thworple
Sep 12, 11:19 AM
Its good to know that you will be able to drop in the new processors into an exisiting Mac Pro.
Expensive.... but good to know.
Expensive.... but good to know.
mmmcheese
Jul 14, 03:37 PM
As usual though they come with 50% of the necessary RAM :rolleyes:, why Apple can't get this right I don't know.
Also I'm surprised the top model doesn't have Intel's fastest chip, surely Apple want to say they have the fastest possible computers?
Dual Optical drives is OK, good if you want to have a blu-ray drive as well I suppose...
1) This is all rumour and speculation...
2) At the price that OEMs charge for memory, less RAM is better. We can fill it with whatever we pick.
Also I'm surprised the top model doesn't have Intel's fastest chip, surely Apple want to say they have the fastest possible computers?
Dual Optical drives is OK, good if you want to have a blu-ray drive as well I suppose...
1) This is all rumour and speculation...
2) At the price that OEMs charge for memory, less RAM is better. We can fill it with whatever we pick.
BaldiMac
Mar 22, 04:00 PM
Oh FFS... Ok, yes, if we're being pedantic, I'll wait until I try both iOS 5 and the Playbook before deciding.
:rolleyes: I wasn't being pedantic. You were the one calling for more rational conversation. I agree. And then you curse and belittle the first reply to your post.
I think it's disingenuous to call iOS lagging compared to the Playbook OS when you know perfectly well that iOS will likely be updated around the same time as the Playbook release. It's been played out over and over again in these forums where a demo of an unreleased product is hailed as so much better than Apple's version that came out almost a year ago. Maybe it's just a pet peeve of mine.
:rolleyes: I wasn't being pedantic. You were the one calling for more rational conversation. I agree. And then you curse and belittle the first reply to your post.
I think it's disingenuous to call iOS lagging compared to the Playbook OS when you know perfectly well that iOS will likely be updated around the same time as the Playbook release. It's been played out over and over again in these forums where a demo of an unreleased product is hailed as so much better than Apple's version that came out almost a year ago. Maybe it's just a pet peeve of mine.
ChrisA
Aug 7, 06:43 PM
Probably the same way it is in scalable transactional databases that use multi-versioning concurrency protocols (e.g. PostgreSQL and Oracle). No data is over-written, and every "update" actually creates a new record version.
Lots of ways it COULD be implemented. Looks at Suns new file system ZFS. It is basically "Copy on Write". With a file system you can do things even fancier then with a DBMS. For example a "block" (i-node) exists physicaly on the disk only once but it could be maped into any numbr of files. If a file in only an orderd set of block numbers then to copy a copy all you need to copy is the set of numbers which is on the order of 1000 times shorter then the data itself.
But on the other hand you _want_ the data to be physically copied if it is to be backed up to an external drive.
Some time ago Apple was talking with Sun about using ZFS in OSX but I don't think anything came out of it. I suspect Apple wrote this themselves
The problem is not that I can't figure out how Apple did this but that I can think of about a half dozen ways they could have done this.
Lots of ways it COULD be implemented. Looks at Suns new file system ZFS. It is basically "Copy on Write". With a file system you can do things even fancier then with a DBMS. For example a "block" (i-node) exists physicaly on the disk only once but it could be maped into any numbr of files. If a file in only an orderd set of block numbers then to copy a copy all you need to copy is the set of numbers which is on the order of 1000 times shorter then the data itself.
But on the other hand you _want_ the data to be physically copied if it is to be backed up to an external drive.
Some time ago Apple was talking with Sun about using ZFS in OSX but I don't think anything came out of it. I suspect Apple wrote this themselves
The problem is not that I can't figure out how Apple did this but that I can think of about a half dozen ways they could have done this.
dernhelm
Aug 7, 03:56 PM
I'd also like to point out I've never actually gotten XP's system restore to work, I've tried about 10 times over the past 5 years. Maybe I'm the exception, but you really can't rely on it.
I've had it TRASH a machine at my home before. But I've used it successfully at work once or twice. For the disk space, though, I often turn it off. It is a complete pig, and if I'm tight at all, it's the first thing to go.
I've had it TRASH a machine at my home before. But I've used it successfully at work once or twice. For the disk space, though, I often turn it off. It is a complete pig, and if I'm tight at all, it's the first thing to go.
wordmunger
Nov 28, 06:42 PM
They already get 79 cents out of every 99-cent song sold, and they don't have to pay a penny to produce or distribute the music, as they would with CDs. Apple has given them a more efficient way to distribute music, and they come begging for a share of iPod profits. Ridiculous.
bibbz
Jun 15, 11:36 AM
Se after some clarification, heres the process...
We cant guarantee you a phone, but if you "reserve" and have a pin number, you will get a phone. We just cant make a promise, guarantee, or anything like that per apple.
The same still applies, if we take 10 pins, we get 10 phones.
We cant guarantee you a phone, but if you "reserve" and have a pin number, you will get a phone. We just cant make a promise, guarantee, or anything like that per apple.
The same still applies, if we take 10 pins, we get 10 phones.
eMagius
Aug 7, 07:36 PM
As others have said, Time Machine is likely either a direct port of Sun's ZFS, or an equivalent implementation in HFS+.
I don't think we can say exactly how things work underneath. Windows 2003 offers differential snapshots without making massive changes to NTFS, for example. It would be neat if Apple did throw its weight behind ZFS, but I'm pretty sure it's not going to happen with 10.5.
According to today's keynote, Apple has finally added support for network drives. But I wonder -- does this mean only other Leopard Macs, or any shared drive that the Mac can connect to? Can I index a Windows shared drive from my Mac, or even a Unix NFS mount? Or is it only other Macs? Once again, if it's limited to other Leopard Macs, then this would be useless for a lot of people (mostly ME! :D).
I don't see how this would work for anything other than other Leopard (maybe Tiger, with a software update) Macs. Spotlight has to have the indexes pre-generated, after all.
Finally, gotta wonder what those "top secret" features are, and why so secret?
Call me a cynic, but I'd say Apple either hasn't implemented them yet or hasn't thought of them yet.
I don't think we can say exactly how things work underneath. Windows 2003 offers differential snapshots without making massive changes to NTFS, for example. It would be neat if Apple did throw its weight behind ZFS, but I'm pretty sure it's not going to happen with 10.5.
According to today's keynote, Apple has finally added support for network drives. But I wonder -- does this mean only other Leopard Macs, or any shared drive that the Mac can connect to? Can I index a Windows shared drive from my Mac, or even a Unix NFS mount? Or is it only other Macs? Once again, if it's limited to other Leopard Macs, then this would be useless for a lot of people (mostly ME! :D).
I don't see how this would work for anything other than other Leopard (maybe Tiger, with a software update) Macs. Spotlight has to have the indexes pre-generated, after all.
Finally, gotta wonder what those "top secret" features are, and why so secret?
Call me a cynic, but I'd say Apple either hasn't implemented them yet or hasn't thought of them yet.
scottlinux
Sep 13, 10:32 PM
If you don't think so, then you are paying way too much attention to the content and not enough to the process by which they are conveying that content.
Well if the content is crap, who cares to watch? Content of TV is more important to me. I'd rather see a fascinating news show or program over rabbit ears than watch the Today Show in HD.
My post of this news has nothing to do with content.
This wasn't clear the first time. You sounded like a crazed American Idol fan with your original post. And HD broadcasts are nothing new...
Well if the content is crap, who cares to watch? Content of TV is more important to me. I'd rather see a fascinating news show or program over rabbit ears than watch the Today Show in HD.
My post of this news has nothing to do with content.
This wasn't clear the first time. You sounded like a crazed American Idol fan with your original post. And HD broadcasts are nothing new...
ImNoSuperMan
Jul 27, 10:33 AM
T minus 11 days...............
Cant wait.
Cant wait.
CaoCao
Feb 28, 09:36 PM
You can blame my work PC for not correcting my awful spelling. :rolleyes:
But, yes, obviously I meant influences.
Also, thank you for admitting what most people on here can see. You have no idea what you are talking about.
Correct I have no idea what causes homosexuality, neither do scientists.
Well, then why do expect us to explain it to you? Why do you expect us to justify who we are? We are who we are and we have just as much to offer the world as you do. We have families, talents and love just like anyone else. Love is rare. Why would you deny that to two adults who truly care about each other? To me, that's sick and disgusting. Keep your religion to yourself. Wallow in it's BS as much as you want. But keep it out of our lives.
I wanted to know what he expected from me, he doesn't necessarily have to know the cause(s). I don't remember saying you could not live with the person you love. Also one can not infer what "that" means from your paragraph.
But, yes, obviously I meant influences.
Also, thank you for admitting what most people on here can see. You have no idea what you are talking about.
Correct I have no idea what causes homosexuality, neither do scientists.
Well, then why do expect us to explain it to you? Why do you expect us to justify who we are? We are who we are and we have just as much to offer the world as you do. We have families, talents and love just like anyone else. Love is rare. Why would you deny that to two adults who truly care about each other? To me, that's sick and disgusting. Keep your religion to yourself. Wallow in it's BS as much as you want. But keep it out of our lives.
I wanted to know what he expected from me, he doesn't necessarily have to know the cause(s). I don't remember saying you could not live with the person you love. Also one can not infer what "that" means from your paragraph.
milo
Jul 27, 10:57 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.
And minis.
I'm guessing we get the towers at WWDC and probably meroms in the macbook. Most if not all the other models will get updates, but they can't do them all at once, I'd bet they'll follow up with separate announcements in a few weeks.
Core 3 will be out before Vista is. I'm going to call it now.
Well, duh. That's already pretty much been announced. Vista will be next year, and quad core intel chips are supposed to be out before the end of the year.
wasn't this announced last friday? (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060721145043.shtml)
Yeah. But today, it happened.
Does anyone know if the chips that are actually shipping are the same as the prototype chips?
YES! That's the whole point of a prototype.
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.
You really need to read about this...these chips are just a little higher clock speed. But they have a 20%+ boost at the same clock speed. They ARE making better chip designs instead of just bumping clock speed. Intel/Apple is actually doing pretty much the opposite of what you accuse them of doing.
And minis.
I'm guessing we get the towers at WWDC and probably meroms in the macbook. Most if not all the other models will get updates, but they can't do them all at once, I'd bet they'll follow up with separate announcements in a few weeks.
Core 3 will be out before Vista is. I'm going to call it now.
Well, duh. That's already pretty much been announced. Vista will be next year, and quad core intel chips are supposed to be out before the end of the year.
wasn't this announced last friday? (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060721145043.shtml)
Yeah. But today, it happened.
Does anyone know if the chips that are actually shipping are the same as the prototype chips?
YES! That's the whole point of a prototype.
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.
You really need to read about this...these chips are just a little higher clock speed. But they have a 20%+ boost at the same clock speed. They ARE making better chip designs instead of just bumping clock speed. Intel/Apple is actually doing pretty much the opposite of what you accuse them of doing.
Tanglewood
Aug 7, 03:46 PM
I guess I would be underwhelmed if I had mistaken WWDC for Macworld or something, and expected a bunch of major new product announcements.
I agree. Release Mac Pro and just enough of Leopard to keep us going until January. Besides whats the point in Apple showing its entire hand with a release window 7-9 months out?
I do like that they'll be updating Mail. Having templates will be handy for what I use the program for.
I agree. Release Mac Pro and just enough of Leopard to keep us going until January. Besides whats the point in Apple showing its entire hand with a release window 7-9 months out?
I do like that they'll be updating Mail. Having templates will be handy for what I use the program for.
Carlson-online
Jul 20, 11:47 AM
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).
yes, its known as reverse hyper threading. AMD are working on it
http://www.dvhardware.net/article10901.html
yes, its known as reverse hyper threading. AMD are working on it
http://www.dvhardware.net/article10901.html
JAT
Apr 6, 04:09 PM
YOU apparently havent used either at any length.
I have said nothing that would relate to usage. Do you know what "apparent" means?
I have said nothing that would relate to usage. Do you know what "apparent" means?
Nuck81
Dec 8, 03:44 AM
Actually, Sony explained that the damage is not unlocked or progressive as one dives deeper into the game. It's just that as one goes further into the game, one is able to FINALLY collect more premium cars which do have the better damage engine.
As far as the cars...I really want more already...but not more of the same version. I REALLY want a Triumph TR6 and Datsun 240Z...theres a Triumph Spitfire, which is not near as collectible. Also should have the Brabham fan car as well IMO, plus some Can-Am cars. Stupid having 40 or so of the same body style.
Also, can one set a stick to look around? Racing without the ability to look around is for earlier generations, not THIS generation.
you can look left and right if you assign it somewhere in the layout options.
I look left and right with the right analog as I gas and brake with R2/L2
As far as the cars...I really want more already...but not more of the same version. I REALLY want a Triumph TR6 and Datsun 240Z...theres a Triumph Spitfire, which is not near as collectible. Also should have the Brabham fan car as well IMO, plus some Can-Am cars. Stupid having 40 or so of the same body style.
Also, can one set a stick to look around? Racing without the ability to look around is for earlier generations, not THIS generation.
you can look left and right if you assign it somewhere in the layout options.
I look left and right with the right analog as I gas and brake with R2/L2
EagerDragon
Aug 27, 11:03 AM
Apple is now getting their parts from the same bin that PC makers use. Intel = cheap parts. Cheap parts = low quality.
Same thing with the batteries....
OS X can run on PPC and X86. Apple should target X86 to consumers and PPC for pro's.
That $100 million that Apple just wasted on Creative could have meant new supercooled mobile G5's if it would have been pumped into IBM (Power.org). Instead we have these halfbaked Wintel parts to deal with MUCH fewer problems with PowerPC based Mac's.
http://www.appledefects.com/?cat=6
http://www.appledefects.com/wiki/index.php?title=MacBook_Pro
If Apple could not get IBM to provide cooler and more powerful chips back then with the full set of customers behind them......... what makes you think that the pro comunity will be able to do so?
I have no idea what the pro vs the rest of us is but I am sure it is less than 100% of all users, as such it is less likely.
IBM has no incentive to produce a cool and fast chip, our pro comunity also wants performance to create all those videos and edit all those photos.
There are a few snags, but they will iron them out. I am glad they did the switch to Intel. Do notice from my signature I do not yet own one, I am waiting for Leopard to take full advantage of the Intel chips. So this time next year I will be looking to get my 1 or 2 additional systems based on SantaRosa and Leopard.
Same thing with the batteries....
OS X can run on PPC and X86. Apple should target X86 to consumers and PPC for pro's.
That $100 million that Apple just wasted on Creative could have meant new supercooled mobile G5's if it would have been pumped into IBM (Power.org). Instead we have these halfbaked Wintel parts to deal with MUCH fewer problems with PowerPC based Mac's.
http://www.appledefects.com/?cat=6
http://www.appledefects.com/wiki/index.php?title=MacBook_Pro
If Apple could not get IBM to provide cooler and more powerful chips back then with the full set of customers behind them......... what makes you think that the pro comunity will be able to do so?
I have no idea what the pro vs the rest of us is but I am sure it is less than 100% of all users, as such it is less likely.
IBM has no incentive to produce a cool and fast chip, our pro comunity also wants performance to create all those videos and edit all those photos.
There are a few snags, but they will iron them out. I am glad they did the switch to Intel. Do notice from my signature I do not yet own one, I am waiting for Leopard to take full advantage of the Intel chips. So this time next year I will be looking to get my 1 or 2 additional systems based on SantaRosa and Leopard.
NoSmokingBandit
Aug 10, 10:25 AM
Yamauchi helped design the GT-R i believe. Idk how much he contributed, but he had his hands in it.
I have my collector's edition preordered already. I'm really pumped for this game.
I dont think the signature edition is available in the US, is it? It would be $250 over here :eek:
I have my collector's edition preordered already. I'm really pumped for this game.
I dont think the signature edition is available in the US, is it? It would be $250 over here :eek:
egan311
Apr 11, 12:54 PM
If true, this means that Apple has raised the white flag and accepted the defeat that Android has given to them. Not caring about the power of the hardware relative to others in the marketplace is a hallmark of a niche ecosystem.
Welcome to obscurity Apple - Population You
Yet another example of an opinion being passed off as 'fact'.
Not surprised given your chosen signature.
LOL! :D
So true.
Welcome to obscurity Apple - Population You
Yet another example of an opinion being passed off as 'fact'.
Not surprised given your chosen signature.
LOL! :D
So true.
yoak
Apr 6, 06:59 AM
Hmm we have a Blu Ray burner in our duplication bay in 3 years and approx 1500 hrs of Broadcast HD TV it has only been used so editors can take home personal projects to screen them.
Really do not see the need for Blu Ray at all there are so many other better suited formats.
It all depends on what you do for a living I suppose. I can see wedding video makers would want to deliver blu-ray.
I don�t do weddings, but I would at least like to have the option to easily make a Blu-Ray longer than 20min . Now every time we give people a HD format of what we have done, we usually end up with an Apple TV HD file and that�s a very compressed HD file IMHO.
Really do not see the need for Blu Ray at all there are so many other better suited formats.
It all depends on what you do for a living I suppose. I can see wedding video makers would want to deliver blu-ray.
I don�t do weddings, but I would at least like to have the option to easily make a Blu-Ray longer than 20min . Now every time we give people a HD format of what we have done, we usually end up with an Apple TV HD file and that�s a very compressed HD file IMHO.
swingerofbirch
Aug 26, 07:40 PM
I'm sure the GPU will also be bumped, at the very least. The MBP will probably also see some things that the MB has like a user-removable hard drive and magnetic latch. The CPU and GPU alone make it worth getting the new one, IMO.
Also, I'll say it one last time (yea right) - the imac should not and will not get a mobile processor. It only got Yonah because there was no alternative. It had a real desktop processor when one was available on the PPC side (G5), and it will have a real desktop processor now that one is available on the intel side (Conroe). Leave merom for what it was meant for - laptops.
I agree with you wholeheartedly.
But, I guess they COULD have put a pentium d in them...didnt they have dual cores?
Also, I'll say it one last time (yea right) - the imac should not and will not get a mobile processor. It only got Yonah because there was no alternative. It had a real desktop processor when one was available on the PPC side (G5), and it will have a real desktop processor now that one is available on the intel side (Conroe). Leave merom for what it was meant for - laptops.
I agree with you wholeheartedly.
But, I guess they COULD have put a pentium d in them...didnt they have dual cores?
Malligator
Mar 31, 03:49 PM
And the Apple haters do yet another 180...
1. Macs
1995 to 2007: Don't use a Mac. Noone uses Macs.
2007 to Present: Don't use a Mac. Everyone uses a Mac.
2. Apps
1995 to 2/22/2011: Don't use Apple. There is no software and they can't do anything.
2/22 to Present: Apps? Who needs Apps as long as you have a robust UI?
3. Open
2007 to Today: Apple is a walled garden that only stupid lemmings use.
Today going forward: Controlling the OS is necessary and good for the consumer.
1. Macs
1995 to 2007: Don't use a Mac. Noone uses Macs.
2007 to Present: Don't use a Mac. Everyone uses a Mac.
2. Apps
1995 to 2/22/2011: Don't use Apple. There is no software and they can't do anything.
2/22 to Present: Apps? Who needs Apps as long as you have a robust UI?
3. Open
2007 to Today: Apple is a walled garden that only stupid lemmings use.
Today going forward: Controlling the OS is necessary and good for the consumer.
princealfie
Nov 29, 11:11 AM
I prefer my Count Basie off the Pablo label not Decca (Universal argmmm)... so there.
bedifferent
Apr 12, 10:02 AM
Difinitely not. I won't say where I'd agree and disagree with for the rest of it, but that last sentence isn't right. Thousands implies a rather low number. Not nearly enough revenue for Apple to keep working on FCS. ;)
Ha ;) I love, too true. Those "thousands" could become a larger number, and not just editors but professionals in general as well as high end consumers who would strongly benefit and pony up for a mid range Pro tower as well as the prosumer grade programs.
Slightly off topic, I always wondered about Apple's initial venture into the mobile market, especially given Apple's failed attempt in partnering with Motorola for the "ROKR" (anyone recall the 2005 TV ads with Madonna shamelessly promoting her "Confessions on a Dance Floor" for a cool $5 million?).
Two years later came the iPhone. Makes you wonder why Apple "tested" the mobile market with the ROKR knowing the iPhone wasn't far away.
Ha ;) I love, too true. Those "thousands" could become a larger number, and not just editors but professionals in general as well as high end consumers who would strongly benefit and pony up for a mid range Pro tower as well as the prosumer grade programs.
Slightly off topic, I always wondered about Apple's initial venture into the mobile market, especially given Apple's failed attempt in partnering with Motorola for the "ROKR" (anyone recall the 2005 TV ads with Madonna shamelessly promoting her "Confessions on a Dance Floor" for a cool $5 million?).
Two years later came the iPhone. Makes you wonder why Apple "tested" the mobile market with the ROKR knowing the iPhone wasn't far away.
