Lollypop
Aug 5, 04:25 PM
Im glad we will be getting a bit of closure on monday, while I love the rumors its been getting a bit to much, im actively avoiding all mac related sites... I dont want to be the boy that spoilt his own Xmas! :D
Onimusha370
Mar 22, 01:04 PM
I agree.
But who in their right minds would want to own something called a Playbook? :o
+1
'lets make a tablet for our business users, to get serious workloads done. we can call it the playbook'.
i didn't know charlie sheen was in charge of their team?
But who in their right minds would want to own something called a Playbook? :o
+1
'lets make a tablet for our business users, to get serious workloads done. we can call it the playbook'.
i didn't know charlie sheen was in charge of their team?
Kilamite
Apr 12, 03:09 PM
What's the UK time?
3am.
3am.
dernhelm
Nov 29, 07:24 AM
Perhaps that lost money isn't due to pirating like the execs want you to think.
Sure it is. Its just that the everyday Joe isn't the pirate, the music distribution executives are. And there's only room for one pirate ship in this industry.
Sure it is. Its just that the everyday Joe isn't the pirate, the music distribution executives are. And there's only room for one pirate ship in this industry.
Chupa Chupa
Apr 5, 07:00 PM
4GB download with in-app purchases for content would be my guess.
4GB? Do you realize how many DVDs FCS is? Unless Apple is going to severely cut up the package and de-studio it, no way is 4GB nearly enough space. Aperture is fine as a download b/c it's a relatively small program. FCS is a monster. It needs to be on media. I can't hog up my bandwidth to d/l a 16+GB suite.
4GB? Do you realize how many DVDs FCS is? Unless Apple is going to severely cut up the package and de-studio it, no way is 4GB nearly enough space. Aperture is fine as a download b/c it's a relatively small program. FCS is a monster. It needs to be on media. I can't hog up my bandwidth to d/l a 16+GB suite.
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.
Snowy_River
Jul 28, 05:34 PM
I appreciate the thoughts on my quandry whether or not to return my 20 " iMac and purchase after the WWDC. Of course my decision is not any easier with one vote for and one vote against.
Thanks Grokgod and Multimedia for the thoughts...
I'll chime in and try to help alleviate your quandary. I would take it back. You've got a narrow window of opportunity to take it back, and we're just a few days away from an event that will likely harold the release of a new iMac. Even if you wanted to keep this model, if you take it back and then buy it after the release of the new one, you'll likely be able to get it at a fairly discounted price. So, that's what you have to weigh against having a computer to play with for the next couple of weeks...
Thanks Grokgod and Multimedia for the thoughts...
I'll chime in and try to help alleviate your quandary. I would take it back. You've got a narrow window of opportunity to take it back, and we're just a few days away from an event that will likely harold the release of a new iMac. Even if you wanted to keep this model, if you take it back and then buy it after the release of the new one, you'll likely be able to get it at a fairly discounted price. So, that's what you have to weigh against having a computer to play with for the next couple of weeks...
Angelus520
Aug 11, 10:41 AM
Take a look at the Nokia E61. I just got one to replace my BlackBerry and love it. It's the European version and you have to buy it unlocked ($350 or so) but it works great. Cingular is coming out with a dumbed down version called the E62 but strips away some of the cool features like WiFi. Go figure - an American phone with less features than the one sold in the rest of the world.
With crappy phones and our pathetic broadband infrastructure, you'd think we were Third World rather than a "Superpower."
I don't care so much about the iPod capability, but I would like to see the result of a smartphone by Apple. I haven't jumped on the bandwagon of the Treos and Palms.
Call me a sucker, but I'd like somehting that could do all the mundane, make my life easier, organization crap, and have it look cool as well. Oh, and not run on a crap OS.
With crappy phones and our pathetic broadband infrastructure, you'd think we were Third World rather than a "Superpower."
I don't care so much about the iPod capability, but I would like to see the result of a smartphone by Apple. I haven't jumped on the bandwagon of the Treos and Palms.
Call me a sucker, but I'd like somehting that could do all the mundane, make my life easier, organization crap, and have it look cool as well. Oh, and not run on a crap OS.
OutThere
Apr 27, 09:22 AM
Can you really blame them? They won't have a purpose in life without Birtherism.
Si Dieu n'existait pas, il faudrait l'inventer.
Si Dieu n'existait pas, il faudrait l'inventer.
wmmk
Aug 17, 09:49 AM
I don't like Adobe anymore. :mad:
I dunno, I mean, I guess they could use core image, but really. CS3 will probably have PS, Illustrator, ID, FW, Flash, DW, CF, Contribute, Bridge and Acrobat. That's 10 apps. Would you want to develop 20 apps, just so that Mac users could have Core Image? Until competitors come along with Core Image support, don't expect Adobe to have it.
I dunno, I mean, I guess they could use core image, but really. CS3 will probably have PS, Illustrator, ID, FW, Flash, DW, CF, Contribute, Bridge and Acrobat. That's 10 apps. Would you want to develop 20 apps, just so that Mac users could have Core Image? Until competitors come along with Core Image support, don't expect Adobe to have it.
twoodcc
Jul 27, 10:59 PM
Could Shadowfax or Shawnce or someone else who knows describe a little more about the implications of the upgrade from Yonah to Merom? I'm trying to decide whether to get a Macbook or wait, I'm not that worried about the minor speed boost, but I am more concerned about longer term compatibility (say with mac OS or Windows). If there's going to be a point in a couple of years where the difference between Yonah and Merom is the difference between running the latest version of the OS or not, then I might wait. But if it's only speed and heat, I'll probably go for the Yonah (after WWDC) and live with not having the speed and lower heat that the upgrade brings.
i want to know the exact same thing
i want to know the exact same thing
georgee2face
Mar 22, 02:07 PM
My apologies to the"greens", but these tablets ( and my ipad) will NEVER be a true enterprise product with out some sort of native printing and a FIRST CLASS STYLUS/WRITING APPS. PERIOD.
I use mine in two different business, but it takes drop box, print work-arounds and crude writing apps to use it for business.
I enjoy it for all the other reasosns, but business goes to my MAC AIR.
I use mine in two different business, but it takes drop box, print work-arounds and crude writing apps to use it for business.
I enjoy it for all the other reasosns, but business goes to my MAC AIR.
daneoni
Sep 19, 03:36 AM
PowerBook G5 by the holidays.
iMrNiceGuy0023
Jun 9, 01:21 AM
I think this will be great for AT&T and Apple....Radio Shack is the closest store out of AT&T and Apple Store
Radio Shack and Best Buy use the same AT&T POS system to upgrade and activate phones
I got my 3G and 3GS from Best Buy.....but i'll go to Radio Shack for my iPhone 4
Looks like AT&T and Apple are looking to do big numbers with this release
Radio Shack and Best Buy use the same AT&T POS system to upgrade and activate phones
I got my 3G and 3GS from Best Buy.....but i'll go to Radio Shack for my iPhone 4
Looks like AT&T and Apple are looking to do big numbers with this release
digitalbiker
Aug 25, 03:35 PM
Call it what you want but these new MacBooks are crap. Yea there is people who are enjoying theirs without a hitch but look at all the reports of problems. Not once on this forum have we had a flood of problems with a single unit. Apple dropped the ball on this one. Poorly made unit
I think you are exagerating this just a tad. The MacBook has had very few problems considering it is a generation one release. The MacBook Pro generation one and the G4 TI PB first generation were plagued with many, many more problems than the MacBook.
In my opinion Apple has done a very good job of quality control on the MacBook. This battery recall doesn't even apply to the MacBook.
I think you are exagerating this just a tad. The MacBook has had very few problems considering it is a generation one release. The MacBook Pro generation one and the G4 TI PB first generation were plagued with many, many more problems than the MacBook.
In my opinion Apple has done a very good job of quality control on the MacBook. This battery recall doesn't even apply to the MacBook.
Huntn
Aug 16, 10:20 AM
As I am newly familiar with Need For Sped: Shift. How would you guys compare the two games?
I don't know if it is my imagination but some of the racing demos I've tried, the cars seem to skid out of control relatively easily. I'm wondering if this is a characteristic of "realsim" in a racing game?
I don't know if it is my imagination but some of the racing demos I've tried, the cars seem to skid out of control relatively easily. I'm wondering if this is a characteristic of "realsim" in a racing game?
NY Guitarist
Apr 5, 08:11 PM
If it is all just more bells and whistles I guess it will be time to get the upgrade from CS4 to CS5.
It sure does seem like Apple is abandoning the pro market that for a very long time influenced others to go Mac.
I really hope that's not the case.
It sure does seem like Apple is abandoning the pro market that for a very long time influenced others to go Mac.
I really hope that's not the case.
milo
Aug 17, 04:29 PM
Some people do things called graphic design and video editing for a living. Sometimes, when you want to make money and put food on the table, you want top of the line equipment.:rolleyes:
I guess you missed that he was responding to someone talking about gaming? Less eye rolling, more paying attention.
To make more money faster.Yes. I agree totally. If you are making your living with your Mac doing graphics and video work, every minute saved is another minute you can take on another client or meet a perviously impossible deadline. So in that case the extra $850 is made up in a matter of a few weeks or months at worst. Totally understandable when time is money for the Mac professional. :)
Ditto.
I guess you missed that he was responding to someone talking about gaming? Less eye rolling, more paying attention.
To make more money faster.Yes. I agree totally. If you are making your living with your Mac doing graphics and video work, every minute saved is another minute you can take on another client or meet a perviously impossible deadline. So in that case the extra $850 is made up in a matter of a few weeks or months at worst. Totally understandable when time is money for the Mac professional. :)
Ditto.
rjohnstone
Apr 25, 03:06 PM
You obviously missed the point that they do not track anything. It's just a log file on your iphone, it stays with your iphone. I GOT even more news!! I FOUND a file on the iphone that stores text messages. YES PEOPLE text messages. I can read your text messages from this file if I have your phone!! Oh ya, I know you can launch the SMS app, but WHY WOULD APPLE NEED TO STORE TEXT MESSAGES ON MY DEVICE?!?! I'm suing!!
Just like web caching, storing text messages is part of the function of the messaging app. It serves a purpose of giving YOU a history.
And guess what... you can clear it. ;)
Just like web caching, storing text messages is part of the function of the messaging app. It serves a purpose of giving YOU a history.
And guess what... you can clear it. ;)
shamino
Jul 21, 12:45 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.
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.
All I will say is that you are not a typical user. You are not even close to typical.
OK. So maybe you need ten thousand cores and three million gigabytes of RAM. Don't think for an instant that the majority of the world shares your requirements.
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.
All I will say is that you are not a typical user. You are not even close to typical.
OK. So maybe you need ten thousand cores and three million gigabytes of RAM. Don't think for an instant that the majority of the world shares your requirements.
steadysignal
Apr 12, 07:51 AM
i actually dont mind this. i'd like to enjoy the 4 a little longer...
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.
vansouza
Nov 28, 09:59 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Reuters reports (http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=technologyNews&storyID=2006-11-28T213349Z_01_N28267036_RTRUKOC_0_US-MEDIA-SUMMIT-UNIVERSALMUSIC-IPOD.xml&WTmodLoc=TechNewsHome_C2_technologyNews-1) that Universal Music Group Chief Executive said on Tuesday that they may seek a royalty from Apple for iPod sales:
Universal made news earlier this month (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/11/20061109124909.shtml) when it was reported that Microsoft had agreed to pay Universal Music a fee for every new Zune Music Player sold. Music studios, of course, currently get a cut from every song sold, but do not get any percentage of iPod sales.
Perhaps the pencil makers should demand a payment from the pen makers... and if you have a pen and paper you must be copying documents so paper producers should pay book dealers... I could live never buying another Universal song on iTunes... thank you very much Bill Gates... his check to Universal is what may be $900. for all Zunes sold... what a joke...
Reuters reports (http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=technologyNews&storyID=2006-11-28T213349Z_01_N28267036_RTRUKOC_0_US-MEDIA-SUMMIT-UNIVERSALMUSIC-IPOD.xml&WTmodLoc=TechNewsHome_C2_technologyNews-1) that Universal Music Group Chief Executive said on Tuesday that they may seek a royalty from Apple for iPod sales:
Universal made news earlier this month (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/11/20061109124909.shtml) when it was reported that Microsoft had agreed to pay Universal Music a fee for every new Zune Music Player sold. Music studios, of course, currently get a cut from every song sold, but do not get any percentage of iPod sales.
Perhaps the pencil makers should demand a payment from the pen makers... and if you have a pen and paper you must be copying documents so paper producers should pay book dealers... I could live never buying another Universal song on iTunes... thank you very much Bill Gates... his check to Universal is what may be $900. for all Zunes sold... what a joke...
Eidorian
Jul 14, 05:21 PM
Given that this is easily available for the PC world, there's no reason why it can't also be made available for the Mac (aside from someone deciding to write the device driver, of course.)Ok, here's ANOTHER can of worms. Since we're on EFI now and can boot in Windows. It means our video cards, etc. don't have Open Firmware BIOS. Does that mean ANY "Windows" video card will work as long as OS X has drivers for it? Does OS X even have generic VGA drivers?
No comments:
Post a Comment