leekohler
Mar 3, 10:53 AM
I'm not conflating them. See post 129.
Don't compare them either. There is a huge difference between what homosexuals do and what pedophiles do. You're the one getting on people for not comprehending language. I suggest you take your own advice.
Don't compare them either. There is a huge difference between what homosexuals do and what pedophiles do. You're the one getting on people for not comprehending language. I suggest you take your own advice.
Ahheck01
Apr 5, 06:40 PM
++, finally!
I'm hoping they sell it on the App store. I prefer the licensing management and model on there. (Although 50GB might be a problem!!)
4GB download with in-app purchases for content would be my guess.
I'm hoping they sell it on the App store. I prefer the licensing management and model on there. (Although 50GB might be a problem!!)
4GB download with in-app purchases for content would be my guess.
Bubba Satori
Mar 26, 12:05 PM
Great news.
Hopefully there will be a big computer oriented media event when it's released
along with new Minis, iMacs, Mac Pros and finally some affordable xMacs. :D
No, I won't put the bong down. :cool:
http://boxothoughts.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/bongcat.jpg
Hopefully there will be a big computer oriented media event when it's released
along with new Minis, iMacs, Mac Pros and finally some affordable xMacs. :D
No, I won't put the bong down. :cool:
http://boxothoughts.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/bongcat.jpg
Silentwave
Jul 14, 09:34 PM
Either way, between the case redesign rumor and the Conroe vs. Woodcrest rumor, looks like WWDC will really boost the credibility of one rumors site and smash the other's credibility to pieces (unless they're both wrong).
No, I don't think its possible to either make ThinkSecret's credibility either better or worse without disrupting the balance of the space/time continuum. Unless of course there are powerbook G5s on Tuesday August 8th during WWDC. In that case, the universe will vanish instantly and be replaced with something even more inexplicable.
No, I don't think its possible to either make ThinkSecret's credibility either better or worse without disrupting the balance of the space/time continuum. Unless of course there are powerbook G5s on Tuesday August 8th during WWDC. In that case, the universe will vanish instantly and be replaced with something even more inexplicable.
boncellis
Apr 6, 02:11 PM
I think it's mostly about the price. I, for one, can't see myself not buying the original (iPad) when the competition is the same price. When there are more commoditized components then Android tablets will have a more enticing pricepoint and consumers will be more likely to buy them.
jicon
Aug 17, 02:11 AM
A lot of folks are waiting for game benchmarks...bring 'em on!
Does anyone seriously believe games today will show any significant improvement on a Mac Pro?
1. The video cards are underclocked compared to their PC equivalents on the Mac.
2. Generally, you are limited to a framerate of 60Hz anyway.
3. Most games are old ports, and need to run thru Rosetta.
When playing a game on a PC, you have DirectX to take full advantage of the hardware, and your processor is usually tagged consuming any and all cycles it can for the game. On a Mac, multithreading, and sharing the processor among apps seems to be the flow of the computing experience.
I'd predict a single Core2 Duo Extreme would still outdo a dual processor 3.0 Ghz Xeon Mac Pro when memory timings are nearly half of the Xeon on the Core2.
Does anyone seriously believe games today will show any significant improvement on a Mac Pro?
1. The video cards are underclocked compared to their PC equivalents on the Mac.
2. Generally, you are limited to a framerate of 60Hz anyway.
3. Most games are old ports, and need to run thru Rosetta.
When playing a game on a PC, you have DirectX to take full advantage of the hardware, and your processor is usually tagged consuming any and all cycles it can for the game. On a Mac, multithreading, and sharing the processor among apps seems to be the flow of the computing experience.
I'd predict a single Core2 Duo Extreme would still outdo a dual processor 3.0 Ghz Xeon Mac Pro when memory timings are nearly half of the Xeon on the Core2.
Michael73
Apr 11, 11:28 AM
Hopefully the additional wait time will result in a more revolutionary than evolutionary device.
AppleScruff1
Apr 10, 02:49 AM
Rockwell doesn't exist anymore, it's Broadwell now ;) After that it will be Sky Lake (16nm) and Skymont (11nm).
If these latest names hold true. :D
If these latest names hold true. :D
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.
tralala
Nov 29, 09:47 AM
I only registered to respond to this idiot "dougny". I usually just lurk and read what everyone else has to say on here.
You have no clue what your talking about, all your statistics are wrong and I feel really sorry for whatever artists you represent.
Your a f_ck_ng moran.
Anyway, to everyone else....
Here is the deal. The money Universal got Microsoft never EVER touched the hands of any artists.. it went straight into some very deep pockets. This is exactly what is going to happen with Apple's loot if this little deal goes through.
Total revenues in the MI (music industry) have actually been UP, and consistently so. More people are going to concerts than ever before, download sales are so large that they are numbing, and BEST OF ALL indie labels are thriving. Yes, people do still buy CD's, and DVD's.
You have no clue what your talking about, all your statistics are wrong and I feel really sorry for whatever artists you represent.
Your a f_ck_ng moran.
Anyway, to everyone else....
Here is the deal. The money Universal got Microsoft never EVER touched the hands of any artists.. it went straight into some very deep pockets. This is exactly what is going to happen with Apple's loot if this little deal goes through.
Total revenues in the MI (music industry) have actually been UP, and consistently so. More people are going to concerts than ever before, download sales are so large that they are numbing, and BEST OF ALL indie labels are thriving. Yes, people do still buy CD's, and DVD's.
Leoff
Sep 19, 07:30 AM
i agree, I need a computer to encode video in iDVD because it takes forever on my PPC. That little difference in power is a big difference.
If you're still using the PPC, then you won't notice the difference between 2.0 and 2.16 on Intel. It will simply be "faster." Go out, get yourself a nice new MacBook, and enjoy.
If you're still using the PPC, then you won't notice the difference between 2.0 and 2.16 on Intel. It will simply be "faster." Go out, get yourself a nice new MacBook, and enjoy.
LagunaSol
Apr 6, 03:26 PM
Congrats, you will be able to play with the handful of apps designed for it.
;)
But hey, haven't you heard, Honeycomb is a real tablet OS. (Whatever the heck that means.)
Google must have used that line in a PowerPoint somewhere because I see it regurgitated verbatim on every single iPad vs. Honeycomb thread.
The Google brainwashing continues. ;)
;)
But hey, haven't you heard, Honeycomb is a real tablet OS. (Whatever the heck that means.)
Google must have used that line in a PowerPoint somewhere because I see it regurgitated verbatim on every single iPad vs. Honeycomb thread.
The Google brainwashing continues. ;)
layte
Mar 31, 03:52 PM
You're moving the goal posts. That always has been the wonderful thing about the words "open" and "free" with respect to software. They never really meant much but had such loaded connotations. You can change the definition mid-argument as easily as you change what hat you're wearing.
I look ace in a Trilby.
You know, projecting isn't healthy at all.
You'd best stop then old fella (yea, I can play forum clich�d response 101 as well, /tips-hat)
I look ace in a Trilby.
You know, projecting isn't healthy at all.
You'd best stop then old fella (yea, I can play forum clich�d response 101 as well, /tips-hat)
Some_Big_Spoon
Aug 27, 12:56 PM
I'd like to see a couple pounds shaved off the iMac. I know it sounds goofy, but I'd like a machine thatI could transport easily either to work, or just room to room. It's very light now (considering how much is in there), but - 2 to 5 lbs. would be great.
Also, and I know peeps don't dig them, but the glossy screen would be nice. The glare's not cool, but the rich colors and brightness are tops.
Also, and I know peeps don't dig them, but the glossy screen would be nice. The glare's not cool, but the rich colors and brightness are tops.
AppleScruff1
Apr 10, 02:49 AM
Rockwell doesn't exist anymore, it's Broadwell now ;) After that it will be Sky Lake (16nm) and Skymont (11nm).
If these latest names hold true. :D
If these latest names hold true. :D
notjustjay
Apr 8, 12:22 AM
I do not intend to be rude, but there is a difference in HDMI cables, no matter what the Internet tells you. Conductors, shielding materials/layers and the way the connectors are put together are a few differentiators. An AudioQuest Coffee cable, for example, which is several hundred dollars ($600 I believe for a 1.5m) is made of pure silver starting with the tips and going the length of the cable. This is not the same as a no name $5 dollar HDMI cable from Amazon.
Sure there is a difference, but is it noticable? Is it worth the cost?
A Ferrari costs a lot more than a Ford Fiesta. It's better built and has a lot more power under the hood. But if all you're ever doing is driving at 20 mph, then it doesn't matter, the Fiesta has all the power you need and you'll save a pile of money. Now, you don't want to go rock bottom and buy a junker that might break down, but as long as it runs smoothly at 20 mph, any car will do the job.
You don't want ultra-cheap crappy cables that can develop loose connections or come poorly shielded, as that can cause dropouts. But neither do you need pure silver or oxygen-free shielding or whatever. Any HDMI cable will either fail outright or do the exact same job as any other for the given application.
Sure there is a difference, but is it noticable? Is it worth the cost?
A Ferrari costs a lot more than a Ford Fiesta. It's better built and has a lot more power under the hood. But if all you're ever doing is driving at 20 mph, then it doesn't matter, the Fiesta has all the power you need and you'll save a pile of money. Now, you don't want to go rock bottom and buy a junker that might break down, but as long as it runs smoothly at 20 mph, any car will do the job.
You don't want ultra-cheap crappy cables that can develop loose connections or come poorly shielded, as that can cause dropouts. But neither do you need pure silver or oxygen-free shielding or whatever. Any HDMI cable will either fail outright or do the exact same job as any other for the given application.
LegendKillerUK
Apr 6, 11:37 AM
You sure as hell can.
By game I mean a modern title at full settings. Otherwise it's just 'making do'.
By game I mean a modern title at full settings. Otherwise it's just 'making do'.
shawnce
Jul 27, 04:11 PM
I never said otherwise.
You did say "successors" and "next generation" which I was pointing out they are not :D
You did say "successors" and "next generation" which I was pointing out they are not :D
dernhelm
Mar 31, 05:46 PM
There they go, building their own little walled garden...
iindigo
Mar 26, 07:35 AM
I'm shocked at how many people are so willing to just wave away all the nice under-the-hood changes and improvements that Lion offers just because there aren't any super-radical UI changes... really disappointing to be honest. Does it really have to be all flashy to be of interest to you? What, the functional side of things doesn't matter any more?
As an amateur OS X developer, I really hate this attitude because it will end up slowing Lion adoption. That really sucks, because there are a ton of awesome changes in 10.6 that I (and many, many other developers) would love to take advantage of to make their software even greater, but it's not going to be viable to go Lion-only for said features until Lion is installed on the majority of Macs out there.
As an amateur OS X developer, I really hate this attitude because it will end up slowing Lion adoption. That really sucks, because there are a ton of awesome changes in 10.6 that I (and many, many other developers) would love to take advantage of to make their software even greater, but it's not going to be viable to go Lion-only for said features until Lion is installed on the majority of Macs out there.
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 11, 05:10 PM
But you're really forgetting 1 thing. International Trade Mark/patent law is a pain in the @$$!!! I wouldn't blame Apple for 1 min to keep it in the US for at least a test run. That way they should be able to keep the patent breaker-reverse engineers off their back for a least a little while (i.e. why copy something if you can't even use it anywhere other than where it's patent protected).
If the rest of the world would get a handle on international trademarking and patent protection I don't think we'd have this issue of different standards of EU vs USA...
:confused: patent intrusion in europe??? Are you serious? Do you have any examples to verify your claims where a european company violated US patent law and this wasn't enforced by the european judicial system?
If the rest of the world would get a handle on international trademarking and patent protection I don't think we'd have this issue of different standards of EU vs USA...
:confused: patent intrusion in europe??? Are you serious? Do you have any examples to verify your claims where a european company violated US patent law and this wasn't enforced by the european judicial system?
LagunaSol
Apr 11, 04:57 PM
Checking email and Browsing the Internet is better on a bigger screen....Ability to open Office files, yes the iPhone does that well, but it's much better with a bigger screen.
Ah, so most of the stuff on Android is "better" only because it's on a bigger screen? :rolleyes:
So if Apple came out with a 6" iPhone, that would make it better than Android, right?
Navigation system..using an Android you don't have to pay $70 (TomTom) for something which should've come with your device.
And the navigation app I purchased houses all the map data on the device and doesn't rely on a data connection to operate. Unlike Android's stock navigation.
What did Android release which was later than the iOS which defined a smartphone?
Um, how about the entire OS?
Yup, but not many people want to lug around a 10" tablet and would like the extra screen real estate on their phones. I know i would.
There are also people (like me) who prefer not to carry something the size of an old-school Palm Pilot in their pocket.
Ah, so most of the stuff on Android is "better" only because it's on a bigger screen? :rolleyes:
So if Apple came out with a 6" iPhone, that would make it better than Android, right?
Navigation system..using an Android you don't have to pay $70 (TomTom) for something which should've come with your device.
And the navigation app I purchased houses all the map data on the device and doesn't rely on a data connection to operate. Unlike Android's stock navigation.
What did Android release which was later than the iOS which defined a smartphone?
Um, how about the entire OS?
Yup, but not many people want to lug around a 10" tablet and would like the extra screen real estate on their phones. I know i would.
There are also people (like me) who prefer not to carry something the size of an old-school Palm Pilot in their pocket.
cronked
Mar 22, 01:04 PM
Blackberry playbook = The IPad 2 killer - you heard it here first.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
I hope you are being sarcastic. You can't even access your Blackberry email on this thing unless you are tethered to a Blackberry phone. That fact alone will keep a lot of people from using this. As far as design goes (not specs), Apple has everyone beat.
Specs aren't as important as you might think. It is the software, interface and the app store that really set Apple apart. This creates the "user experience" that they focus so much on. You can rest assured that the OS in this Playbook will not be groundbreaking.
Overall I am glad there is competition. That is good and there is plenty of room for more than one player in this space. But Playbook doesn't stand a snowballs chance in hell of being the iPad 2 killer.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
I hope you are being sarcastic. You can't even access your Blackberry email on this thing unless you are tethered to a Blackberry phone. That fact alone will keep a lot of people from using this. As far as design goes (not specs), Apple has everyone beat.
Specs aren't as important as you might think. It is the software, interface and the app store that really set Apple apart. This creates the "user experience" that they focus so much on. You can rest assured that the OS in this Playbook will not be groundbreaking.
Overall I am glad there is competition. That is good and there is plenty of room for more than one player in this space. But Playbook doesn't stand a snowballs chance in hell of being the iPad 2 killer.
gorgeousninja
Mar 22, 10:10 PM
I do get a kick out of their 10.1" model being both thinner and lighter than the 9.7" Ipad2 though. That will undoubtedly have the apple apologists out en masse.
if you think 'getting a kick' from these points says anything remotely positive about your character...you'd be wrong.
if you think 'getting a kick' from these points says anything remotely positive about your character...you'd be wrong.