xPismo
Sep 9, 10:31 PM
...work in the new MBPs/MBs as part of the whole glorious iLife spiel, or something.
That would be great but honestly, after all the updates this week, i don't think its gonna happen.
So a few more months before Apple makes *my* MBP 15". Sadly.
That would be great but honestly, after all the updates this week, i don't think its gonna happen.
So a few more months before Apple makes *my* MBP 15". Sadly.
KPOM
Apr 14, 01:59 PM
I think my next computer will be an Ivy Bridge MBA with Thunderbolt. My 2007 Macbook is getting a bit long in tooth.
I have a Rev D MacBook Air (11") and also think the Ivy Bridge will be a worthwhile upgrade. There is now no reason why that one shouldn't have USB 3.0, or Thunderbolt, plus Ivy Bridge, unlike Sandy Bridge, will have a GPU as fast as the NVIDIA 320m.
I have a Rev D MacBook Air (11") and also think the Ivy Bridge will be a worthwhile upgrade. There is now no reason why that one shouldn't have USB 3.0, or Thunderbolt, plus Ivy Bridge, unlike Sandy Bridge, will have a GPU as fast as the NVIDIA 320m.
Eidorian
May 3, 12:07 PM
:confused:I understand that Eyefinity offers a single display per connector. The best example being the 5/6 Mini DisplayPort video cards on the market.
What I have not seen are daisy chaining multiple displays from a single DisplayPort connector (via proper cabling) or from a passthrough based on a display to an additional monitor.
What I have not seen are daisy chaining multiple displays from a single DisplayPort connector (via proper cabling) or from a passthrough based on a display to an additional monitor.
LightSpeed1
Apr 11, 04:02 PM
i can only imagine steve jobs hunched over his desk like in 'pirates of silicon valley" and screaming "your stealing from me!!!!" lol.
Otherwise awesome news.lol
Otherwise awesome news.lol
AlBDamned
Aug 23, 04:47 PM
Really, though $100 million isn't all that significant to a company with reserves like Apple has, vs. having a possible patent infringement hanging over them that could, given a ruling against them, cost much more.
I guess so. It's good that there's been a settlement though. For both companies I think this is a positive outcome.
I guess so. It's good that there's been a settlement though. For both companies I think this is a positive outcome.
gnasher729
Jul 17, 11:47 AM
www.theregister.com quotes a chinese language website which apparently has leaked price information for the Merom chips. This is what it looks like: Merom will supposedly come in variants with 2.33, 2.16, 2.00, 1.83 and 1.66GHz. The versions with 2.00 or more GHz have four MB L2 cache, the slower ones have two MB L2 cache. Prices up to 2.16 are exactly the same as the current Yonah chips in the latest intel price list ($209, $241, $294 and $423 when buying 1000 chips), and the 2.33 GHz is supposed to cost $637.
That means that Apple could afford to replace every Yonah with a Merom of same clock speed and sell them at exactly the same price. Even with current 32 bit applications, this should give 10 percent speed because of better execution units, and another 10 percent speed on the faster chips for the larger L2 cache, with another ten percent in the future with 64 bit applications. There might be a 2.33 GHz option for a premium price.
It seems that using Yonah would only make sense if Intel reduces Yonah prices a lot, and only for low-end products, like an entry level MacBook or the MacMini.
That means that Apple could afford to replace every Yonah with a Merom of same clock speed and sell them at exactly the same price. Even with current 32 bit applications, this should give 10 percent speed because of better execution units, and another 10 percent speed on the faster chips for the larger L2 cache, with another ten percent in the future with 64 bit applications. There might be a 2.33 GHz option for a premium price.
It seems that using Yonah would only make sense if Intel reduces Yonah prices a lot, and only for low-end products, like an entry level MacBook or the MacMini.
peharri
Sep 18, 09:00 AM
You are right. I make a call. i expect to pay for it. i dont expect the person im calling to get billed for the damn call.
The other way of looking at it is that the mobile user has made a technology choice. They shouldn't expect other people to pay for their technology choice. A system where each person pays to connect to the network and decides how they want to pay for that is inherently fairer, even if it makes it harder for people to choose to subsidize the systems of others.
(Remember too that in the majority of cases, most US users have a fixed bill because of the high number of bundled minutes coupled with the huge unmetered portions of their bills. It's not the case that we get billed for the incoming call in the majority of cases. If it's made at peak time, from a different network, then yeah, we'll use bundled minutes, but most of us end up with large amounts of bundled minutes free at the end of the month despite this. And you never have to accept an incoming call.)
and. as for pricing. yes, vodafone have a 1c/sec flat rate on calls. but. i pay $79/month and at the end of the my account has a automatic refund (of sorts) applied, so anything up to $500 in calls/txt/etc is included in the $79.
That doesn't sound like a bad plan, that's unusually good outside of the US from what I've researched, though most of my research has been limited to the UK.
i DO use my mobile for most calls. i use my landline maybe once a week, because it has a better speakerphone if im using it for a long time.
If I were back in Britain, I couldn't substitute a cellphone for a landline because of the incoming calls issue. It's simply not fair to my family or friends to make them pay through the nose to contact me. I might use one for the bulk of my outgoing calls, but for incoming calls, it wouldn't be right.
An ideal compromise, in my view, would be for the operators to provide two numbers on every phone, a caller pays and a mobile party pays (with the latter being treated as ordinary airtime, or unmetered according to a fixed monthly charge), but alas I don't think the operators would ever do something that could potentially undermine their interconnect revenues like that.
Neither solution is perfect. The US seems better at the moment because of the emphasis on unmetered usage. At least unmetered incoming calls are an option here. But the downside is the lack of a practical PAYG system.
The other way of looking at it is that the mobile user has made a technology choice. They shouldn't expect other people to pay for their technology choice. A system where each person pays to connect to the network and decides how they want to pay for that is inherently fairer, even if it makes it harder for people to choose to subsidize the systems of others.
(Remember too that in the majority of cases, most US users have a fixed bill because of the high number of bundled minutes coupled with the huge unmetered portions of their bills. It's not the case that we get billed for the incoming call in the majority of cases. If it's made at peak time, from a different network, then yeah, we'll use bundled minutes, but most of us end up with large amounts of bundled minutes free at the end of the month despite this. And you never have to accept an incoming call.)
and. as for pricing. yes, vodafone have a 1c/sec flat rate on calls. but. i pay $79/month and at the end of the my account has a automatic refund (of sorts) applied, so anything up to $500 in calls/txt/etc is included in the $79.
That doesn't sound like a bad plan, that's unusually good outside of the US from what I've researched, though most of my research has been limited to the UK.
i DO use my mobile for most calls. i use my landline maybe once a week, because it has a better speakerphone if im using it for a long time.
If I were back in Britain, I couldn't substitute a cellphone for a landline because of the incoming calls issue. It's simply not fair to my family or friends to make them pay through the nose to contact me. I might use one for the bulk of my outgoing calls, but for incoming calls, it wouldn't be right.
An ideal compromise, in my view, would be for the operators to provide two numbers on every phone, a caller pays and a mobile party pays (with the latter being treated as ordinary airtime, or unmetered according to a fixed monthly charge), but alas I don't think the operators would ever do something that could potentially undermine their interconnect revenues like that.
Neither solution is perfect. The US seems better at the moment because of the emphasis on unmetered usage. At least unmetered incoming calls are an option here. But the downside is the lack of a practical PAYG system.
PlaceofDis
Sep 26, 07:20 AM
Darn, was really hoping for T Mobile compatibility. Oh well, guess this was pretty expected. What about all the CDMA customers? After 6 months? Never? :confused:
well technically depending on how its implemnted... Cingular is GSM just like T-Mobile, which means that depending upon access and the way the phone is 'locked' it will work with T-Mobile too. i have T-Mobile and of course i didn't ever expect Apple to go with them, they just aren't big enough, but Cingular is, i just hope that Apple sells unlocked versions even if its at a premium, or that you can buy an unlocked version from Cingular.
well technically depending on how its implemnted... Cingular is GSM just like T-Mobile, which means that depending upon access and the way the phone is 'locked' it will work with T-Mobile too. i have T-Mobile and of course i didn't ever expect Apple to go with them, they just aren't big enough, but Cingular is, i just hope that Apple sells unlocked versions even if its at a premium, or that you can buy an unlocked version from Cingular.
FinderUser213
Mar 29, 03:00 PM
Woohooo!
Awesome to see Android on the top with Windows. It's about time opensource started taking off. Enough of this Apple closed source junk.
Awesome to see Android on the top with Windows. It's about time opensource started taking off. Enough of this Apple closed source junk.
cube
Mar 30, 01:41 PM
So, here is an interesting argument, as app is short for Applications, and Applications are a strict subset of programs, doesn't the App Store technically sell Programs, not Apps? Thus, the term is no generic at all. "Program Store" would the generic term. It's the same as a club called "Liqueur Store" (which is TMed.)
That's like saying it's OK to name a restaurant "Burger Place" because it's technically a "Fast Food Place".
That's like saying it's OK to name a restaurant "Burger Place" because it's technically a "Fast Food Place".
MrSmith
Oct 27, 08:25 PM
So all Greenpeace did was hand out leaflets in areas other than their stand? So they didn't smash up the Apple stand or invade Adobe chanting and shouting.
They handed out leaflets and were ejected because no one's ever allowed to talk about the downsides of our throwaway consumer-trinket technojunk culture without being told to shut up.
Heck, every trade show I ever go to has girls with their tits half hanging out wondering the halls handing out leaflets nowhere near their particular stand.
Sad to see so many people now happy to have people's free speech stamped all over. No wonder Bush can dismantle the Bill of Rights and his lapdog Blair can swiftly remove centruries-old liberties with barely a whisper. I agree with Greenpeace's concerns. Vast toxic waste dumps with no proper processing are springing up across China.
If some fat overfed Westerner's kids had to live and play near a site like that they'd be up in arms! But, no, let's pretend the problems are somehow 'made up' by 'subversives' and need stamping out with the jackboots.
I didn't read every post, but the above nicely sums up my take on it. The reference to half-naked women at car shows is a stroke of genius. I mean, kids go to such shows. Greenpeace handing out leaflets, though, is an affront to mature businessmen.
But Greenpeace aren't going to make a change at Apple. Only the consumers are going to do that. Not by forming a negative opinion about Apple's business practices/production methods but by not buying their products. Anyone here willing? Thought not. Me neither. Only the powers of the marketplace are going to force a powerful, important company to invest in change, and those powers need to be manifested as more than opinions.
And sorry if this has been mentioned already, but in the picture on the GP site they're holding red apples, not green. Isn't that, like, stupid?
They handed out leaflets and were ejected because no one's ever allowed to talk about the downsides of our throwaway consumer-trinket technojunk culture without being told to shut up.
Heck, every trade show I ever go to has girls with their tits half hanging out wondering the halls handing out leaflets nowhere near their particular stand.
Sad to see so many people now happy to have people's free speech stamped all over. No wonder Bush can dismantle the Bill of Rights and his lapdog Blair can swiftly remove centruries-old liberties with barely a whisper. I agree with Greenpeace's concerns. Vast toxic waste dumps with no proper processing are springing up across China.
If some fat overfed Westerner's kids had to live and play near a site like that they'd be up in arms! But, no, let's pretend the problems are somehow 'made up' by 'subversives' and need stamping out with the jackboots.
I didn't read every post, but the above nicely sums up my take on it. The reference to half-naked women at car shows is a stroke of genius. I mean, kids go to such shows. Greenpeace handing out leaflets, though, is an affront to mature businessmen.
But Greenpeace aren't going to make a change at Apple. Only the consumers are going to do that. Not by forming a negative opinion about Apple's business practices/production methods but by not buying their products. Anyone here willing? Thought not. Me neither. Only the powers of the marketplace are going to force a powerful, important company to invest in change, and those powers need to be manifested as more than opinions.
And sorry if this has been mentioned already, but in the picture on the GP site they're holding red apples, not green. Isn't that, like, stupid?
AppleScruff1
Apr 28, 08:55 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8H7)
It's very, very telling. MS is riding the coattails of their universal licensing racket while Apple keeps changing the face of consumer tech. This day was bound to come.
This is the post-PC era and we'll see MS in decline.
Did you forget that Microsoft is what got the pc world to where it is today?
It's very, very telling. MS is riding the coattails of their universal licensing racket while Apple keeps changing the face of consumer tech. This day was bound to come.
This is the post-PC era and we'll see MS in decline.
Did you forget that Microsoft is what got the pc world to where it is today?
angrylawyer
Apr 22, 03:20 PM
As long as it doesnt shudder with the OS X animations and it plays 1080p smoothly, why does it matter? Do people really game on an Air?
I play simple games like portal and amnesia on it, and even those will get mine quite toasty.
I play simple games like portal and amnesia on it, and even those will get mine quite toasty.
jsoto
Apr 28, 03:24 PM
Congrats!:D
jz1492
Nov 13, 03:25 PM
So they "knew" they were Right after being told otherwise. :rolleyes:
If I remember correctly, apps that get rejected multiple times experiment unusual delays in the approval process.
Maybe they have never developed software for a client and so it is their way or else. Sad.
If you want to develop for the highly rewarding AppStore you have to come to grips with the fact that it is a combination of both models -there is a client, Apple, and there are customers. Fail to please any of them at your own risk.
On the other hand, new openings in a crowded marketplace are more of a good thing for everybody. Farewell, strong-headed developers! :D
If I remember correctly, apps that get rejected multiple times experiment unusual delays in the approval process.
Maybe they have never developed software for a client and so it is their way or else. Sad.
If you want to develop for the highly rewarding AppStore you have to come to grips with the fact that it is a combination of both models -there is a client, Apple, and there are customers. Fail to please any of them at your own risk.
On the other hand, new openings in a crowded marketplace are more of a good thing for everybody. Farewell, strong-headed developers! :D
Warbrain
Apr 20, 10:27 AM
The paragraph I quoted kind of explains it.
I agree though, I'd like to see more proof if it is true.
But without the data a paragraph means nothing. Show me a map with that data on it from when location services was off.
I agree though, I'd like to see more proof if it is true.
But without the data a paragraph means nothing. Show me a map with that data on it from when location services was off.
shecky
Aug 28, 09:37 PM
And this is why I say it can go either way. The release of the C2D mac systems are not dependent upon the rebate IMO. It might happen or it might not. My guess is that Apple is not releasing their new computers based upon when the rebate ends. They'll simply release them, and if they happen to fall within the rebate period, that's not necessarily by design. But it is our good fortune. :)
i completely agree. this rebate has zero bearing on the new merom machines.
i completely agree. this rebate has zero bearing on the new merom machines.
manu chao
Sep 14, 07:59 PM
Spend your energy on working a few extra hours so you can pay for a RAM upgrade or a 7200 RPM hard drive.
Done. :D
Done. :D
ClimbingTheLog
Sep 4, 10:17 PM
Anyone else notice that Elgato have now pulled their Eyehome media streaming device without a replacement? Anything to do with rumors of a rival device from Apple?
Rivalry or acquisition?
Rivalry or acquisition?
BWhaler
Sep 4, 11:39 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 bucks, but it only streams?
Maybe I am missing something, or maybe this is just pieces of the puzzle.
Silentwave
Jul 17, 06:23 PM
I'd bet it all that the iMac gets an Allendale with maybe a Conroe top-end option.
That makes sense, it offers some product differentiation, and saves Apple a few pennies allowing them to offer a lower priced consumer desktop. Mac Pros will likely get at least one Woodcrest dualie model on the top end and perhaps a Conroe on the bottom but it is entirely possible that it will be Woodcrest across the board, to achieve economies of scale both in purchase power and motherboard engineering.
I'd actually say they'd be more likely to go straight Conroe, TDP is the same, has speedstep so it throttles back, and the Conroe has a bigger L2 Cache- just like the Meroms that would be most likely for the iMac.
Could someone answer me this, who actually understands the Core Microarchitecture. Is the Conroe extreme edition (2.93 GHz) a better high end gaming chip than a quad woodcrest setup, say at 2.66 GHz? I've heard more than a couple comments that the Conroe is better suited for gamers than a Woodcrest but this makes no sense to me. Again please, no fanboy speculators answering this, I'd really like to know the rationale using some expert technological analysis. What makes the conroe EE so expensive? At a higher cost than the 3.0 GHz Woodcrest, it must excel in some regard.
Well, the main thing here is its a desktop chip not a server/workstation chip. Woodcrest is the same microarchitecture and all that. Just a 1333 FSB and slightly different clocks. The woodcrest's additional costs however would be a totally different MB/Chipset, and FB-DIMM RAM.
I suppose it may depend on how the game is written to take advantage of the cores.
That makes sense, it offers some product differentiation, and saves Apple a few pennies allowing them to offer a lower priced consumer desktop. Mac Pros will likely get at least one Woodcrest dualie model on the top end and perhaps a Conroe on the bottom but it is entirely possible that it will be Woodcrest across the board, to achieve economies of scale both in purchase power and motherboard engineering.
I'd actually say they'd be more likely to go straight Conroe, TDP is the same, has speedstep so it throttles back, and the Conroe has a bigger L2 Cache- just like the Meroms that would be most likely for the iMac.
Could someone answer me this, who actually understands the Core Microarchitecture. Is the Conroe extreme edition (2.93 GHz) a better high end gaming chip than a quad woodcrest setup, say at 2.66 GHz? I've heard more than a couple comments that the Conroe is better suited for gamers than a Woodcrest but this makes no sense to me. Again please, no fanboy speculators answering this, I'd really like to know the rationale using some expert technological analysis. What makes the conroe EE so expensive? At a higher cost than the 3.0 GHz Woodcrest, it must excel in some regard.
Well, the main thing here is its a desktop chip not a server/workstation chip. Woodcrest is the same microarchitecture and all that. Just a 1333 FSB and slightly different clocks. The woodcrest's additional costs however would be a totally different MB/Chipset, and FB-DIMM RAM.
I suppose it may depend on how the game is written to take advantage of the cores.
AidenShaw
Sep 10, 11:48 PM
I've owned SMP machines in the past and often found it more useful to force CPU affinity of CPU-heavy tasks to a single processor, as Windows 2000 (which was current at the time) by default had a habit of swapping it between chips, resulting in a lot of cache-dirtying....
However, you could see some significant improvement in processing time on some non-parallelizable cpu-bound tasks.
I came to the opposite conclusion....
Running many compute-bound single-threaded benchmarks and apps - I saw how NT (pre Win2k) would balance across CPUs (that is, a "100%" compute-bound job would show each CPU running at 50%).
However, setting affinity so that one CPU was 100% and the other was 0% had no significant effect on the run times. (And by "significant" I mean statistically significant - I literally ran hundreds of runs in each configuration.)\\
By the way, with Win2k3 (and XP 64-bit, really the same system) you see much less "balancing" - a single-threaded app will stick to a CPU for much longer.
However, you could see some significant improvement in processing time on some non-parallelizable cpu-bound tasks.
I came to the opposite conclusion....
Running many compute-bound single-threaded benchmarks and apps - I saw how NT (pre Win2k) would balance across CPUs (that is, a "100%" compute-bound job would show each CPU running at 50%).
However, setting affinity so that one CPU was 100% and the other was 0% had no significant effect on the run times. (And by "significant" I mean statistically significant - I literally ran hundreds of runs in each configuration.)\\
By the way, with Win2k3 (and XP 64-bit, really the same system) you see much less "balancing" - a single-threaded app will stick to a CPU for much longer.
puckhead193
Sep 19, 01:34 PM
I wonder if these people are buying one to "test it out" or are buying multiple movies.
CalBoy
Apr 25, 01:24 AM
I will agree that it's rude of people to not allow others to pass when they are in the fast lane, but 90mph?! Are you joking? If you had been caught doing this maneuver of yours, it would have been a wreckless speeding ticket plus possible insurance fraud inquiries.
Thank god the biggest wreck you caused today was this thread.
Thank god the biggest wreck you caused today was this thread.
