nagromme
Jul 14, 03:07 PM
Leave the Xeons for the PowerMacs, but introduce some mini-tower machines with Conroe chips - they would fit nicely between the iMac and PowerMac.
Yes--whatever the name, whatever the case size, a low-to-midrange tower is needed to fill a gap in the lineup.
It could even just be a lower-spec'd Mac Pro than the ones posted in this article. Just something that allows a choice of display--and GPU--for non high-end buyers.
I think it's only a matter of time before this gap (and the "small MacBook Pro" gap) are filled. After all, Apple did fill the bottom-end headless gap (Mac Mini) which once seemed impossible!
Yes--whatever the name, whatever the case size, a low-to-midrange tower is needed to fill a gap in the lineup.
It could even just be a lower-spec'd Mac Pro than the ones posted in this article. Just something that allows a choice of display--and GPU--for non high-end buyers.
I think it's only a matter of time before this gap (and the "small MacBook Pro" gap) are filled. After all, Apple did fill the bottom-end headless gap (Mac Mini) which once seemed impossible!
Taustin Powers
Aug 18, 05:21 AM
That blue PS3 looks pretty awesome!
Too bad I already have a PS3....AND have no interest in GT5. :rolleyes:
Too bad I already have a PS3....AND have no interest in GT5. :rolleyes:
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.
samcraig
Apr 27, 08:04 AM
I'm glad they're fixing this "bug"
But their response is utter crap. They know it - and now everyone knows it.
As reports came out over a year ago about this - it's only after this tremendous bad press that they "found" it. Mhhhmmmm sure.
But their response is utter crap. They know it - and now everyone knows it.
As reports came out over a year ago about this - it's only after this tremendous bad press that they "found" it. Mhhhmmmm sure.
kdarling
Apr 19, 02:43 PM
That sort of misstates the test for likelihood of confusion. A consumer might, for example, believe that Apple licenses or otherwise blesses the Samsung products. That's probably good enough.
Thank you for the correction!
Please stop spreading FUD. If you knew anything about the history of the iPhone, you would know that it was announced and previewed at MacWorld 2007.
"FUD" is a big strong, don't you think? But you are correct; the F700 was shown off a couple of weeks later.
As I've said many times, 2006 was the time that everyone of us in the business (not casual consumers) knew that touchscreen phones were coming. Many companies were working on them; some quicker than others. They had no need to copy from each other; there's only a few major ways to do an all-touch phone without getting weird.
That's why Jobs felt he had to show off the iPhone before the other trade shows came along, long before it was ready for sale. He did not want to be seen as second in line. (It had nothing to do with the FCC... that's a story for the naive.)
Thank you for the correction!
Please stop spreading FUD. If you knew anything about the history of the iPhone, you would know that it was announced and previewed at MacWorld 2007.
"FUD" is a big strong, don't you think? But you are correct; the F700 was shown off a couple of weeks later.
As I've said many times, 2006 was the time that everyone of us in the business (not casual consumers) knew that touchscreen phones were coming. Many companies were working on them; some quicker than others. They had no need to copy from each other; there's only a few major ways to do an all-touch phone without getting weird.
That's why Jobs felt he had to show off the iPhone before the other trade shows came along, long before it was ready for sale. He did not want to be seen as second in line. (It had nothing to do with the FCC... that's a story for the naive.)
hulugu
Mar 23, 12:19 AM
Although I backed the implementation of a no-fly zone a few weeks ago, I wouldn't describe my position as one of wholehearted support. More a queasy half-hearted recognition that something had to be done and that all alternatives lead to rabbit holes of some degree or another. When all is said and done, my usual fallback position is an intense weariness at the evil that men do.
For the record, I actually supported (if silence is considered consent) both Gulf wars at the start; I believed in the fictional WMD, I believed it when Colin Powell held his little vial up at the UN... but I, like many was tied down with work and other concerns and was only paying cursory attention to the news at the time. Like Obama, I also initially supported the war in Afghanistan, or at least the idea of it, initiated by a Republican president, but since then it seems to have become a fiasco of Catch-22 proportions.
Slowly discovering the real agenda and true ineptness of the Bush administration was a pivotal point in my reawakening political understanding of US current affairs after reading Hunter Thompson for so many years. Disgusted and appalled at the casual way in which we all were lied to, I'm quite happy to hold my hands up and say 'I was wrong'.
Thing is about Obama, I never had any starry-eyed notion about him being a peace-maker. He's an American president, the incentives are cemented into the role as one of using power and protecting wealth. Not that many conservatives were paying attention at the time, but he stood up in front of the Nobel academy when accepting his Nobel Peace Prize and laid out a justification for war.
Since the second Gulf War, the entire circus has been one of my occasional interests, because I've never seen a political process elsewhere riddled with so many bald-faced liars, grotesque characters and half-baked casual hate speech. What power or the sniff of it does to people, twisting them out of shape, is infinitely more interesting and has more impact on us than any other endeavour, except for possibly the parallel development of technology.
I used you as an example more out of rhetoric than anything else. However, I think your essay is spot on.
I didn't believe the Bush administration's call for war in Iraq because I was reading Hans Blix's reports and I was suspicious of the whole endeavor: the Bushies struck me as a group wholly unprepared for the difficulty of governing a foreign country after a military invasion. I did hope, like Tom Friedman, that an Iraq without Saddam might be a powerful symbol in the Middle East, but I was deeply concerned about the war.
Reading Anthony Shadid's reporting on Iraq told me that the situation was, days in, already spinning out of control. Once it became apparent that looters were able to steal artifacts from the museums, office chairs pilled with computers from the bureaus and weapons from Iraq's hundreds of ammunition dumps I knew we were in trouble.
Libya is more like Bosnia than Iraq. A moment of force has the potential to change the scope of the conflict, hopefully for the positive, in a way that a full-blown invasion would merely complicate. That's the central part that fivepoint, who is merely interested in making another partisan screed, is ignoring.
We have complicated thoughts about the use of force in the world, which leads us to appear hypocritical when all things are made to appear equal to make straw.
George W. Bush is responsible for another calamity: me posting in PRSI, one of my many occasional weaknesses.
Me too. I wandered in here by accident as a new member and haven't left.
For the record, I actually supported (if silence is considered consent) both Gulf wars at the start; I believed in the fictional WMD, I believed it when Colin Powell held his little vial up at the UN... but I, like many was tied down with work and other concerns and was only paying cursory attention to the news at the time. Like Obama, I also initially supported the war in Afghanistan, or at least the idea of it, initiated by a Republican president, but since then it seems to have become a fiasco of Catch-22 proportions.
Slowly discovering the real agenda and true ineptness of the Bush administration was a pivotal point in my reawakening political understanding of US current affairs after reading Hunter Thompson for so many years. Disgusted and appalled at the casual way in which we all were lied to, I'm quite happy to hold my hands up and say 'I was wrong'.
Thing is about Obama, I never had any starry-eyed notion about him being a peace-maker. He's an American president, the incentives are cemented into the role as one of using power and protecting wealth. Not that many conservatives were paying attention at the time, but he stood up in front of the Nobel academy when accepting his Nobel Peace Prize and laid out a justification for war.
Since the second Gulf War, the entire circus has been one of my occasional interests, because I've never seen a political process elsewhere riddled with so many bald-faced liars, grotesque characters and half-baked casual hate speech. What power or the sniff of it does to people, twisting them out of shape, is infinitely more interesting and has more impact on us than any other endeavour, except for possibly the parallel development of technology.
I used you as an example more out of rhetoric than anything else. However, I think your essay is spot on.
I didn't believe the Bush administration's call for war in Iraq because I was reading Hans Blix's reports and I was suspicious of the whole endeavor: the Bushies struck me as a group wholly unprepared for the difficulty of governing a foreign country after a military invasion. I did hope, like Tom Friedman, that an Iraq without Saddam might be a powerful symbol in the Middle East, but I was deeply concerned about the war.
Reading Anthony Shadid's reporting on Iraq told me that the situation was, days in, already spinning out of control. Once it became apparent that looters were able to steal artifacts from the museums, office chairs pilled with computers from the bureaus and weapons from Iraq's hundreds of ammunition dumps I knew we were in trouble.
Libya is more like Bosnia than Iraq. A moment of force has the potential to change the scope of the conflict, hopefully for the positive, in a way that a full-blown invasion would merely complicate. That's the central part that fivepoint, who is merely interested in making another partisan screed, is ignoring.
We have complicated thoughts about the use of force in the world, which leads us to appear hypocritical when all things are made to appear equal to make straw.
George W. Bush is responsible for another calamity: me posting in PRSI, one of my many occasional weaknesses.
Me too. I wandered in here by accident as a new member and haven't left.
ECUpirate44
Apr 11, 11:27 AM
Makes my recent iPhone 4 purchase look like a good decision. Sorry for those who are waiting for the 5 :o
starflyer
Mar 22, 02:23 PM
not enough RAM
Not enough RAM to do what exactly?
Not enough RAM to do what exactly?
puuukeey
Nov 28, 10:39 PM
https://home.comcast.net/~puuukeey/evil2.gif
Al Coholic
Apr 27, 08:43 AM
They also note that findings that the database continues to grow despite Location services being off as a bug that will soon be addressed.
???
The MRbot needs some lessons in basic sentence structure.
Apple is planning on releasing a free iOS update in the next few weeks that performs the following:
- ceases backing up this cache, and
- deletes this cache entirely when Location Services is turned off.
Oh joy. Now AT&T's lightening-fast EDGE network will seek mindlessly for hours trying to find that lone cell tower as I drive across rural-ass USA. It'll probably take me days to dial out as well.
Thanks Al Franken! Glad you got your useless staff to address this useless matter because there's nothing else you should be doing right now. (Enjoy your short senate term).
???
The MRbot needs some lessons in basic sentence structure.
Apple is planning on releasing a free iOS update in the next few weeks that performs the following:
- ceases backing up this cache, and
- deletes this cache entirely when Location Services is turned off.
Oh joy. Now AT&T's lightening-fast EDGE network will seek mindlessly for hours trying to find that lone cell tower as I drive across rural-ass USA. It'll probably take me days to dial out as well.
Thanks Al Franken! Glad you got your useless staff to address this useless matter because there's nothing else you should be doing right now. (Enjoy your short senate term).
*LTD*
Apr 10, 09:50 PM
Oh, we are totally getting an iPad app to go along with this program. I can feel it.
Impossible.
The iPad is not a serious computer. This will never happen.
It's just a fad.
Ignore the big-name game titles for iOS. Ignore the upcoming Photoshop app. Ignore the millions of sales. Ignore the copycats in the market.
It'll all go away very soon.
Impossible.
The iPad is not a serious computer. This will never happen.
It's just a fad.
Ignore the big-name game titles for iOS. Ignore the upcoming Photoshop app. Ignore the millions of sales. Ignore the copycats in the market.
It'll all go away very soon.
fehhkk
Apr 27, 09:47 AM
If they're not tracking location, why would the new update purge the location database when it's turned off... :p
cgc
Jul 15, 11:05 AM
:o well, that looks a real mess.. but I suppose it's a good idea since heated air tends to rise.. :-)
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...
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...
VanNess
Aug 7, 04:24 PM
By the way, I don't want to say Leopard is a disappointment compared to Vista, obviously we were not shown Leopard in action to any great degree yet. But the keynote (at least the Leopard part) was definitely a disappointment. It hardly scratched the surface of just about everything that everybody was most interested in/concerned about.
http://www.misterbg.org/AppleProductCycle/CryBaby2.gif
http://www.misterbg.org/AppleProductCycle/CryBaby2.gif
Kirkmedia
Aug 11, 10:51 AM
iPhone = bad idea and difficult to implement beyond the USA.
I think it will be harder to implement in the USA and easier in Europe.
I think it will be harder to implement in the USA and easier in Europe.
goobot
Apr 11, 11:27 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
I dont want to wait :(
I dont want to wait :(
bamerican
Apr 25, 03:19 PM
"Federal Marshals need a warrant. . . . . "
Duh, the police always have to jump over a higher bar . . . I, personally, can come into your home, take your bag of cocaine, and go give it to the police and it will be admissible, even though the cops need a warrant. (I can be sued for breaking and entering, etc., but the drugs are still admissible.
You are absolutely right. This lawyer is a complete idiot. The reason that federal marshals or any other goverment actor needs a warrant is because they are government actors. The Fourth Amendment protects people from the government, not private parties. Purely private searches are not protected by the Fourth Amendment.
Apple is not a government actor and, unless they are acting in coordination or on behalf of the government, under the Fourth Amendment they don't require a warrant for a damn thing.
Did this guy miss the day they taught law in law school?
Duh, the police always have to jump over a higher bar . . . I, personally, can come into your home, take your bag of cocaine, and go give it to the police and it will be admissible, even though the cops need a warrant. (I can be sued for breaking and entering, etc., but the drugs are still admissible.
You are absolutely right. This lawyer is a complete idiot. The reason that federal marshals or any other goverment actor needs a warrant is because they are government actors. The Fourth Amendment protects people from the government, not private parties. Purely private searches are not protected by the Fourth Amendment.
Apple is not a government actor and, unless they are acting in coordination or on behalf of the government, under the Fourth Amendment they don't require a warrant for a damn thing.
Did this guy miss the day they taught law in law school?
eoblaed
Apr 25, 02:48 PM
Thinking it's only stored on the device and not used by Apple is naive. What's the point of logging your every location if it's not going to be used in some way.
When you bought your device (even if you didn't purchase one, I'm speaking to the general 'you'), you knew that it had GPS capabilities. You knew that the phone knew where you were at any given time.
You also knew it had network capabilities. Nothing stops any GPS device with networking capabilities from broadcasting this data without you knowing. We trust the manufacturers of these devices to not do that.
Saying you don't trust Apple/Google/etc to not secretly broadcast your data just because it's backed up like your contacts/phone-conversation-information/texts/etc runs counter to the same trust you placed in those companies when you bought the device; if they're willing to broadcast that data because it's saved on your device they could just as easily broadcast that data as it's being gathered, real time without storing it. In fact, it'd be easier to do that since there wouldn't be an easy artifact left behind for people to gawk at.
Seriously, if you trust these companies to not broadcast your data behind your back while you're using it, why do you think they're going to broadcast it because it's part of your backup?
When you bought your device (even if you didn't purchase one, I'm speaking to the general 'you'), you knew that it had GPS capabilities. You knew that the phone knew where you were at any given time.
You also knew it had network capabilities. Nothing stops any GPS device with networking capabilities from broadcasting this data without you knowing. We trust the manufacturers of these devices to not do that.
Saying you don't trust Apple/Google/etc to not secretly broadcast your data just because it's backed up like your contacts/phone-conversation-information/texts/etc runs counter to the same trust you placed in those companies when you bought the device; if they're willing to broadcast that data because it's saved on your device they could just as easily broadcast that data as it's being gathered, real time without storing it. In fact, it'd be easier to do that since there wouldn't be an easy artifact left behind for people to gawk at.
Seriously, if you trust these companies to not broadcast your data behind your back while you're using it, why do you think they're going to broadcast it because it's part of your backup?
Dagless
Aug 5, 04:18 AM
i thought this game was vaporware
They finally announced the release date at E3 2010.
I don't think I'll be getting it. I bought GT PSP and its as if the developers actively tried to suck all the enjoyment out of the series.
They finally announced the release date at E3 2010.
I don't think I'll be getting it. I bought GT PSP and its as if the developers actively tried to suck all the enjoyment out of the series.
FF_productions
Aug 15, 01:13 PM
Couldn't it be the harddrive that is the limiting factor in this bnechmark?
When rendering in FCP, it's all about the CPU.
Fast hard drives contribute to real-time effects, but do NOT contribute to rendering.
Ram helps a little bit.
When rendering in FCP, it's all about the CPU.
Fast hard drives contribute to real-time effects, but do NOT contribute to rendering.
Ram helps a little bit.
Silentwave
Sep 14, 11:00 PM
One thing's for sure, Intel appears to have learnt a great deal from the Netburst fiasco -- how not to do things, if nothing else. Unfortunately, they still estimate ~50% of processors shipping in 1Q2007 will be netburst-based (mostly Pentium-D).
It is a shame, but sadly those are the real cheap chips right now. The good news is that they'll change those over soon enough with more Allendales, then millville and so on and so on taking on more segments of the market.
I think as they transition to 45nm we'll see more and more Core chips, simply because they'll want as much manufacturing to be on the new process as possible, and they don't need to scale the D's etc. down to it.
It is a shame, but sadly those are the real cheap chips right now. The good news is that they'll change those over soon enough with more Allendales, then millville and so on and so on taking on more segments of the market.
I think as they transition to 45nm we'll see more and more Core chips, simply because they'll want as much manufacturing to be on the new process as possible, and they don't need to scale the D's etc. down to it.
technicolor
Sep 19, 10:05 PM
Speaking personally, I don't see a problem with it.
They've always had updates roughly every 3-6 months, of one kind or another.
Yeah and they werent in Macs, so I didnt care.
They've always had updates roughly every 3-6 months, of one kind or another.
Yeah and they werent in Macs, so I didnt care.
daver969
Sep 13, 11:05 AM
A bit pointless given that no software utilises the extra cores yet. But nice to know, I guess.
I'm still getting used to having two cores in my laptop!
What I couldn't understand - I couldn't see it explained in the article - why is the dual core Mac Pro (i.e. with current Mac Pro with 2 cores disabled) faster in so many tests than the 4 core Mac Pro.
I think part of the reason so many people seem to be hung up on the "software doesn't utilize multiple cores" mantra is because benchmarks tend to test only one software component at a time. If a given app isn't multithreaded, then it doesn't benefit from multiple cores in these tests. But that doesn't mean that multiple cores don't affect the overall system speed.
What we need is some kind of a super benchmark: How fast is my computer when I'm watching a quicktime stream of Steve demoing the latest insanely great stuff, while ripping my CD collection to iTunes, while surfing complex Cnet.com pages (w/animation), and compiling the latest version of my Java app, every once in a while flipping over to Dashboard (dashboard seems to take up a lot of system resources every time I invoke it, not just on startup).
At this point I would rather push towards more cores than more raw speed in a single core, since I don't tend to wait on any single process. If something is taking a long time, like loading a page or compiling code, I switch to something else and come back later. I would much rather have the whole system retain its responsive feel than have one app finish its task a few seconds quicker.
I'm still getting used to having two cores in my laptop!
What I couldn't understand - I couldn't see it explained in the article - why is the dual core Mac Pro (i.e. with current Mac Pro with 2 cores disabled) faster in so many tests than the 4 core Mac Pro.
I think part of the reason so many people seem to be hung up on the "software doesn't utilize multiple cores" mantra is because benchmarks tend to test only one software component at a time. If a given app isn't multithreaded, then it doesn't benefit from multiple cores in these tests. But that doesn't mean that multiple cores don't affect the overall system speed.
What we need is some kind of a super benchmark: How fast is my computer when I'm watching a quicktime stream of Steve demoing the latest insanely great stuff, while ripping my CD collection to iTunes, while surfing complex Cnet.com pages (w/animation), and compiling the latest version of my Java app, every once in a while flipping over to Dashboard (dashboard seems to take up a lot of system resources every time I invoke it, not just on startup).
At this point I would rather push towards more cores than more raw speed in a single core, since I don't tend to wait on any single process. If something is taking a long time, like loading a page or compiling code, I switch to something else and come back later. I would much rather have the whole system retain its responsive feel than have one app finish its task a few seconds quicker.
merk850
Jul 28, 03:01 PM
I am a new Mac owner. I just bought my new 20 " iMac and I am learing aout the upcomming conference and possible new product releases. I
Would appreciate any thoughts on my question.
I am considering returning the new 20" I just bought in the 14 day period and taking the 10% hit and waitning to see if the iMac gets updated and I will repurchase. What is the likelyhood that the version I have will be updated. I would be bummed if I just bought it and I am at the end of a cycle. The $160 fee would actuallly be worth it to me to get thte latest. I would have to return it prior to the conference to stay within the 14 days but i may not want to loose out on lthe chance to get the latest.
Any thoughts on this 20 " model be increased with a new processor??
Thanks,
New Mac owner.....
Would appreciate any thoughts on my question.
I am considering returning the new 20" I just bought in the 14 day period and taking the 10% hit and waitning to see if the iMac gets updated and I will repurchase. What is the likelyhood that the version I have will be updated. I would be bummed if I just bought it and I am at the end of a cycle. The $160 fee would actuallly be worth it to me to get thte latest. I would have to return it prior to the conference to stay within the 14 days but i may not want to loose out on lthe chance to get the latest.
Any thoughts on this 20 " model be increased with a new processor??
Thanks,
New Mac owner.....