Mundy
Sep 10, 11:41 AM
Clovertown will not be a workstation-class CPU, and I'm surprised that so many people are expecting to see it in the Mac Pro. Adopting Clovertown would be a big step backward for Apple, since Woodcrest uses dual, independent front-side busses, while Clovertown will use a single, shared FSB. Clovertown will be okay (and probably even excellent) for server applications, but most analysts aren't expecting it to be better than Woodcrest for the types of things most creative professionals do on the desktop.
Tigerton will be a bigger performance leap over Woodcrest than Clovertown. In truth, I don't expect Intel to release anything that will make a Mac Pro look remotely obsolete until their CPU line goes to a 45 nanometer process in the last half of 2007.
Quite simply, the way Intel is going about quad-core at this point in the game is both cautious and underwhelming. Once true quad core becomes a reality (and not simply two dual-core chips on a single peice of silicon, like Clovertown and Kentsfield), and the FSB is replaced by direct interconnects, then I'll upgrade from my Mac Pro. Otherwise, I expect the machine to remain capable and viable for the next three years or so.
Tigerton will be a bigger performance leap over Woodcrest than Clovertown. In truth, I don't expect Intel to release anything that will make a Mac Pro look remotely obsolete until their CPU line goes to a 45 nanometer process in the last half of 2007.
Quite simply, the way Intel is going about quad-core at this point in the game is both cautious and underwhelming. Once true quad core becomes a reality (and not simply two dual-core chips on a single peice of silicon, like Clovertown and Kentsfield), and the FSB is replaced by direct interconnects, then I'll upgrade from my Mac Pro. Otherwise, I expect the machine to remain capable and viable for the next three years or so.
thedarkhorse
Apr 25, 02:25 PM
Retina resolution screens, high speed flash main drive with SSD/HDD secondary, no optical bay and carbon fiber.
Pravius
Apr 22, 09:26 AM
One thing that apple or the carriers need to consider is removing the data download limit. If I select to download an album from my cloud drive to my phone and it exceeds 20GB and I am on the move. I will be disappointed.
Dr.Gargoyle
Sep 14, 09:28 AM
do tell. why?
Photokina is a photo convention. Not a computer convention.
Photokina is a photo convention. Not a computer convention.
anthonylambert
Apr 19, 08:02 AM
This is the GUI wars all over again... Last time Apple sued Microsoft for copying their GUI desktop to make Windows....
(and no Xerox didn't invent that they invented windowing not really a desktop Apple did that bit.)
Anyway Apple lost and Microsoft took over the world while Apple dwindled to a market share of less than 5%.
I don't think they want that to happen this time....
(and no Xerox didn't invent that they invented windowing not really a desktop Apple did that bit.)
Anyway Apple lost and Microsoft took over the world while Apple dwindled to a market share of less than 5%.
I don't think they want that to happen this time....
maxspivak
Sep 14, 03:46 PM
Why is everyone saying that Aperture 2.0 announcement is too little???
Photokina is all about *photo*. Aperture is about digital *photo* workflow. Its workflow features were pretty groundbreaking a year ago. Yes, it was buggy before first update. Yes, it was slow, and still is too some extent. But the features they showed -- autostacking, the loupe, the library -- are *fantastic*. They had a year to improve -- why not hold a big event to show it off!
No one would say that Adobe hosting an event to show new version of Photoshop would be to little, right? Same goes for Apple.
I'm desperately waiting for the update. If AP update (2.0, 1.5 -- whatever) improves speed on new Mac Pros, my order for a MP + AP goes right in. And $3.5K go to pay for it.
Photokina is all about *photo*. Aperture is about digital *photo* workflow. Its workflow features were pretty groundbreaking a year ago. Yes, it was buggy before first update. Yes, it was slow, and still is too some extent. But the features they showed -- autostacking, the loupe, the library -- are *fantastic*. They had a year to improve -- why not hold a big event to show it off!
No one would say that Adobe hosting an event to show new version of Photoshop would be to little, right? Same goes for Apple.
I'm desperately waiting for the update. If AP update (2.0, 1.5 -- whatever) improves speed on new Mac Pros, my order for a MP + AP goes right in. And $3.5K go to pay for it.
BRLawyer
Sep 9, 01:16 PM
Well they were selling them back in 1996 so you might want to add 5 years to your 5 year statement. You could buy dual 604e in the 9500 and the 9600 too I think.
You are right, but if I remember well the 9500 had 604s, not 604e...and actually the 9600 had the best-ever case for any Mac...you just had to pull down one of the panels to have full access to everything in the MOBO and drives...really beautiful...
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/powermac/media/easytower_movie.html
You are right, but if I remember well the 9500 had 604s, not 604e...and actually the 9600 had the best-ever case for any Mac...you just had to pull down one of the panels to have full access to everything in the MOBO and drives...really beautiful...
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/powermac/media/easytower_movie.html
macintel4me
Sep 4, 11:40 PM
This seems contradictory.
10 bucks, but it only streams?
Maybe I am missing something, or maybe this is just pieces of the puzzle.
$10 to buy to your computer. It then streams to your living room using the 'new device'.
10 bucks, but it only streams?
Maybe I am missing something, or maybe this is just pieces of the puzzle.
$10 to buy to your computer. It then streams to your living room using the 'new device'.
Piggie
Apr 15, 02:40 PM
You have to admit this thread is really funny.
How many times have we heard Apple lovers say it's not all about "specs" and the general public are not interested in "specs" and rubbish others when they say how much better spec their PC might be.
And yet, now that Apple has the high specs, all of a sudden THIS IS the most important thing.
No average consumer is ever going to notice the difference between USB3 and Thunderbolt, in fact USB3 will be better for the general user experience as it's backwards compatible.
But now, sod the typical consumer, the only thing that matters now is specs.
Oh, you have to laugh don't you :D
How many times have we heard Apple lovers say it's not all about "specs" and the general public are not interested in "specs" and rubbish others when they say how much better spec their PC might be.
And yet, now that Apple has the high specs, all of a sudden THIS IS the most important thing.
No average consumer is ever going to notice the difference between USB3 and Thunderbolt, in fact USB3 will be better for the general user experience as it's backwards compatible.
But now, sod the typical consumer, the only thing that matters now is specs.
Oh, you have to laugh don't you :D
Eidorian
May 3, 10:14 AM
macpro dead in 2 years...my prediction:mad:Maybe in 2015. Then again we might be on PCIe 4.0 by then.
iGary
Sep 14, 10:15 AM
you can feel free to go ahead and explain yourself in your next post instead of just mindlessly making statements with nothing to back them up. thanks.
I already did that (explain myself) and you said I was ignorant for doing so - didn't leave me many options, really. :)
I already did that (explain myself) and you said I was ignorant for doing so - didn't leave me many options, really. :)
Full of Win
May 3, 10:37 AM
The 21.5" has thunderbolt too....does that mean you can use it as an external display as well? :-)
Likely not. The last 21.5 had Mini Display Port, and could not be used as an external monitor. Would be nice though.
Likely not. The last 21.5 had Mini Display Port, and could not be used as an external monitor. Would be nice though.
TonySwartz
Oct 12, 04:35 PM
http://img189.imageshack.us/img189/5216/indexfallingnanos20061012fz5.th.png (http://img189.imageshack.us/my.php?image=indexfallingnanos20061012fz5.png)
nemaslov
Sep 14, 03:55 PM
It will be the Apple HAL 9000 computer . Looks like HAL from 2001 A Space Odyssey :D
"...open the iPod Bay door Hal."
"...open the iPod Bay door Hal."
stockscalper
Mar 22, 01:13 PM
Another hot grill coming from Apple! This one will be big enough to fry steaks!
FMenes
Apr 11, 07:03 PM
http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lji97caR8J1qimcf5o1_r1_400.jpg
Thanks James Laird amazing work.
I've been able to install ShairPort on my iMac.
Here you can find some instructions (http://mmacteo.tumblr.com/post/4533119926/shairport-instructions) to do the same on your mac(s).
It's relatively easy, you need just some very basic terminal experience.
Thank you ! Helped me a lot. Much faster with your help !
To everybody who doesn't see the point with this hack :
Let's say I don't want to have any extra program than iTunes running
-> AirFoil doesn't fit.
Let's say I want an unlimited (>5) amount of people to be able to play their music with my Mac as an Airport Express
-> Home Shairing doesn't fit.
This hack does.
Thanks James Laird amazing work.
I've been able to install ShairPort on my iMac.
Here you can find some instructions (http://mmacteo.tumblr.com/post/4533119926/shairport-instructions) to do the same on your mac(s).
It's relatively easy, you need just some very basic terminal experience.
Thank you ! Helped me a lot. Much faster with your help !
To everybody who doesn't see the point with this hack :
Let's say I don't want to have any extra program than iTunes running
-> AirFoil doesn't fit.
Let's say I want an unlimited (>5) amount of people to be able to play their music with my Mac as an Airport Express
-> Home Shairing doesn't fit.
This hack does.
QCassidy352
Sep 13, 09:02 PM
arn very rarely posts info from his own sources. When he does, that info is always correct. I'd bet a good deal of my savings that the iphone will look very similar to that pic.
Rodimus Prime
Mar 30, 11:27 AM
i love when big companies publicly fight like this. Dont really care about the actual issue, but the details are so interesting. The lawyers basically make it look like children are fighting.
It goes to show you what our legal system really is like. Kind of goes to show you that much of our legal system is nothing more than expensive babies fighting. Also goes to show you why our government is such a mess because guess what most of our political leaders are........ You guessed it LAWYERS. This is pretty much a world wide thing.
It goes to show you what our legal system really is like. Kind of goes to show you that much of our legal system is nothing more than expensive babies fighting. Also goes to show you why our government is such a mess because guess what most of our political leaders are........ You guessed it LAWYERS. This is pretty much a world wide thing.
VanNess
Sep 1, 04:02 AM
Well, if any of this is true, I'm going to take a pass on this one.
First of all, I'm not really interested in buying movies. It's not the same as music, with movies one view is all it takes and I'm pretty much done. There are exceptions but they are rare - even rarer now considering the stuff studios are putting out these days. If the rumored price points stick, I can't see the value in downloading something that's likely going to occupy too much space on my drive and even more likely to be erased or burned to DVD - if burning is allowed. Counting up the time to download (ugh), the time to burn it to DVD (if it simply doesn't end up being erased altogether, permissable burning or not) for a movie I never had any intention on keeping in the first place and potentially coughing up about 15 bucks just so I get to join the movie download revolution just isn't adding up in my book.
Worse is if the movie is sub-DVD quality, and I have a bad bad feeling it will be. Ratcheting up H264 to DVD quality (or preferably better - much better) is going to make the download time way too long. In as much as Apple was originally competing with file sharing when it entered the music download biz, it had the advantage of offering consumers a consistent, great sounding, high quality sound file which in itself was desirable where songs that bounced around file sharing networks at the time weren't always so blessed. If Apple really wants to repeat the iTunes miracle again, they have to pull off the same thing with movies. In other words, an experience that is equal to or preferably better than the present DVD experience.
Unfortunately, I don't think that's Apple's intention this time around. My guess is that they are getting their rather sizable and feared (if your Sony, lol) foot in the door now before other online movie dot coms saturate the market and worse, much worse - bring their MS WMV DRM along with them. Apple can establish itself now and pander to the iPod/iTunes faithful and not find itself marginalized for selling online movies in the future by MS and it's C:/Windows/Windows_only/Windows_proprietary/DRM.
But not for me. I still think the online movie biz just isn't ready for prime time, and as a competitor or alternative to Netflix and the terrestrial-based movie rental outfits, far from it. But we'll see. I don't want to poo-poo something sight unseen, and maybe Apple has a surprise or two up it's sleeve - but I doubt it. We simply need better bandwidth than what we have in this country now for this stuff to really fly.
First of all, I'm not really interested in buying movies. It's not the same as music, with movies one view is all it takes and I'm pretty much done. There are exceptions but they are rare - even rarer now considering the stuff studios are putting out these days. If the rumored price points stick, I can't see the value in downloading something that's likely going to occupy too much space on my drive and even more likely to be erased or burned to DVD - if burning is allowed. Counting up the time to download (ugh), the time to burn it to DVD (if it simply doesn't end up being erased altogether, permissable burning or not) for a movie I never had any intention on keeping in the first place and potentially coughing up about 15 bucks just so I get to join the movie download revolution just isn't adding up in my book.
Worse is if the movie is sub-DVD quality, and I have a bad bad feeling it will be. Ratcheting up H264 to DVD quality (or preferably better - much better) is going to make the download time way too long. In as much as Apple was originally competing with file sharing when it entered the music download biz, it had the advantage of offering consumers a consistent, great sounding, high quality sound file which in itself was desirable where songs that bounced around file sharing networks at the time weren't always so blessed. If Apple really wants to repeat the iTunes miracle again, they have to pull off the same thing with movies. In other words, an experience that is equal to or preferably better than the present DVD experience.
Unfortunately, I don't think that's Apple's intention this time around. My guess is that they are getting their rather sizable and feared (if your Sony, lol) foot in the door now before other online movie dot coms saturate the market and worse, much worse - bring their MS WMV DRM along with them. Apple can establish itself now and pander to the iPod/iTunes faithful and not find itself marginalized for selling online movies in the future by MS and it's C:/Windows/Windows_only/Windows_proprietary/DRM.
But not for me. I still think the online movie biz just isn't ready for prime time, and as a competitor or alternative to Netflix and the terrestrial-based movie rental outfits, far from it. But we'll see. I don't want to poo-poo something sight unseen, and maybe Apple has a surprise or two up it's sleeve - but I doubt it. We simply need better bandwidth than what we have in this country now for this stuff to really fly.
Skika
Apr 25, 01:06 PM
Wooo hooo i cant wait, allready have the money on the side.
I was planning on getting a new Macbook in oktober when i start my courses, buy decided to wait because of this.
I was planning on getting a new Macbook in oktober when i start my courses, buy decided to wait because of this.
TrollToddington
Apr 23, 07:47 AM
Why assume people want to game on the go ? I don't game on the go with my MBA, I usually use it to VPN to work on the go or to do some hobby programming. However, when home, I plug it into my external monitor and I game there. Why wouldn't people with 11" do the same ? Play some WoW/StarCraft/Civilization/Portal/Whatever at home when "docked", unplug and take the laptop on the Go for other tasks they need to do away from home ?If you read my post more carefully you'll understand I was referring to the people who play games on the 11". As far as I'm concerned, working on a laptop with an external monitor plugged in is an exception (rare) and not something common.
Are you guys so short sighted you can't see a lot of us don't have 2 computers ? What's the use when the MBA is capable of everything ?Perhaps you mean it is capable of everything you need it to do. I used to have a laptop as a single computer at my home. It resembled a Christmas tree pretty much - it had an USB optical mouse, a printer, external speakers, a Yamaha keyboard, card reader and power cord plugged in. I was always plugging and unplugging cables whenever I wanted to move it to another place. Thank goodness I did not come to the idea to attach an external monitor to it.
Are you guys so short sighted you can't see a lot of us don't have 2 computers ? What's the use when the MBA is capable of everything ?Perhaps you mean it is capable of everything you need it to do. I used to have a laptop as a single computer at my home. It resembled a Christmas tree pretty much - it had an USB optical mouse, a printer, external speakers, a Yamaha keyboard, card reader and power cord plugged in. I was always plugging and unplugging cables whenever I wanted to move it to another place. Thank goodness I did not come to the idea to attach an external monitor to it.
striker33
Apr 25, 02:12 PM
Ahhh just as I bought a new MBP!!!!! Hopefully resale value won't take too big of a hit :(
13"ers generally lose 15-20% value after a year, so should be fine.
13"ers generally lose 15-20% value after a year, so should be fine.
mmmmpsi
Mar 29, 12:46 PM
Let's ask yourself this.. they are saying that approx 1 in every 17 people now have a Windows based phone?? Do you know ANYONE that does?? Cause I know hundreds of people who have smartphones and not one of them has a Windows based phone.. major statistical failure!
Winni
Nov 14, 12:37 PM
Lets see how long they will stay away. There are buckets of DOLLARS waiting to be made in the App Store.
Yes, but only for Apple, because they own the infrastructure. We still haven't heard of a company that can really make a living with software for the iPhone/iPod Touch platform. So far, it's all just hype and even though there are hundreds of thousands of apps distributed through the AppStore, the only winner at this point in time is Apple.
And to be honest, from a customer's perspective, I do hope that that the AppStore concept will fail. The AppStore as it is manifest a distribution monopoly for Apple, and monopolies -always- hurt the customer and prevent innovation. Imagine you could only obtain Mac application through the AppStore with similar rules: There wouldn't be a Firefox for the Mac because it competes with Apple's Safari. There wouldn't be an Adobe Lightroom for the Mac because it competes with Apple's Aperture. There wouldn't be any DVD or CD ripping software for the Mac because those apps could hurt Apple's iTunes sales. There probably wouldn't even be a Microsoft Office anymore because it competes with Apple's (inferior) iWork Suite. And, worst of all, all software authors would be FORCED to distribute their apps through the AppStore which would impose an Apple distribution tax on their software. As a result, they would all run away and write their apps for Windows instead. And Apple probably wouldn't even care because most of their customers are Internet-surfing consumers anyway who don't need much more than Safari, Mail and iLife to play with their photos and iPods.
Yes, but only for Apple, because they own the infrastructure. We still haven't heard of a company that can really make a living with software for the iPhone/iPod Touch platform. So far, it's all just hype and even though there are hundreds of thousands of apps distributed through the AppStore, the only winner at this point in time is Apple.
And to be honest, from a customer's perspective, I do hope that that the AppStore concept will fail. The AppStore as it is manifest a distribution monopoly for Apple, and monopolies -always- hurt the customer and prevent innovation. Imagine you could only obtain Mac application through the AppStore with similar rules: There wouldn't be a Firefox for the Mac because it competes with Apple's Safari. There wouldn't be an Adobe Lightroom for the Mac because it competes with Apple's Aperture. There wouldn't be any DVD or CD ripping software for the Mac because those apps could hurt Apple's iTunes sales. There probably wouldn't even be a Microsoft Office anymore because it competes with Apple's (inferior) iWork Suite. And, worst of all, all software authors would be FORCED to distribute their apps through the AppStore which would impose an Apple distribution tax on their software. As a result, they would all run away and write their apps for Windows instead. And Apple probably wouldn't even care because most of their customers are Internet-surfing consumers anyway who don't need much more than Safari, Mail and iLife to play with their photos and iPods.
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder