counter to the same trust you placed in those companies when you bought the device; if they're willing to broadcast that data because it's saved on your device they could just as easily broadcast that data as it's being gathered, real time without storing it. In fact, it'd be easier to do that since there wouldn't be an easy artifact left behind for people to gawk at.
Seriously, if you trust these companies to not broadcast your data behind your back while you're using it, why do you think they're going to broadcast it because it's part of your backup?
When you bought your device (even if you didn't purchase one, I'm speaking to the general 'you'), you knew that it had GPS capabilities. You knew that the phone knew where you were at any given time.
You also knew it had network capabilities. Nothing stops any GPS device with networking capabilities from broadcasting this data without you knowing. We trust the manufacturers of these devices to not do that.
Saying you don't trust Apple/Google/etc to not secretly broadcast your data just because it's backed up like your contacts/phone-conversation-information/texts/etc runs counter to the same trust you placed in those companies when you bought the device; if they're willing to broadcast that data because it's saved on your device they could just as easily broadcast that data as it's being gathered, real time without storing it. In fact, it'd be easier to do that since there wouldn't be an easy artifact left behind for people to gawk at.
Seriously, if you trust these companies to not broadcast your data behind your back while you're using it, why do you think they're going to broadcast it because it's part of your backup?
01civicman
Apr 8, 08:28 AM
Scenario 1: Store expects 1000 customers. Customer 15 walks in and buys all the store's stock. The remaining 985 customer walk in through the day and are told we have nothing to sell you. These 98.5% of the daily customers never return to the store in the future.
Scenario 2: Store expects 1000 customers and rations stock to serve the needs of the greatest percentage of their daily customers as possible. The great majority of customers are happy and continue to patronize the store in the future.
Scenario 2 above does not seem so bizarre to me.
We are talking business here, business that needs to function over time and not just over one day. All I know is there are a lot of people here who are taking great pleasure trashing a store for their own personal reasons. But the store must serve their overall client base as best as possible and sometimes that may mean being unable to satisfy every specific request every day.
If somebody came into my store and asked for all of the iPads, my managers would buy him dinner for a week. lol
Scenario 2: Store expects 1000 customers and rations stock to serve the needs of the greatest percentage of their daily customers as possible. The great majority of customers are happy and continue to patronize the store in the future.
Scenario 2 above does not seem so bizarre to me.
We are talking business here, business that needs to function over time and not just over one day. All I know is there are a lot of people here who are taking great pleasure trashing a store for their own personal reasons. But the store must serve their overall client base as best as possible and sometimes that may mean being unable to satisfy every specific request every day.
If somebody came into my store and asked for all of the iPads, my managers would buy him dinner for a week. lol
No comments:
Post a Comment