dernhelm
Jul 27, 10:27 AM
Rule 1 of Apple Events:
You never get all the marbles.
Perfect description.
...But all I want is an iMac upgrade to Core 2 Duo and I'll be happy.
You never get all the marbles.
Perfect description.
...But all I want is an iMac upgrade to Core 2 Duo and I'll be happy.
Timepass
Jul 15, 11:18 AM
:o
I think placing the PSU at the bottom of the case is good...heavy items near the top of the case may lead to Macs being prone to tipping over. Heat can be vented easy enough...
Come on PSU do are not that heavy and genenally speaking cases are pretty stable. Putting the PSU at the top, oh dang the computer will tip over with 1 inch of less travel. It a Tower that going to be out of the way and not hit that offen. Come on PC have been built for years with PSU at the top. Are they unstable... No they are fairly stable. Considering 95+% of all PC towers out there have the PSU at the top and are they tipping over at a slight hit.. No. you have to tip them pretty far before they will fall over.
Also there are other advatages of putting the PSU at the top. Instead of having to make another fan system to cool it and keep it separated from the rest of the case due to the heat it generatates you can now put it at the top where it not going to add heat to the case and use the PSU fans to help cool the rest of the computer.
Lets see that means less fans are needed over all in the computer which means Oh my gosh. LESS NOISE. <sarcasim>Is that possible. Using a PSU fans to help cool the entire computer...... Who as ever heard of such a thing. <sarcasim> Really people most of the agurments people are using against putting the PSU at the top are stupid and weak at best.
It WILL NOT make the computer top heavy. The base on computer is wide enough to keep it stable any how.
It WILL NOT add any more noise to the computer (it will reduce it because the PSU can now help cool the case with it own cooling fans as well)
Power plug at the top.. Um yeah not really a problem. Oh dang a wire is not 12 in higher than it was before. it is still on the back. and instead of plugging in you monitor at the top of the case and the plug on the bottom they flip locations. You the user will never notices or care.
I think placing the PSU at the bottom of the case is good...heavy items near the top of the case may lead to Macs being prone to tipping over. Heat can be vented easy enough...
Come on PSU do are not that heavy and genenally speaking cases are pretty stable. Putting the PSU at the top, oh dang the computer will tip over with 1 inch of less travel. It a Tower that going to be out of the way and not hit that offen. Come on PC have been built for years with PSU at the top. Are they unstable... No they are fairly stable. Considering 95+% of all PC towers out there have the PSU at the top and are they tipping over at a slight hit.. No. you have to tip them pretty far before they will fall over.
Also there are other advatages of putting the PSU at the top. Instead of having to make another fan system to cool it and keep it separated from the rest of the case due to the heat it generatates you can now put it at the top where it not going to add heat to the case and use the PSU fans to help cool the rest of the computer.
Lets see that means less fans are needed over all in the computer which means Oh my gosh. LESS NOISE. <sarcasim>Is that possible. Using a PSU fans to help cool the entire computer...... Who as ever heard of such a thing. <sarcasim> Really people most of the agurments people are using against putting the PSU at the top are stupid and weak at best.
It WILL NOT make the computer top heavy. The base on computer is wide enough to keep it stable any how.
It WILL NOT add any more noise to the computer (it will reduce it because the PSU can now help cool the case with it own cooling fans as well)
Power plug at the top.. Um yeah not really a problem. Oh dang a wire is not 12 in higher than it was before. it is still on the back. and instead of plugging in you monitor at the top of the case and the plug on the bottom they flip locations. You the user will never notices or care.
Taustin Powers
Aug 4, 05:50 PM
I'll pass on the game altogether.
What it does, Gran Turismo does to perfection....I'm just really not into what it does.
I'm more of an arcade racing guy, so I'll stick with Burnout Paradise until it gets a worthy sequel!
What it does, Gran Turismo does to perfection....I'm just really not into what it does.
I'm more of an arcade racing guy, so I'll stick with Burnout Paradise until it gets a worthy sequel!
Rafterman
Apr 27, 08:12 AM
Since I'm neither a criminal nor paranoid, I thought it was kind of cool/interesting too.
Its not about being a criminal or paranoid. This data is for the sole purpose of marketers to sell us crap.
Well, I'm tired of seeing ads everywhere I turn. You can't go to the bathroom now without seeing a ad shoved in your face and its becoming tiresome.
It reminds me of a line from Futurama:
Leela: Didn't you have ads in the 21st century?"
Fry: Well sure, but not in our dreams. Only on TV and radio, and in magazines, and movies, and at ball games... and on buses and milk cartons and t-shirts, and bananas and written on the sky. But not in dreams, no siree.
Well, Fry could have added our iPads and our phones too. Its disgusting already how much advertising has infiltrated our lives. You can't even read a news story on the internet without an ad being being intrusively shoved in your face.
Its not about being a criminal or paranoid. This data is for the sole purpose of marketers to sell us crap.
Well, I'm tired of seeing ads everywhere I turn. You can't go to the bathroom now without seeing a ad shoved in your face and its becoming tiresome.
It reminds me of a line from Futurama:
Leela: Didn't you have ads in the 21st century?"
Fry: Well sure, but not in our dreams. Only on TV and radio, and in magazines, and movies, and at ball games... and on buses and milk cartons and t-shirts, and bananas and written on the sky. But not in dreams, no siree.
Well, Fry could have added our iPads and our phones too. Its disgusting already how much advertising has infiltrated our lives. You can't even read a news story on the internet without an ad being being intrusively shoved in your face.
FF_productions
Aug 15, 11:34 AM
Check it out!
http://barefeats.com/quad06.html
The 3 ghz Mac Pro is neck and neck with the G5 Quad in the Adobe benchmarks, sick considering the fact it's running under rosetta!!
http://barefeats.com/quad06.html
The 3 ghz Mac Pro is neck and neck with the G5 Quad in the Adobe benchmarks, sick considering the fact it's running under rosetta!!
cohen777
Apr 6, 07:53 AM
Let me be clear - FCS needs a robust blu-ray authoring feature. We don't live in a wireless world where you can transmit video free over the air. We still put disks in a player to watch and also preserve our video memories.
Not having a good blu-ray authoring feature is a huge problem for Final Cut Studio. Not only does it impact professional wedding video-graphers, but ordinary people who want to put their video on a disk to send to people. I can't just put my video on netflix to have a friend watch it on his ROKU.
Not having a good blu-ray authoring feature is a huge problem for Final Cut Studio. Not only does it impact professional wedding video-graphers, but ordinary people who want to put their video on a disk to send to people. I can't just put my video on netflix to have a friend watch it on his ROKU.
BRLawyer
Aug 6, 02:05 PM
As Apple applied for the trademark, it will not be approved.
It is up to Apple how they want to proceed. A fight that can't win, no matter how much money they have.
Mac Pro has been the premier Mac dealer in the same county as Apple since 1988. Out of all the names for this new line of computers, why choose one that they know they cannot have.
We are already getting countless support calls for the macbook pro. It seems they assume we made them When we can't help them, they seem to get very upset.
Mac Pro is in a position to file for a court order not to release any computer that bears our name.
So get ready WWDC, we will be watching.
Mike Ajlouny
President
MAC-PRO.com
Great joke, thanks very much...in the same line as Tiger Computer Dealers, right?
It is up to Apple how they want to proceed. A fight that can't win, no matter how much money they have.
Mac Pro has been the premier Mac dealer in the same county as Apple since 1988. Out of all the names for this new line of computers, why choose one that they know they cannot have.
We are already getting countless support calls for the macbook pro. It seems they assume we made them When we can't help them, they seem to get very upset.
Mac Pro is in a position to file for a court order not to release any computer that bears our name.
So get ready WWDC, we will be watching.
Mike Ajlouny
President
MAC-PRO.com
Great joke, thanks very much...in the same line as Tiger Computer Dealers, right?
technicolor
Sep 19, 10:15 PM
Why do you care?
Why shouldnt I?
Why shouldnt I?
cult hero
Mar 31, 09:58 PM
What he said was spot on. Gruber is the archetypical Apple sycophant, second only to Andy Ifatso from MacBreak Weekly.
No, what he said wasn't spot on. Gruber's a Mac fan and someone I would go so far as to call a "defender of the faith." That's pretty accurate. Saying Gruber would "eat Steve Job's ***** if he could" as just gross. I don't mind if someone says it, but when calling someone else biased, giving a raging response like that does make you look any better.
Of course, hating on virtually anything Apple does or anyone who likes/follows them appears to be the trendy thing to do around here.
No, what he said wasn't spot on. Gruber's a Mac fan and someone I would go so far as to call a "defender of the faith." That's pretty accurate. Saying Gruber would "eat Steve Job's ***** if he could" as just gross. I don't mind if someone says it, but when calling someone else biased, giving a raging response like that does make you look any better.
Of course, hating on virtually anything Apple does or anyone who likes/follows them appears to be the trendy thing to do around here.
The ArchAngel
Mar 26, 08:22 AM
I'm shocked at how many people are so willing to just wave away all the nice under-the-hood changes and improvements that Lion offers just because there aren't any super-radical UI changes... really disappointing to be honest. Does it really have to be all flashy to be of interest to you? What, the functional side of things doesn't matter any more?
As an amateur OS X developer, I really hate this attitude because it will end up slowing Lion adoption. That really sucks, because there are a ton of awesome changes in 10.6 that I (and many, many other developers) would love to take advantage of to make their software even greater, but it's not going to be viable to go Lion-only for said features until Lion is installed on the majority of Macs out there.
I hear what you're saying, and agree in large part, but since when did most consumers select products on grounds other than primarily looks?
As an amateur OS X developer, I really hate this attitude because it will end up slowing Lion adoption. That really sucks, because there are a ton of awesome changes in 10.6 that I (and many, many other developers) would love to take advantage of to make their software even greater, but it's not going to be viable to go Lion-only for said features until Lion is installed on the majority of Macs out there.
I hear what you're saying, and agree in large part, but since when did most consumers select products on grounds other than primarily looks?
Santabean2000
Apr 10, 03:45 AM
The other presenters just had to toss months of planning out the window and scramble to reschedule events w/less than a weeks notice during the industry's biggest annual convention. Hopefully the members of the audience that signed up to see the original line-up will be able to make it to all the reschedule events and, on top of that, everyone going to the SuperMeet has now paid money for tickets to what is nothing more than an Apple PR event.
Dick move by Apple but all will be forgiven as long as they release the holy grail of editing on Tuesday. If they preview 'iMovie Pro' lord help them...
To be fair to Mark (the head of Post at Bunim/Murray) there really isn't anything he could say due to the NDA. Just because what he saw of the new FCP might not lead him to believe it would work in Bunim/Murray's current workflow doesn't mean it might not be awesome for someone else's work flow. It was a tough spot for Mark to be in and I'm not exactly sure why he even kicked off the meeting with "I was there, but don't ask me about it because I'm under NDA". He could've never even have brought it up and it wouldn't have altered the course of the conversation at all.
Lethal
But Apple have slipped him a little something to drop it in, s it will get picked up by sites like this... and so the hype begins.
Dick move by Apple but all will be forgiven as long as they release the holy grail of editing on Tuesday. If they preview 'iMovie Pro' lord help them...
To be fair to Mark (the head of Post at Bunim/Murray) there really isn't anything he could say due to the NDA. Just because what he saw of the new FCP might not lead him to believe it would work in Bunim/Murray's current workflow doesn't mean it might not be awesome for someone else's work flow. It was a tough spot for Mark to be in and I'm not exactly sure why he even kicked off the meeting with "I was there, but don't ask me about it because I'm under NDA". He could've never even have brought it up and it wouldn't have altered the course of the conversation at all.
Lethal
But Apple have slipped him a little something to drop it in, s it will get picked up by sites like this... and so the hype begins.
GFLPraxis
Jul 20, 12:01 PM
Back to reality: Apple wil use Xeon 51xx (5150 and 5160) in the MacPro, and Core 2 Duo (Merom) in the iMac and MBP to be announced at the WWDC. The top iMac config will get a boost to 2.33GHz. In addition, Apple will use the price-drops for the Yonah to upgrade the Core Solo mini to Core Duo.
I disagree. I think Apple will use Core 2 Duo (Conroe) in the iMac, and Merom in the MBP. The iMac could hold a G5, why not Conroe?
On top of that, you'll notice that a 2.16 GHz Conroe costs $70 less than the 1.83 GHz Yonah that's in the iMac now, $70 less than a 2 GHz Merom, and $200 less than a 2.16 GHz Merom, increasing Apple's profit margins on the iMac considerably or allowing a price drop- plus they can advertise it as a desktop processor.
In fact, even if Conroe was too hot (which I highly doubt, since the iMac had a G5), a 2.16 GHz Conroe underclocked to 2 GHz still saves $70 over a 2 GHz Merom.
I disagree. I think Apple will use Core 2 Duo (Conroe) in the iMac, and Merom in the MBP. The iMac could hold a G5, why not Conroe?
On top of that, you'll notice that a 2.16 GHz Conroe costs $70 less than the 1.83 GHz Yonah that's in the iMac now, $70 less than a 2 GHz Merom, and $200 less than a 2.16 GHz Merom, increasing Apple's profit margins on the iMac considerably or allowing a price drop- plus they can advertise it as a desktop processor.
In fact, even if Conroe was too hot (which I highly doubt, since the iMac had a G5), a 2.16 GHz Conroe underclocked to 2 GHz still saves $70 over a 2 GHz Merom.
Legion93
Apr 6, 03:34 PM
Perfect day for this news....
I have a new 13" MBA sitting here at my desk unopened...just dropped off from FedEx today. I'm debating whether or not to just return it and wait for the refresh or be happy with what I got.
I'm a very light user..web, email, iTunes, sync iPhone and iPad. Do I really need the Sandy Bridge power..probably not but I dont want to have the "old not so shiny ball" come June (as the rumors suggest).
Any help from the MR community is greatly appreciated!
Don't get your hopes up, as any rumour is just a speculation. Apple may or may not release any updated version of the MBA very soon, but it can all depend. If you really want power, you could sell your Air for a MBP, which came out only couple months ago.
I have a new 13" MBA sitting here at my desk unopened...just dropped off from FedEx today. I'm debating whether or not to just return it and wait for the refresh or be happy with what I got.
I'm a very light user..web, email, iTunes, sync iPhone and iPad. Do I really need the Sandy Bridge power..probably not but I dont want to have the "old not so shiny ball" come June (as the rumors suggest).
Any help from the MR community is greatly appreciated!
Don't get your hopes up, as any rumour is just a speculation. Apple may or may not release any updated version of the MBA very soon, but it can all depend. If you really want power, you could sell your Air for a MBP, which came out only couple months ago.
*LTD*
Apr 27, 09:44 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8H7)
It's nice that this month's "Apple-gate" story will start to die. I can't wait to see what the media generates next month in the "Apple-gate" saga.
Antennagate
Locationgate
C'mon, Apple competitors, think up your next outrage.
Who cares about all this overblown nonsense. I just want my damn iPad 2. Those bloody things sell out as soon as anyone gets any amount of stock.
It's nice that this month's "Apple-gate" story will start to die. I can't wait to see what the media generates next month in the "Apple-gate" saga.
Antennagate
Locationgate
C'mon, Apple competitors, think up your next outrage.
Who cares about all this overblown nonsense. I just want my damn iPad 2. Those bloody things sell out as soon as anyone gets any amount of stock.
Moyank24
Mar 2, 10:01 PM
Hes a quack.
http://holybulliesandheadlessmonsters.blogspot.com/2009/02/more-on-phony-expert-john-r.html
Heres a nicely done documenting of the doctors distortions too: http://www.freewebs.com/palmettoumoja/John%20R.%20Diggs's%20lies.pdf
And here is what the Southern Poverty Law Center has to say about him:
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2010/winter/under-attack-gays-remain-minority-mos
I figured the research and findings were a little skewed when they found that lesbians had more heterosexual sex than heterosexual women did. :rolleyes:
http://holybulliesandheadlessmonsters.blogspot.com/2009/02/more-on-phony-expert-john-r.html
Heres a nicely done documenting of the doctors distortions too: http://www.freewebs.com/palmettoumoja/John%20R.%20Diggs's%20lies.pdf
And here is what the Southern Poverty Law Center has to say about him:
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2010/winter/under-attack-gays-remain-minority-mos
I figured the research and findings were a little skewed when they found that lesbians had more heterosexual sex than heterosexual women did. :rolleyes:
samcraig
Apr 27, 08:15 AM
A lot of people are upset over this. But, no one seems to care that the US Government can snoop on any electronic communication it wants for well over 10 years now: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Echelon_(signals_intelligence)
Data transmissions, cell phone calls, you name it. I think we're trying to cook the wrong goose if you ask me.
I think ALL the gooses should be cooked. No one should get the free pass.. so I don't think it's wrong to call Apple out on this.
I thought looking at my location histories was interesting. I, too, have no delusions that I cannot be tracked (cell phone, credit card purchases, etc.) I wonder if all the paranoids realize that any GPS camera encodes that information in the image. Share that photo online and anyone can get the metadata with location of photograph.
You wanna be connected, you can't be truly anonymous.
You wanna be anonymous, sell you computer, smart phone, cut up credit cards, and move to an undocumented shack in the middle of nowhere with no utilities.
Sharing a photo is actively giving out a location. Just like foursquare, tweeting and updating facebook. This issue is about giving out data which is involuntary, non encrypted and not being able to turn it off.
And as for the latter half of your statement - it's a dangerous/slippery slope to start being apathetic about your right to privacy. Once it's all out there - it's that much harder to get it back.
And again - there's a difference between voluntarily and involuntarily releasing of private information.
Data transmissions, cell phone calls, you name it. I think we're trying to cook the wrong goose if you ask me.
I think ALL the gooses should be cooked. No one should get the free pass.. so I don't think it's wrong to call Apple out on this.
I thought looking at my location histories was interesting. I, too, have no delusions that I cannot be tracked (cell phone, credit card purchases, etc.) I wonder if all the paranoids realize that any GPS camera encodes that information in the image. Share that photo online and anyone can get the metadata with location of photograph.
You wanna be connected, you can't be truly anonymous.
You wanna be anonymous, sell you computer, smart phone, cut up credit cards, and move to an undocumented shack in the middle of nowhere with no utilities.
Sharing a photo is actively giving out a location. Just like foursquare, tweeting and updating facebook. This issue is about giving out data which is involuntary, non encrypted and not being able to turn it off.
And as for the latter half of your statement - it's a dangerous/slippery slope to start being apathetic about your right to privacy. Once it's all out there - it's that much harder to get it back.
And again - there's a difference between voluntarily and involuntarily releasing of private information.
Reventon
Aug 10, 10:47 AM
The Signature Edition is only available in Europe and Australia/NZ and not North America.
http://ps3.ign.com/articles/111/1110501p1.html
That said, I've already pre-ordered the Collector's Edition when they announced its release. (I probably wouldn't get it anyway, I'm not to keen on spending $300 for a game when I could get a Logitech G27 for roughly the same price). I love the GT series. The graphics look AMAZING and I can't wait for November to roll around. :D
http://ps3.ign.com/articles/111/1110501p1.html
That said, I've already pre-ordered the Collector's Edition when they announced its release. (I probably wouldn't get it anyway, I'm not to keen on spending $300 for a game when I could get a Logitech G27 for roughly the same price). I love the GT series. The graphics look AMAZING and I can't wait for November to roll around. :D
Bill McEnaney
Apr 29, 12:47 PM
So what? Who said liberals never partake in name calling? You claimed that liberals do more name calling. You want me to go dig out examples of name-calling done by conservative voices such as Limbaugh, Beck, etc.?
Please do dig them out. It's only fair that you should be free to point out point out evil that some conservatives do publicly. Meanwhile, let's see whether this (http://www.mrc.org/Profiles/odonnell/welcome.asp) link works now.
RT, did you notice that I said that whomever does it, name-calling is libel or slander?
Please do dig them out. It's only fair that you should be free to point out point out evil that some conservatives do publicly. Meanwhile, let's see whether this (http://www.mrc.org/Profiles/odonnell/welcome.asp) link works now.
RT, did you notice that I said that whomever does it, name-calling is libel or slander?
twoodcc
Aug 5, 07:20 PM
To me the answer to the whole IR/Mac Pro/Front Row thing is obvious - put an integrated IR receiver into the keyboard. The keyboard would come with the Mac Pro (unlike the display) and is rarely under the desk. :)
Plus they could sell the keyboard for any Mac (including ones that don't have Front Row - they could include the app with it).
that's actually a good idea....;)
Plus they could sell the keyboard for any Mac (including ones that don't have Front Row - they could include the app with it).
that's actually a good idea....;)
Soba
Jul 28, 01:02 PM
you can't make a statement like that. that's like saying "i hate general electric air conditioners." what the heck? all CPU's (and air conditioners) do the same thing.
I'm not sure if this was intended as some kind of throwaway comment or not, but this is not even remotely true.
The original poster said he hated the P4, and honestly, the P4 was a lousy chip design from day 1. The original Pentium 4 chips released about 5 1/2 years ago were outperformed in some instances by an original Pentium chip running at 166MHz. The Pentium 4 was an awful architecture in many respects that simply could not be cleaned up enough to be viable; that would be why Intel abandoned it and based its current designs on the Pentium Pro's core (which was really a very decent server chip in the nineties).
When Apple announced last year they were going with Intel, a lot of people agreed it was a good choice based on the current state of the PowerPC architecture and based on Intel's planned chip designs. Personally, I was a bit unsure at the time, but was optimistic about the switch and figured we could scarcely do much worse than sticking with the G5, which was languishing. Turning back the clock a bit, if instead of releasing the G5, Apple had announced a switch to Intel in I would have thought they were crazy. Intel's chips were awful at that time and there wasn't much of a light at the end of the tunnel, either.
CPUs can be very, very different even if the overall system architecture is similar. And I side with the original poster. The P4 was a dog, and thankfully it is about to be buried forever.
I'm not sure if this was intended as some kind of throwaway comment or not, but this is not even remotely true.
The original poster said he hated the P4, and honestly, the P4 was a lousy chip design from day 1. The original Pentium 4 chips released about 5 1/2 years ago were outperformed in some instances by an original Pentium chip running at 166MHz. The Pentium 4 was an awful architecture in many respects that simply could not be cleaned up enough to be viable; that would be why Intel abandoned it and based its current designs on the Pentium Pro's core (which was really a very decent server chip in the nineties).
When Apple announced last year they were going with Intel, a lot of people agreed it was a good choice based on the current state of the PowerPC architecture and based on Intel's planned chip designs. Personally, I was a bit unsure at the time, but was optimistic about the switch and figured we could scarcely do much worse than sticking with the G5, which was languishing. Turning back the clock a bit, if instead of releasing the G5, Apple had announced a switch to Intel in I would have thought they were crazy. Intel's chips were awful at that time and there wasn't much of a light at the end of the tunnel, either.
CPUs can be very, very different even if the overall system architecture is similar. And I side with the original poster. The P4 was a dog, and thankfully it is about to be buried forever.
NewSc2
Sep 19, 02:18 AM
Does it even MATTER if Apple keeps up? Do we actually WANT Apple to release a new computer every month when Intel bumps up their chips a few megahertz?
See, it's easy to get lost in the specs war. The Mac Pros came out and I was salivating, even though I have a dual 2.0GHz G5 sitting at home. And then one day, as I was editing some HD footage, it occurred ot me that my G5 here - my now outdated G5 - was editing 1080p high-def footage without so much as a flinch. It was SO fast it was not even necessary at all.
So I really have to ask - does Apple really need to get into that stupid-ass PC specs war? Is it really hurting you guys that Apple has been slow to update? Are you really doing tasks that the current computer lineup cannot do?
Hm, well my Powerbook runs barely 4 instances of Sculpture on some of my works. MacBook Pros can run about 15-17, but I've been holding off on the Rev. A because of all the heat issues. Hopefully those get cleared up.
Anyways -- yes, I think we should expect Apple to update along with everybody else on the PC front. Maybe not every small speed bump, but whenever a newly designed chip comes out.
See, it's easy to get lost in the specs war. The Mac Pros came out and I was salivating, even though I have a dual 2.0GHz G5 sitting at home. And then one day, as I was editing some HD footage, it occurred ot me that my G5 here - my now outdated G5 - was editing 1080p high-def footage without so much as a flinch. It was SO fast it was not even necessary at all.
So I really have to ask - does Apple really need to get into that stupid-ass PC specs war? Is it really hurting you guys that Apple has been slow to update? Are you really doing tasks that the current computer lineup cannot do?
Hm, well my Powerbook runs barely 4 instances of Sculpture on some of my works. MacBook Pros can run about 15-17, but I've been holding off on the Rev. A because of all the heat issues. Hopefully those get cleared up.
Anyways -- yes, I think we should expect Apple to update along with everybody else on the PC front. Maybe not every small speed bump, but whenever a newly designed chip comes out.
Bosunsfate
Aug 8, 12:46 AM
Well I for one was kind of disappointed. Leopard is sort of Apple's chance to prove they can out-Vista Vista, and I'm not really sure what we saw today does it. I've been following Vista somewhat closely, and it really does catch Windows up to OS X in terms of features and prettiness.
I really think most of the features shown off today are already present in Windows (I've definitely heard about all of them before) or will be in Vista, and it's too bad Apple didn't have anything truly innovative to show us. Hopefully those secret features are something good...
I have seen plenty of beta Vista versions and they have nothing like Spaces or Time Machine....or frankly anything I saw today.
Why don't you point out something specific rather blather on with such nonsense.
I really think most of the features shown off today are already present in Windows (I've definitely heard about all of them before) or will be in Vista, and it's too bad Apple didn't have anything truly innovative to show us. Hopefully those secret features are something good...
I have seen plenty of beta Vista versions and they have nothing like Spaces or Time Machine....or frankly anything I saw today.
Why don't you point out something specific rather blather on with such nonsense.
aegisdesign
Sep 13, 12:30 PM
The Mac Pro isn't for most people. It's for professionals and professional applications, which are usally multithreaded, and will take advantage of the capabilities.
If you have a complaint about all these cores and not being able to take advantage of them, then this is not the computer for you. You're probably not using the software that will take advantage of them, so let it go and stop whining about it. For the those of us that do, this is great news.
It was just a general point, not a whine, so don't get your panties in a bunch. And some of the applications that don't take advantage of multiple cores currently are Adobe Photoshop and Quicktime which both rarely use more than two cores and sometimes only one. Both pretty important to professionals.
If you have a complaint about all these cores and not being able to take advantage of them, then this is not the computer for you. You're probably not using the software that will take advantage of them, so let it go and stop whining about it. For the those of us that do, this is great news.
It was just a general point, not a whine, so don't get your panties in a bunch. And some of the applications that don't take advantage of multiple cores currently are Adobe Photoshop and Quicktime which both rarely use more than two cores and sometimes only one. Both pretty important to professionals.
KnightWRX
Apr 9, 11:12 AM
I thought the 320m was also integrated? Wouldn't that mean that would be your only graphics card were nvidia allowed to add them to sandy bridge? I don't see why you would have integrated intel hd 3000 along with an integrated 320m (or successor).
Why not ? A 320m successor would just destroy the Intel HD 3000 which is sub-par compared to the current 320m. Why not use 2 IGPs and go for a 2 chip solution instead of using a dedicated GPU and have to rely on a 3 chip solution if that 2nd IGP just blows away the first ?
Heck, just disable the Intel 3000 HD entirely.
Intel got greedy.
Why not ? A 320m successor would just destroy the Intel HD 3000 which is sub-par compared to the current 320m. Why not use 2 IGPs and go for a 2 chip solution instead of using a dedicated GPU and have to rely on a 3 chip solution if that 2nd IGP just blows away the first ?
Heck, just disable the Intel 3000 HD entirely.
Intel got greedy.
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق