Kelmon
Aug 27, 05:11 AM
Arrgh! The anticipation! While I'd like to be able to hold off on a new laptop until Santa Rosa and a supporting MacBook Pro hits the market I can't. My old Ti PowerBook is way too slow these days and it will be replaced by the first 17" Merom-based MacBook Pro that Apple releases. While there's a few things that I'd like to see updated in the new models beyond the processor, I think my #1 will be 4GB RAM limit (2GB is fine for one OS but I want to be running OS X and Windows side-by-side at work) and #2 will be an updated GPU.
It will certainly be interesting to see what happens next week (personally, I'm not expecting an announcement, but hey, I'm happy to be wrong) and it will nicely coincide with the finances becoming available for the muther of all portable Macs. As long as the new one doesn't have any QA or design issues, I'll be as happy as a pig in ****...
It will certainly be interesting to see what happens next week (personally, I'm not expecting an announcement, but hey, I'm happy to be wrong) and it will nicely coincide with the finances becoming available for the muther of all portable Macs. As long as the new one doesn't have any QA or design issues, I'll be as happy as a pig in ****...
shanmugam
Apr 7, 10:29 PM
another low for apple, i ordered Mar 19th still waiting ...
fiasco just continues, does not look nice apple.
fiasco just continues, does not look nice apple.
mencles
Sep 19, 01:10 AM
If they don't update their MBs before October '06 - I see myself forced to buy a PC Laptop- because I really need one for university and I am not buying an outdated product.
SevenInchScrew
Aug 10, 10:47 AM
Yamauchi helped design the GT-R i believe. Idk how much he contributed, but he had his hands in it.
No, Polyphony was contracted to help design the graphics and layout of the NAV screen and its various displays.
http://www.drive.com.au/Editorial/ArticleDetail.aspx?ArticleID=46084&IsPgd=0
No, Polyphony was contracted to help design the graphics and layout of the NAV screen and its various displays.
http://www.drive.com.au/Editorial/ArticleDetail.aspx?ArticleID=46084&IsPgd=0
Nuvi
Apr 11, 12:01 AM
Uh, iMovie was botched?
Yes, its crap. The first version followed the basic principles of NLE but the new version is pathetic.
However, Randy came up with FCP for Macromedia so he has what it takes if Jobs and other consumer oriented guys can keep their ***** away from the mix.
Yes, its crap. The first version followed the basic principles of NLE but the new version is pathetic.
However, Randy came up with FCP for Macromedia so he has what it takes if Jobs and other consumer oriented guys can keep their ***** away from the mix.
brepublican
Sep 19, 12:15 AM
G5 PowerBooks next tuesday :confused:
:D
That one never gets old :D
Seriously though, I'm not holding my breath. Really not in the market for a notebook at the mo... But it'd still be sweet to get some updates. Keeps me feeling all warm and fuzzy :)
:D
That one never gets old :D
Seriously though, I'm not holding my breath. Really not in the market for a notebook at the mo... But it'd still be sweet to get some updates. Keeps me feeling all warm and fuzzy :)
Multimedia
Jul 27, 11:26 PM
if merom produces less heat.. i would think that apple will quickly update both MB and MBP so it won't be releasing anymore problematic notebooksYes your logic is impecible. But Apple does not act on logic. They are in it for the money. :D
IceMacMac
Apr 10, 08:47 PM
The pro of today is no longer the pro of the past decade. Pro is a far broader term in 2011. Nearly anyone could be a 'pro' with a little interest, work, and dedication.
To me the term denotes a person who is gaining a sizeable portion of their income from video production...and whom is talented enough to woo paying clients.
So in my opinion the meaning for "Pro" has changed little.
To me the term denotes a person who is gaining a sizeable portion of their income from video production...and whom is talented enough to woo paying clients.
So in my opinion the meaning for "Pro" has changed little.
MCIowaRulz
Apr 5, 08:35 PM
4GB download with in-app purchases for content would be my guess.
I hope they ship it on DVD as i'm not going to tie up my Internet connection for 3 hrs while it downloads:(
I hope they ship it on DVD as i'm not going to tie up my Internet connection for 3 hrs while it downloads:(
shamino
Jul 20, 11:28 AM
Not quite the first. Sun has been shipping a commercial 8-core systems for about a year now.
Yes. This is their UltraSPARC T1 (http://www.sun.com/processors/UltraSPARC-T1/) chip.
The T2000 has all 8 cores on one chip but each core also does four-way hyper threading so they claim 32 hardware threads.
The T1 chip ships in several different configurations. 4-, 6- and 8-cores, at 1.0 or 1.2GHz. All sporting 4 threads per core.
The price for an 8-core T1000 is about $8K.
While this is their least expensive 8-core box, you should point out (for the benefit of everyone else reading this message) that the price is not just for the CPU. It's for a high-end server that includes 8G of RAM, 4 Gigabit Ethernet ports, remote management software, Java Enterprise, and Solaris 10. All in a 1U-high rack chassis.
A system with 8 cores and 8GB RAM burns about 250W.
You are being very misleading here. According to Sun's spec sheet (http://www.sun.com/servers/coolthreads/t1000/specifications.jsp), it has a 300W power supply. Peak power consumption for the entire system is 220W, and typical consumption is 180W.
But those are for the entire system. Sun's page on the UltraSPARC T1 (http://www.sun.com/processors/UltraSPARC-T1/) processor itself says that the CPU (in its 32-thread configuration) consumes 72W. The rest of that power consumption is from parts other than the CPU.
It's also worth noting Intel's Xeon spec sheet (http://www.intel.com/products/processor/xeon/specs.htm), which lists the fastest chips as consuming 130W for the CPU package alone! And that is with only four threads (two cores with 2-way hyperthreading.) I can guarantee you that a system based on one of these will have peak power consumption far greater than 220W.
Yes. This is their UltraSPARC T1 (http://www.sun.com/processors/UltraSPARC-T1/) chip.
The T2000 has all 8 cores on one chip but each core also does four-way hyper threading so they claim 32 hardware threads.
The T1 chip ships in several different configurations. 4-, 6- and 8-cores, at 1.0 or 1.2GHz. All sporting 4 threads per core.
The price for an 8-core T1000 is about $8K.
While this is their least expensive 8-core box, you should point out (for the benefit of everyone else reading this message) that the price is not just for the CPU. It's for a high-end server that includes 8G of RAM, 4 Gigabit Ethernet ports, remote management software, Java Enterprise, and Solaris 10. All in a 1U-high rack chassis.
A system with 8 cores and 8GB RAM burns about 250W.
You are being very misleading here. According to Sun's spec sheet (http://www.sun.com/servers/coolthreads/t1000/specifications.jsp), it has a 300W power supply. Peak power consumption for the entire system is 220W, and typical consumption is 180W.
But those are for the entire system. Sun's page on the UltraSPARC T1 (http://www.sun.com/processors/UltraSPARC-T1/) processor itself says that the CPU (in its 32-thread configuration) consumes 72W. The rest of that power consumption is from parts other than the CPU.
It's also worth noting Intel's Xeon spec sheet (http://www.intel.com/products/processor/xeon/specs.htm), which lists the fastest chips as consuming 130W for the CPU package alone! And that is with only four threads (two cores with 2-way hyperthreading.) I can guarantee you that a system based on one of these will have peak power consumption far greater than 220W.
rdowns
Apr 28, 04:48 PM
Jesus wasn't born in America, yet you don't see Republicans trying to keep him out of government.
The-Pro
Apr 6, 11:57 AM
well the CPU in the 13" macbook air has a 1066 Mhz frontside bus, only the 11" has a 800 Mhz FSB, so that quote thing was wrong :D
barkomatic
Apr 11, 11:37 AM
If the iPhone 5 has a bigger screen and 4G connectivity it will be worth it. I can't imagine Apple will release another phone with only 3G with all these Verizon 4G phones coming onto the market.
phatpat88
Jul 15, 12:40 AM
Burn two DVD's at once and DVD copying.
Burning a DVD while watching another?
Dude, there is totally a use for the power user!
Burning a DVD while watching another?
Dude, there is totally a use for the power user!
EagerDragon
Aug 25, 06:45 PM
Apple needs to address this situation appropriately. As their products gain higher profile, as their customer base increases and they gain market share, it's only logical to think that there will be a greater need for support. If nothing else, it's simple math - more Macs out there = more problems! Esepcially with how well the Intel Macs have been selling, I think Apple would be foolish to think that what was good enough a few years ago is still good enough today in terms of support.
Apple must also realize the importance of first impressions. Now more than ever new switchers are coming on board to the Intel platform, and if they have problems right off the bat and poor customer service and support, that's going to leave a sour taste in their mouth, and perhaps they may just get fed up and switch back.
Apple is so good at so many things - let's hope they ensure this is the case for their Support services as well.
Well said, I think you hit the nail on the head.
Apple must also realize the importance of first impressions. Now more than ever new switchers are coming on board to the Intel platform, and if they have problems right off the bat and poor customer service and support, that's going to leave a sour taste in their mouth, and perhaps they may just get fed up and switch back.
Apple is so good at so many things - let's hope they ensure this is the case for their Support services as well.
Well said, I think you hit the nail on the head.
bushido
Mar 22, 08:24 PM
love that UI, iOS looks like windows 95 compared to the latest offers on the market, some things need to change. getting kinda tired of it after 3 iPhones
tortoise
Aug 7, 09:26 PM
Well I wouldn't say "Nothing" as obviously it required a lot of programmer time to move the OS to Intel, create the new XCode compiler, create & debug rosetta, re-write all of the iLife, and Pro-Apps offered by Apple, etc. etc.
This should be pretty trivial for the most part, mostly just a rebuild of the code base plus a rewrite of some tiny core bits that will be in assembly code (like locking primitives) and a few drivers. The normal applications should require approximately no porting effort at all.
I would point out that the Intel compiler for OSX is much better than the PPC compiler for the same. I found a couple extremely irritating compiler bugs under XCode PPC, while I have never even seen a bug in contemporaneous versions of GCC for Intel. This by itself is worth something. Current versions of GCC for x86 and AMD64 are on par with the best commercial compilers. GCC for PPC was a usable but inferior pile of dog poo that gave me many problems.
This should be pretty trivial for the most part, mostly just a rebuild of the code base plus a rewrite of some tiny core bits that will be in assembly code (like locking primitives) and a few drivers. The normal applications should require approximately no porting effort at all.
I would point out that the Intel compiler for OSX is much better than the PPC compiler for the same. I found a couple extremely irritating compiler bugs under XCode PPC, while I have never even seen a bug in contemporaneous versions of GCC for Intel. This by itself is worth something. Current versions of GCC for x86 and AMD64 are on par with the best commercial compilers. GCC for PPC was a usable but inferior pile of dog poo that gave me many problems.
Riemann Zeta
Mar 25, 10:42 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8G4)
********. If Apple is really done with Lion, then they should only be charging $29 for it (if that), like 10.6. More confusing scrollbars, tiny window controls and a better graphics/OGL support stack...add in the touch-screen readiness and you might have a quick $29 update.
I suppose, following the iOS model, Apple will likely stop charging anything for Mac OS; the OS features will revolve around new hardware features and/or gimmicks.
********. If Apple is really done with Lion, then they should only be charging $29 for it (if that), like 10.6. More confusing scrollbars, tiny window controls and a better graphics/OGL support stack...add in the touch-screen readiness and you might have a quick $29 update.
I suppose, following the iOS model, Apple will likely stop charging anything for Mac OS; the OS features will revolve around new hardware features and/or gimmicks.
KnightWRX
Apr 12, 06:17 PM
I really don't know what to do now.
I have a 3GS, decided to skip the iPhone 4 (was eligible for upgrade), and my contract is up in June or July. I don't want to buy an iPhone 4 knowing an iPhone 5 is around the corner. However, if the iPhone 5 has LTE I do not want it and I guess I'll have no choice but to buy an iPhone 4 then. If I am forced to buy the iPhone 4 I might as well buy an iPhone 4 today instead of waiting until the fall.
Please explain this. You'd buy an iPhone 5 with HSPA+, but not one with LTE ? Why ? Makes no sense at all.
I have a 3GS, decided to skip the iPhone 4 (was eligible for upgrade), and my contract is up in June or July. I don't want to buy an iPhone 4 knowing an iPhone 5 is around the corner. However, if the iPhone 5 has LTE I do not want it and I guess I'll have no choice but to buy an iPhone 4 then. If I am forced to buy the iPhone 4 I might as well buy an iPhone 4 today instead of waiting until the fall.
Please explain this. You'd buy an iPhone 5 with HSPA+, but not one with LTE ? Why ? Makes no sense at all.
gnasher729
Jul 20, 01:21 PM
Is having more cores more energy efficient than having one big fat ass 24Ghz processor? Maybe thats a factor in the increasing core count.
Absolutely.
The power consumption of a chip is proportional to the clock speed, multiplied by the voltage squared. So at the same voltage, a hypothetical 24 GHz chip would use eight times as much power as a single 3 GHz chip, and the same as eight 3 GHz chips.
However, with any given technology, you need higher voltage to achieve the higher clock speed. So with the same technology, that 24 GHz chip would need much much higher voltage than the 3 GHz chips and accordingly it would take much more energy than eight 3 GHz chips.
As an example, some iPods have two ARM chips running at half the clock speed and lower power instead of a single ARM chip running at higher speed, in order to safe power.
Absolutely.
The power consumption of a chip is proportional to the clock speed, multiplied by the voltage squared. So at the same voltage, a hypothetical 24 GHz chip would use eight times as much power as a single 3 GHz chip, and the same as eight 3 GHz chips.
However, with any given technology, you need higher voltage to achieve the higher clock speed. So with the same technology, that 24 GHz chip would need much much higher voltage than the 3 GHz chips and accordingly it would take much more energy than eight 3 GHz chips.
As an example, some iPods have two ARM chips running at half the clock speed and lower power instead of a single ARM chip running at higher speed, in order to safe power.
gorgeousninja
Apr 20, 10:35 AM
Feel free to discuss the same things I am next time so that we can actually have a meaningful debate about it.
Well let's just check we are 'on the same page then'..
You agree Samsung have copied Apple, but only on things that you think don't really matter, while on the other hand anything where they don't look the same is terribly important..
Okay, got it!
Well let's just check we are 'on the same page then'..
You agree Samsung have copied Apple, but only on things that you think don't really matter, while on the other hand anything where they don't look the same is terribly important..
Okay, got it!
ugp
Jun 15, 12:48 PM
My buddy was able to get my PIN to generate but every ticket after will not. He did my ticket for me at 1:00EST on the dot.
Hopefully I get it. If not I will wait I guess until it comes in. In the end it's just a phone.
Hopefully I get it. If not I will wait I guess until it comes in. In the end it's just a phone.
bkj216
Apr 6, 10:10 AM
And THAT's why I didn't jump the gun on a MBA yet. Now give me the new processors, and a backlit keyboard, and Apple's got my $.
(Be nice if they could bump up the battery life on the 11 too)
(Be nice if they could bump up the battery life on the 11 too)
amin
Aug 18, 10:28 PM
Obviously, inherently the iMac design is inferior to the Mac Pro/Powermac.
It may be obvious, but based on your earlier statement that a Conroe iMac would be "able to crunch through" apps faster than a Mac Pro, the obvious seemed worth identifying.
But I think there's a bigger reason why Apple chose to go all quad with the Mac Pro: Apple chose all quad because a duo option would have had the same performance in professional apps (again, excluding handbrake and toast which are the only two examples touted about). A single processor Woodcrest or Conroe option will have the same obtainable CPU power for 90-95% of the professional market for another 6-12 months at the very least.
So you think they put an extra processor in across the line just to be able to say they had a quad? Even the AnandTech article you used as a source showed here (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2816&p=18) that PS took advantage of quad cores in Rosetta
Here's some data regarding the Mac Pro's FSB:
*snip*
What can we take from this? Because of the use of FB-DIMMs, the Mac Pro's effective FSB is that of ~640MHz DDR2 system.
And how does it fare in memory latency?
*snip*
Your points about latency and FSB are not separate negatives as you have made them. They are redundant theoretical concerns with implications of unclear practical significance.
As for bandwidth, although the Mac Pro has a load of theoretical bandwidth, the efficiency is an abysmal 20%. In real use a DDR2 system has 72% more usable bandwidth. (source here (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2816&p=11))
I don't know bout you, but if I were a heavy user of memory intensive apps such as Photoshop, I'd be worried. Worried in the sense that a Conroe would be noticeably faster.
I am not worried. Everything anyone has come up with on this issue are taken from that same AnandTech article. Until I see more real-world testing, I will not be convinced. Also, I expect that more pro apps such as PS will be able to utilize quad cores in the near future, if they aren't already doing so. Finally, even if Conroe is faster, Woodcrest is fast enough for me ;).
Memory issues aside, Woodcrests are faster than Conroes, 2.4% on average (source here (http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2795&p=6))
I think you misread that. They were comparing Core 2 Extreme (not Woodcrest) and Conroe to see whether the increased FSB of the former would make much difference.
It may be obvious, but based on your earlier statement that a Conroe iMac would be "able to crunch through" apps faster than a Mac Pro, the obvious seemed worth identifying.
But I think there's a bigger reason why Apple chose to go all quad with the Mac Pro: Apple chose all quad because a duo option would have had the same performance in professional apps (again, excluding handbrake and toast which are the only two examples touted about). A single processor Woodcrest or Conroe option will have the same obtainable CPU power for 90-95% of the professional market for another 6-12 months at the very least.
So you think they put an extra processor in across the line just to be able to say they had a quad? Even the AnandTech article you used as a source showed here (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2816&p=18) that PS took advantage of quad cores in Rosetta
Here's some data regarding the Mac Pro's FSB:
*snip*
What can we take from this? Because of the use of FB-DIMMs, the Mac Pro's effective FSB is that of ~640MHz DDR2 system.
And how does it fare in memory latency?
*snip*
Your points about latency and FSB are not separate negatives as you have made them. They are redundant theoretical concerns with implications of unclear practical significance.
As for bandwidth, although the Mac Pro has a load of theoretical bandwidth, the efficiency is an abysmal 20%. In real use a DDR2 system has 72% more usable bandwidth. (source here (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2816&p=11))
I don't know bout you, but if I were a heavy user of memory intensive apps such as Photoshop, I'd be worried. Worried in the sense that a Conroe would be noticeably faster.
I am not worried. Everything anyone has come up with on this issue are taken from that same AnandTech article. Until I see more real-world testing, I will not be convinced. Also, I expect that more pro apps such as PS will be able to utilize quad cores in the near future, if they aren't already doing so. Finally, even if Conroe is faster, Woodcrest is fast enough for me ;).
Memory issues aside, Woodcrests are faster than Conroes, 2.4% on average (source here (http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2795&p=6))
I think you misread that. They were comparing Core 2 Extreme (not Woodcrest) and Conroe to see whether the increased FSB of the former would make much difference.
