gmfeier
Apr 11, 12:59 PM
I was already pushing it to wait this long with my 3G. I don't think I can wait another 4 months+ from June.
When does the EVO 2 come out?
Not sure I believe the rumors, but as long as my 3G still works, I'll wait. $200 every 3 years is better than $200 every 2 years.
When does the EVO 2 come out?
Not sure I believe the rumors, but as long as my 3G still works, I'll wait. $200 every 3 years is better than $200 every 2 years.
MrNomNoms
Apr 10, 04:08 AM
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. Only thing that's changed is the scroll bars.
In Lion they're providing AV Foundation which leads me to believe that QtKit will be a stripped down bare basic framework with AV Foundation going to be used for future heavy lifting projects. In Snow Leopard AV Foundation is provided but it is a private framework so the rumours a while ago that Lion version will be 'better' than the Snow Leopard sounds that it'll probably rely on AV Foundation in Snow Leopard but the Lion version, the one with the AV Foundation that is a public API, will probably have more features etc.
In Lion they're providing AV Foundation which leads me to believe that QtKit will be a stripped down bare basic framework with AV Foundation going to be used for future heavy lifting projects. In Snow Leopard AV Foundation is provided but it is a private framework so the rumours a while ago that Lion version will be 'better' than the Snow Leopard sounds that it'll probably rely on AV Foundation in Snow Leopard but the Lion version, the one with the AV Foundation that is a public API, will probably have more features etc.
topgunn
Jul 20, 08:20 AM
THIS is why IBM was given the boot.
cgc
Jul 20, 02:45 PM
I think I'll still get the low-end Intel Tower in August/September, but I'm curious if the XEON 51xx chip could be replaced with a quad-core Intel chip.
Sequin
Apr 11, 02:35 PM
I don't mind waiting till September, but not till next year. I still have the iPhone 3 and have been putting off getting a new one till 5.
rezenclowd3
Dec 8, 12:02 PM
I have close to 20 premium cars (level 17) and i've not noticed much in the way of damage. I do generally drive very safely though.
Damage IMO is much like it was in Project Gotham 1 and 2. One must hit a wall at 100mp+ to see anything significant.
Damage IMO is much like it was in Project Gotham 1 and 2. One must hit a wall at 100mp+ to see anything significant.
Fredrick
Apr 25, 04:46 PM
Hear we go again, who ever filed the law suit, get a life. Lifes not all about trying to make money out of others, enjoy the product for what it is. And not from what you can make out of it!, and if your worried about being tracked, then you must be doing something wrong!!!!
ChickenSwartz
Aug 5, 08:40 PM
There will be no Xserve Pro until there is an Xserve Non-Pro. Many people would love to see an xserve mini (http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/Home/3FE506E2-FD6D-4FC6-BC9C-055F27279DF4.html), but at present there is no need to change the name.
I think iSteve said, when he introduced the MacBook Pro, that they weren't calling it the PowerBook becasue they wanted "mac" in the title (and obviously to take out Power). A new name with a new chip?
I think iSteve said, when he introduced the MacBook Pro, that they weren't calling it the PowerBook becasue they wanted "mac" in the title (and obviously to take out Power). A new name with a new chip?
shamino
Jul 20, 09:12 AM
The Mactopus??
Am I the only one who thought of a case-mod idea after seeing this line? :eek:
Am I the only one who thought of a case-mod idea after seeing this line? :eek:
KnightWRX
Apr 6, 10:52 AM
The Intel IGP is a serious downgrade. It's too bad Intel kicked nVidia out of the market, they have no talent for graphics. I would not have bought a SB MBA with Intel graphics, quite happy with my C2D+320m one.
jav6454
Feb 28, 04:48 PM
Well, I have nothing to say, but that the University has grounds for dismissal if difference of opinion arises.
True, you can argue the gay card, but in this case, they college played the rights cards to get rid of him. Was it the best choice? No.
Still, it's the college's right on who teaches or not; and seeing how it's a Catholic Church college, I'd say it was bound to happen.
True, you can argue the gay card, but in this case, they college played the rights cards to get rid of him. Was it the best choice? No.
Still, it's the college's right on who teaches or not; and seeing how it's a Catholic Church college, I'd say it was bound to happen.
mr.steevo
Apr 28, 04:51 PM
This thread is Still rattling on about this?
The Titanic is still sinking...
The Titanic is still sinking...
Erasmus
Aug 27, 02:58 AM
I already have those stats, I want to see them drop in a high-end Conroe (~3GHz) so I would know that I could feasibly upgrade my 2GHz Core Duo in the future. It's possible, isn't it? I mean, the G5's were really hot, and the iMac enclosure could handle that, wouldn't the new Intel ones be able to handle the Conroe Extremes?
See Apple???
Yet another potential customer for iMac Ultra. We Want C2DE + X1900 and a 23" screen!
It has been demonstrated an iMac can take large amounts of heat. I should expect (With almost certainty) that iMac will get at least 2.4 Conroe, which should be quite a significant increase on its own, and possibly higher. 2.4 on the low end 17" model, 2.66 in 20" and the option of 2.93 or 3.2 in iMac Ultra! (Then Apple can gift me with one for coming up with such a great idea)
X1800's for the 17 and 20 inches, and X1900 for the 23".
Sounds good to me.
Extra space due to 23" could be used for the cooling of the twin fires of CPU and GPU.
See Apple???
Yet another potential customer for iMac Ultra. We Want C2DE + X1900 and a 23" screen!
It has been demonstrated an iMac can take large amounts of heat. I should expect (With almost certainty) that iMac will get at least 2.4 Conroe, which should be quite a significant increase on its own, and possibly higher. 2.4 on the low end 17" model, 2.66 in 20" and the option of 2.93 or 3.2 in iMac Ultra! (Then Apple can gift me with one for coming up with such a great idea)
X1800's for the 17 and 20 inches, and X1900 for the 23".
Sounds good to me.
Extra space due to 23" could be used for the cooling of the twin fires of CPU and GPU.
milozauckerman
Jul 14, 02:54 PM
Without a doubt. And in keeping with long tradition, the "less expensive" name-brand PC will mysteriously come with less (ports, software, even speed if Netburst lingers) than the Mac
I'm talking about Core2 Duo machines - either Conroe or Woodcrest.
Ports? My G5 tower had no more ports than any other PC I've seen. My current CD iMac actually lacks any kind of high-speed port for external hard-drives or burners.
Software? OK, I know it's supposed to be a selling point, but there's not a damn thing outside of iTunes I use in iLife enough to justify hardware prices at any level. They're nice freebies, but I happily pay the Apple Tax to have an OS that works with me rather than against me. Unquestionably worth it, but I'm not going to pretend that I'm getting good value in the (theoretical) hardware.
I think I know what the apologists will say - no one else will offer Woodcrest in a low-end pro machine, they'll use Conroe. And yeah, that's probably true, but for a reason - there's no reason to put Woodcrest in the low-end tower offering, aside from a desire to perpetuate the artifical line distinctions. Which isn't going to cut it in the Intel world.
I'm talking about Core2 Duo machines - either Conroe or Woodcrest.
Ports? My G5 tower had no more ports than any other PC I've seen. My current CD iMac actually lacks any kind of high-speed port for external hard-drives or burners.
Software? OK, I know it's supposed to be a selling point, but there's not a damn thing outside of iTunes I use in iLife enough to justify hardware prices at any level. They're nice freebies, but I happily pay the Apple Tax to have an OS that works with me rather than against me. Unquestionably worth it, but I'm not going to pretend that I'm getting good value in the (theoretical) hardware.
I think I know what the apologists will say - no one else will offer Woodcrest in a low-end pro machine, they'll use Conroe. And yeah, that's probably true, but for a reason - there's no reason to put Woodcrest in the low-end tower offering, aside from a desire to perpetuate the artifical line distinctions. Which isn't going to cut it in the Intel world.
Luph67
Apr 6, 12:21 PM
Yes. I need to see the keyboard. And in a dark room it's critical.
I guess I just assumed that anyone who has used a computer for more than two weeks would be capable of typing without staring at the keyboard.
I guess I just assumed that anyone who has used a computer for more than two weeks would be capable of typing without staring at the keyboard.
jholzner
Aug 7, 06:00 PM
Time Machine won't mean much when the HD fails. Back that azz up!
I keep reading stuff like this. I don't think Time Machine works with the reagular harddrive. You have to use it with an external drive.
I keep reading stuff like this. I don't think Time Machine works with the reagular harddrive. You have to use it with an external drive.
Multimedia
Jul 21, 12:20 PM
It really depends on your application.
On the desktop, if you're a typical user that's just interested in web surfing, playing music files, organizing your photo collection, etc., more than two cores will probably not be too useful. For these kinds of users, even two cores may be overkill, but two are useful for keeping a responsive UI when an application starts hogging all the CPU time.
If you start using higher-power applications (like video work - iMovie/iDVD, for instance) then more cores will speed up that kind of work (assuming the app is properly multithreaded, of course.) 4-core systems will definitely benefit this kind of user.
With current applications, however, I don't think more than 4 cores will be useful. The kind of work that will make 8 cores useful is the kinds that requires expensive professional software - which most people don't use...
Cluster computing has similar benefits. With 8 cores in each processor, it is almost as good as having 8 times as many computers in the cluster, and a lot less expensive. This concept will scale up as the number of cores increases, assuming motherbaords can be designed with enough memory and FSB bandwidth to keep them all busy.
I think we might see a single quad-core chip in consumer systems, like the iMac. I think it is likely that we'll see them in Pro systems, like the Mac Pro (including a high-end model with two quad-core chips.)
I think processors with more than 4 cores will never be seen outside of servers - Xserves and maybe some configurations of Mac Pro. Mostly because that's where there is a need for this kind of power.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.
You are completely blind to the need for many cores right now for very simple stupid work. All I want to do is run 4 copies of Toast while running 4 copies of Handbrake simultaneously. Each wants 2 cores or more. So you are not thinking of the current need for 16 cores already.
This is not even beginning to discuss how many Final Cut Studio Editors need 16 Cores. Man, I can't believe you wrote that. I think you are overlooking the obvious - the need to run multiple copies of today's applicaitons simultaneously.
So as long as the heat issue can be overcome, I don't see why 8 Cores can't belong inside an iMac by the end of 2008.
I apologize if I read a little hot. But I find the line of thought that 4 or 8 Cores are enough or more than enough to really annoy me. They are not nearly enough for those of us who see the problem of not enough cores EVERY DAY. The rest of you either have no imagination or are only using your Macs for word processing, browsing and email.
I am sincerely frustrated by not having enough cores to do simple stupid work efficiently. Just look at how crippled this G5 Quad is already only running three things. They can't even run full speed due to lack of cores.
On the desktop, if you're a typical user that's just interested in web surfing, playing music files, organizing your photo collection, etc., more than two cores will probably not be too useful. For these kinds of users, even two cores may be overkill, but two are useful for keeping a responsive UI when an application starts hogging all the CPU time.
If you start using higher-power applications (like video work - iMovie/iDVD, for instance) then more cores will speed up that kind of work (assuming the app is properly multithreaded, of course.) 4-core systems will definitely benefit this kind of user.
With current applications, however, I don't think more than 4 cores will be useful. The kind of work that will make 8 cores useful is the kinds that requires expensive professional software - which most people don't use...
Cluster computing has similar benefits. With 8 cores in each processor, it is almost as good as having 8 times as many computers in the cluster, and a lot less expensive. This concept will scale up as the number of cores increases, assuming motherbaords can be designed with enough memory and FSB bandwidth to keep them all busy.
I think we might see a single quad-core chip in consumer systems, like the iMac. I think it is likely that we'll see them in Pro systems, like the Mac Pro (including a high-end model with two quad-core chips.)
I think processors with more than 4 cores will never be seen outside of servers - Xserves and maybe some configurations of Mac Pro. Mostly because that's where there is a need for this kind of power.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.
You are completely blind to the need for many cores right now for very simple stupid work. All I want to do is run 4 copies of Toast while running 4 copies of Handbrake simultaneously. Each wants 2 cores or more. So you are not thinking of the current need for 16 cores already.
This is not even beginning to discuss how many Final Cut Studio Editors need 16 Cores. Man, I can't believe you wrote that. I think you are overlooking the obvious - the need to run multiple copies of today's applicaitons simultaneously.
So as long as the heat issue can be overcome, I don't see why 8 Cores can't belong inside an iMac by the end of 2008.
I apologize if I read a little hot. But I find the line of thought that 4 or 8 Cores are enough or more than enough to really annoy me. They are not nearly enough for those of us who see the problem of not enough cores EVERY DAY. The rest of you either have no imagination or are only using your Macs for word processing, browsing and email.
I am sincerely frustrated by not having enough cores to do simple stupid work efficiently. Just look at how crippled this G5 Quad is already only running three things. They can't even run full speed due to lack of cores.
BornAgainMac
Jul 21, 07:19 AM
Now you just need to decide what color your want your new computer... (again)
JFreak
Aug 8, 04:05 AM
Looks like this will be a significant upgrade. Tiger was not what it was promised to be, in my eyes at least, so now I'm thinking they have finally made it better than Panther.
Let's see...
Let's see...
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.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 23, 01:59 PM
Yes I am aware of our Pakistani situation. Do I support it? No. I have the exact same view that Joe Biden supposedly "had". We have no business being near other countries in a military manner unless they are a direct threat to us. "Unless we are attacked or unless there is proof we are about to be attacked"
If you are supporting non-intervention, than I disagree. I support the notion that the UN (using member-nations' pooled military or civilian assets) should be able to intervene in a nation's affairs if it is thought necessary to either 1) protect other nations from harm or 2) protect a nation's own people from its government, or in the case of a civil war, one or more factions.
With that being said, the UN has many flaws and I am not satisfied with the way things are done. But I do feel that intervention is sometimes necessary, if imperfect.
If you are supporting non-intervention, than I disagree. I support the notion that the UN (using member-nations' pooled military or civilian assets) should be able to intervene in a nation's affairs if it is thought necessary to either 1) protect other nations from harm or 2) protect a nation's own people from its government, or in the case of a civil war, one or more factions.
With that being said, the UN has many flaws and I am not satisfied with the way things are done. But I do feel that intervention is sometimes necessary, if imperfect.
greenstork
Jul 31, 12:49 PM
With the possible introduction of the iPhone, movie downloads, Leopard preview, and true video iPods, in addition to new Mac Pros and possibly other updated Macs with the Core 2 Duos, I'm putting my money on a product announcement tomorrow.
Steve's going to spend the keynote telling developers about what they'll be able to do with Leopard, it is a developers conference after all. I'll go out on a limb and say Mac Pros tomorrow or perhaps at the very least, new Xserves. There is every reason to just wait until August 7, but I'll chance my prediction for an update tomorrow. Who's with me!
Steve's going to spend the keynote telling developers about what they'll be able to do with Leopard, it is a developers conference after all. I'll go out on a limb and say Mac Pros tomorrow or perhaps at the very least, new Xserves. There is every reason to just wait until August 7, but I'll chance my prediction for an update tomorrow. Who's with me!
iawait
Apr 11, 10:01 PM
I just don't think I can wait and that is SO irritating I may have to jump ship!
Newton memories :mad:
Newton memories :mad:
SeattleMoose
Apr 5, 07:17 PM
When they revamped Logic Pro they cut the price from $999 to $499.....fingers crossed for FCP.
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق