mkrishnan
Jan 1, 06:01 PM
not only that, but none of the rumors really pointed to MWSF for a compact Macbook.
Agreed... I lust after it, but I have very low expectation of seeing it in January....
Nice work with the summary, Arn! :D
One other thing I think are interesting... We widely expect an iLife 07, but there have been basically no rumors related to how it will differ from iLife 06. I mean there're lots of obvious speculations, but....
Agreed... I lust after it, but I have very low expectation of seeing it in January....
Nice work with the summary, Arn! :D
One other thing I think are interesting... We widely expect an iLife 07, but there have been basically no rumors related to how it will differ from iLife 06. I mean there're lots of obvious speculations, but....
April Dancer
Aug 17, 04:29 AM
i dont really think the ipod needs to be updated.
its great the way it is, and it hasnt even been a year since it was released!
why are you all on this idea of an ipod update?
the ipod isnt a computer that needs a new processor and faster components.
mp3 files just play.
Because they introduced video playback capability, that's why. I travel and this iPod has meant that I don't have to drag around countless dvds to while away hotel room evenings. I love it, but ultimately, the screen is ever so slightly too small (not by much, I'm not asking plasma screen here!) and I need more storage. I know I could go and buy an Archos or some such other brand but I really don't want to do that, and I'm very sure that Apple don't want me to either.
If it was still purely an mp3 player I would totally agree with you. Besides, 10 months+ with no update is a long time in the life cycle of an iPod. Only going by previous form. :)
its great the way it is, and it hasnt even been a year since it was released!
why are you all on this idea of an ipod update?
the ipod isnt a computer that needs a new processor and faster components.
mp3 files just play.
Because they introduced video playback capability, that's why. I travel and this iPod has meant that I don't have to drag around countless dvds to while away hotel room evenings. I love it, but ultimately, the screen is ever so slightly too small (not by much, I'm not asking plasma screen here!) and I need more storage. I know I could go and buy an Archos or some such other brand but I really don't want to do that, and I'm very sure that Apple don't want me to either.
If it was still purely an mp3 player I would totally agree with you. Besides, 10 months+ with no update is a long time in the life cycle of an iPod. Only going by previous form. :)
*LTD*
May 2, 09:26 PM
I think this is the wrong way to go!
Its pulling apart mac os into a waterd down version of itself they will continue to add this stuff untill there is no difference between iOS and Mac OS!
What we'll be left with is a powerfull but waterd down mac iOS/hybrid platform with downloads through the app store like the iphone and ipad killing the powerfull features we have but running on every apple device!
I personally think apple will kill the ability to download any content through safari in the future in mac os!
So all apps will be vetted by apple and all music/films we HAVE to be made through itunes no popping on to amazon or whever to make a purchase through a browser on your imac or macbook!
I hate the direction this is going they are building a walled garden around mac os slowly and dont be supprised the ports start disapearing on the macbook soon for a 30pin dock!
Bad move apple!
"powerful but watered down."
So in other words: "powerful but much easier to use for everyone."
Sounds good to me. Go iOS.
However, if we take your sentence in full:
"What we'll be left with is a powerfull but waterd down mac iOS/hybrid platform with downloads through the app store like the iphone and ipad killing the powerfull features we have but running on every apple device!"
Then it's just nonsense! LOL
Its pulling apart mac os into a waterd down version of itself they will continue to add this stuff untill there is no difference between iOS and Mac OS!
What we'll be left with is a powerfull but waterd down mac iOS/hybrid platform with downloads through the app store like the iphone and ipad killing the powerfull features we have but running on every apple device!
I personally think apple will kill the ability to download any content through safari in the future in mac os!
So all apps will be vetted by apple and all music/films we HAVE to be made through itunes no popping on to amazon or whever to make a purchase through a browser on your imac or macbook!
I hate the direction this is going they are building a walled garden around mac os slowly and dont be supprised the ports start disapearing on the macbook soon for a 30pin dock!
Bad move apple!
"powerful but watered down."
So in other words: "powerful but much easier to use for everyone."
Sounds good to me. Go iOS.
However, if we take your sentence in full:
"What we'll be left with is a powerfull but waterd down mac iOS/hybrid platform with downloads through the app store like the iphone and ipad killing the powerfull features we have but running on every apple device!"
Then it's just nonsense! LOL
Unorthodox
Oct 23, 12:54 PM
The wheels on the rumor mill go 'round and 'round, 'round and 'round, 'round and 'round.
zwilliams07
Jul 14, 10:23 AM
Faster processors, I'll take those of course. Blu-Ray? Hell no, I don't want that turd. Pretty much every format Sony has ever come up with is dead, just look at the UMD now, its a joke.
I'll pass on that MPAA sponsored DRM ladden expensive dog turd.
I'll pass on that MPAA sponsored DRM ladden expensive dog turd.
tigres
Apr 19, 12:09 PM
Always a refresh of something, directly after an earnings call it seems like
cube
Mar 24, 02:30 PM
Yeah, because we all know how lovely AMD's desktop processors have been. :rolleyes: Let alone their mobile processors. The only thing they have going for them is their price. If you want a better processor, buy Sandy Bridge. If you want a better GPU, buy Llano. Stop with your unreleased AMD propaganda.
AMD Fusion is a better CPU because it does true OpenCL in the GPU, not like Intel's alpha OpenCL which runs on the CPU side.
Fusion is DirectX 11 class. Intel is DirectX 10.1 class.
AMD Fusion is a better CPU because it does true OpenCL in the GPU, not like Intel's alpha OpenCL which runs on the CPU side.
Fusion is DirectX 11 class. Intel is DirectX 10.1 class.
HecubusPro
Aug 30, 11:36 AM
Fry's Electronics is advertising Core Solo Mini's for $499 today. "Some demo, some open box". That is usually a sign that they are clearing out their remaining stock of an item.
Is this all Fry's stores, or just the one you're referring to. If it's store-wide, I might actually have to make a trip down to my local Burbank Fry's store after work tonight. :)
Is this all Fry's stores, or just the one you're referring to. If it's store-wide, I might actually have to make a trip down to my local Burbank Fry's store after work tonight. :)
ffakr
Nov 25, 05:32 PM
Dell is setting the pricing. It's not about the vendor costs.. it's all about what vendors think customers will pay.
I'm shopping for one to two compution nodes right now and the Dell Quad-Core 1U servers price at a bit cheaper at 1.86GHz [quad] vs. the dual-core system at 3.0GHz. Since 1.86GHz is very near the low end of the processor line, I'd suspect that we'll see the high end quad-cores sell for much more than the high-end Dual-cores. It won't matter what the part costs are [they are much closer]. There's too much extra value to end users who really need to run a lot of threads.
For most people, one Core2 Duo is plenty of horsepower for a long, long time. I'm typing on my new MacBookPro Core2 right now. One downside with the Core2Duo.. the thermal envelope IS higher than the Yonah CoreDuo processors. This thing gets pretty loud when the cpu [and the fans] spin up. It is wicked fast though [15" model with 2.33GHz]
This is one reason why I don't suspect we'll see a Core2Duo in a Mini any time soon. First off, the cpu is way too fast for a system with Integrated grpahics (unless you want a mini computation node). Unfortunately, Apple hasn't listened to me for the last few years so they haven't built in X-Grid support into all their consumer apps. If they had, your Mac MediaCenter could invisibly speed up the rendering of your iMovie project that you do on your iMac or Macbook. ;-) [as I always tell Apple, I hold no IP on potentially good ideas I provide publicly to Apple, go take them]
For most people, the towers are way too fast. I've set up a few dual-dual 2.66GHz machines and they are wicked fast. It really is difficult to slow them down even when you go out of your way to try (like Mathematica, HandBrake, a fork-bomb, and several other apps).
For me at home, the only reason I'd want a Tower would be for the X1900 video option. The Core2Duo iMac is more than powerful enough in every other way (even the occasional video work). I don't loose money when I'm waiting on a computational cycle though (like some of the people here)
At work, it's a different story. I'm looking for a very small computational cluster or One large computational node and 4 CPU cores may not be enough for multiple users.
Quad Dual-Core Opterons are too expensive so the Dual Quad-Core Intel systems would be perfect. The only problem is, at 1.66 and 1.83GHz, I'd likely be better off with 2 dual-core Core2Xeons running at 3.0GHz because they'd retire threads much faster and they run cooler (our chiller is over 20 years old so heat is a big issue). The Quad-Core Xeon chips run back up into the thermal range of the old P4 family chips. My whole excuse for new funding is to replace cluster of 22 single processor cluster nodes (ranging from 750MHz to 1GHz Athlons).
BTW.. it was some stupid ffakr who predicted in the last thread on this topic that we wouldn't see quad-core mac towers at this time. :-)
I still suspect we'll see Quad-Core chips in one or two high end Tower models only and that will happen at MWSF at the earliest. I also think that it is no coincidence that Apple hasn't replaced the old PPC XServe Cluster Node yet. :-) Considering the relatively low part cost if moving from dual to quad cores.. I suspect that Apple will return the XServe Cluster Node and it may be Dual quad-core only.
ffakr
I'm shopping for one to two compution nodes right now and the Dell Quad-Core 1U servers price at a bit cheaper at 1.86GHz [quad] vs. the dual-core system at 3.0GHz. Since 1.86GHz is very near the low end of the processor line, I'd suspect that we'll see the high end quad-cores sell for much more than the high-end Dual-cores. It won't matter what the part costs are [they are much closer]. There's too much extra value to end users who really need to run a lot of threads.
For most people, one Core2 Duo is plenty of horsepower for a long, long time. I'm typing on my new MacBookPro Core2 right now. One downside with the Core2Duo.. the thermal envelope IS higher than the Yonah CoreDuo processors. This thing gets pretty loud when the cpu [and the fans] spin up. It is wicked fast though [15" model with 2.33GHz]
This is one reason why I don't suspect we'll see a Core2Duo in a Mini any time soon. First off, the cpu is way too fast for a system with Integrated grpahics (unless you want a mini computation node). Unfortunately, Apple hasn't listened to me for the last few years so they haven't built in X-Grid support into all their consumer apps. If they had, your Mac MediaCenter could invisibly speed up the rendering of your iMovie project that you do on your iMac or Macbook. ;-) [as I always tell Apple, I hold no IP on potentially good ideas I provide publicly to Apple, go take them]
For most people, the towers are way too fast. I've set up a few dual-dual 2.66GHz machines and they are wicked fast. It really is difficult to slow them down even when you go out of your way to try (like Mathematica, HandBrake, a fork-bomb, and several other apps).
For me at home, the only reason I'd want a Tower would be for the X1900 video option. The Core2Duo iMac is more than powerful enough in every other way (even the occasional video work). I don't loose money when I'm waiting on a computational cycle though (like some of the people here)
At work, it's a different story. I'm looking for a very small computational cluster or One large computational node and 4 CPU cores may not be enough for multiple users.
Quad Dual-Core Opterons are too expensive so the Dual Quad-Core Intel systems would be perfect. The only problem is, at 1.66 and 1.83GHz, I'd likely be better off with 2 dual-core Core2Xeons running at 3.0GHz because they'd retire threads much faster and they run cooler (our chiller is over 20 years old so heat is a big issue). The Quad-Core Xeon chips run back up into the thermal range of the old P4 family chips. My whole excuse for new funding is to replace cluster of 22 single processor cluster nodes (ranging from 750MHz to 1GHz Athlons).
BTW.. it was some stupid ffakr who predicted in the last thread on this topic that we wouldn't see quad-core mac towers at this time. :-)
I still suspect we'll see Quad-Core chips in one or two high end Tower models only and that will happen at MWSF at the earliest. I also think that it is no coincidence that Apple hasn't replaced the old PPC XServe Cluster Node yet. :-) Considering the relatively low part cost if moving from dual to quad cores.. I suspect that Apple will return the XServe Cluster Node and it may be Dual quad-core only.
ffakr
MattyMac
Sep 7, 10:11 AM
5 more days!
Huntn
Mar 19, 04:48 PM
I see no problem with this app. It is up to individuals to decide if and when they need help. (Not implying gays need help.) I wish Apple would ease up on it's morality standards. Just establish an adult-religious-political, poor taste section in the app store.
Disclaimer: as someone who does not own a single app, it's just an impression I have that Apple is over-controlling. However I do like that they screen new apps for some kind of standard. When I get an iPhone or iPad, I'm sure I'll dive into the app scene.
Disclaimer: as someone who does not own a single app, it's just an impression I have that Apple is over-controlling. However I do like that they screen new apps for some kind of standard. When I get an iPhone or iPad, I'm sure I'll dive into the app scene.
liketom
Jul 19, 03:43 PM
i get the feelling i helped ... yet again with a few of them macs and pods:D
great results
great results
SaddY
Aug 7, 06:05 AM
Well I think it's not AMD who is against apple using ATI products.. not at all.. I think it will be Intel trying to prevent Apple from buying from their biggest competitor and rather have them buy at Nvidia (somewhat independant).
ezekielrage_99
Aug 16, 10:49 AM
I would like wireless upload for an iPod but I really have the quality of wireless headphones.
kjjnk
Apr 12, 08:29 PM
So far all of the negative criticism I've heard is from people who haven't seen it yet. Everyone else that's actually seen it says it will be great so I can't wait to see what Apple has up their sleeve.
gburnham
Mar 31, 07:48 PM
Safari in fullscreen ignores the cmd+L hotkey for jumping to the address bar. That is a pretty huge bug for me... Pretty much removes my ability to use Safari fullscreen. I'm sure they'll catch that quick.
Also, I don't see an option to always show tabs while in fullscreen mode. They hide unless you mouseover the address bar, which makes tab management in fullscreen a little bit inconvenient. A setting for that would be nice to see added before release!
Finder also seems to occasionally not respond to mouse clicks when it is in the background. I have to activate it from the dock icon before it will respond. That has only happened once or twice though.
That said, everything seems much smoother (not sure about faster, but definitely smoother) and the bugs I have seen have been relatively minor. This should be a pretty awesome OS if I can train myself to use some of the new features/gestures.
Also, I don't see an option to always show tabs while in fullscreen mode. They hide unless you mouseover the address bar, which makes tab management in fullscreen a little bit inconvenient. A setting for that would be nice to see added before release!
Finder also seems to occasionally not respond to mouse clicks when it is in the background. I have to activate it from the dock icon before it will respond. That has only happened once or twice though.
That said, everything seems much smoother (not sure about faster, but definitely smoother) and the bugs I have seen have been relatively minor. This should be a pretty awesome OS if I can train myself to use some of the new features/gestures.
RayLancer
Oct 1, 01:40 AM
Actually I just wiped the inside of the case a bit with sandpaper and the watermarks are mostly eliminated. It basically looks like I brush metaled the iPod without actually doing so. It'll probably scratch the hell out of my iPod if I leave in for too long but I figure I'm never rocking this thing naked anyway so might as well.
http://img101.imageshack.us/img101/8225/crw3095.jpg
http://img706.imageshack.us/img706/2222/crw3097.jpg
Yeah they're not that great, but it does keep it pretty safe for a cheap temporary case. Its very hard to squeeze into when you first get it, but once you do, the case loosens. A little too loose actually.
Both the cases I got were like warped out of place or something. It wouldn't properly cover the iPod like in your pictures.
http://img101.imageshack.us/img101/8225/crw3095.jpg
http://img706.imageshack.us/img706/2222/crw3097.jpg
Yeah they're not that great, but it does keep it pretty safe for a cheap temporary case. Its very hard to squeeze into when you first get it, but once you do, the case loosens. A little too loose actually.
Both the cases I got were like warped out of place or something. It wouldn't properly cover the iPod like in your pictures.
digitalbiker
Sep 7, 11:29 PM
"G5" is processor branding which refers to the 970 chipset, not the design of the machine itself, so you are using that terminology incorrectly. Do people go around saying, "Gee, that new Pentium Dell sure is nice!" :p :D It's the equivalent of saying that you like the design of the V10 BMW when in fact you mean the M5. If the current iMac design only housed G5 chips, and was changed when the Intel transition occurred, then fine, that model could be associated with the G5 chip, however this is obviously not the case.
No worries, just pointing out how you are in error. :cool:
Most of the time when people refer to the 5th Generation of a model here on MacRumors they refer to their Machine as 5G or Gen5. The main reason for this shortcut is to avoid the confusion with the PPC chip G4, G5, etc.
For Example, as Shard points out above, referring to the new iMac as G5 is just wrong and confusing because of the obsolete PPC G5 chip. However it is much clearer if you refer to the new iMac as 5thGen or 5G.
No worries, just pointing out how you are in error. :cool:
Most of the time when people refer to the 5th Generation of a model here on MacRumors they refer to their Machine as 5G or Gen5. The main reason for this shortcut is to avoid the confusion with the PPC chip G4, G5, etc.
For Example, as Shard points out above, referring to the new iMac as G5 is just wrong and confusing because of the obsolete PPC G5 chip. However it is much clearer if you refer to the new iMac as 5thGen or 5G.
AppleIntelRock
Dec 30, 12:05 AM
It's possible to both be quite right here. HD is underestimated, but having greater demand than expected is a separate issue to overall market size.
Anyway, as you say... there are 2 separate markets - the 2 evolutions of PayTV are "on demand", and HD (or both together). People who have invested in a top notch TV will easily pay for HD players (like an iTV-HD). Others may just want to watch what they want, when they want it.
If Apple only releases a HD system, and it costs a premium, I won't end up buying it. I'd be paying for a premium that I couldn't take advantage of. And besides, at the moment the iTS sells 640x480 anyway.
Really, is that what you're doing in the US?
We've got Digital 576i in Australia as our standard definition, but it's in the 16:9 aspect ratio. Apple can choose whatever combination they want, I'm sure.
At least our TV's aren't upside down :D :cool: ;)
Anyway, as you say... there are 2 separate markets - the 2 evolutions of PayTV are "on demand", and HD (or both together). People who have invested in a top notch TV will easily pay for HD players (like an iTV-HD). Others may just want to watch what they want, when they want it.
If Apple only releases a HD system, and it costs a premium, I won't end up buying it. I'd be paying for a premium that I couldn't take advantage of. And besides, at the moment the iTS sells 640x480 anyway.
Really, is that what you're doing in the US?
We've got Digital 576i in Australia as our standard definition, but it's in the 16:9 aspect ratio. Apple can choose whatever combination they want, I'm sure.
At least our TV's aren't upside down :D :cool: ;)
mr.suff
Feb 22, 03:51 AM
Way back in early 2008.
http://i110.photobucket.com/albums/n81/bigguysuff/IMG_0394.jpg
24" 7,1 iMac and a base 1,1 MacBook Air
Right now. Literally just set up the Dell 27"
http://i110.photobucket.com/albums/n81/bigguysuff/Setup.jpg
http://i110.photobucket.com/albums/n81/bigguysuff/IMG_0394.jpg
24" 7,1 iMac and a base 1,1 MacBook Air
Right now. Literally just set up the Dell 27"
http://i110.photobucket.com/albums/n81/bigguysuff/Setup.jpg
MacVault
Sep 6, 08:59 AM
Maybe i am alone on this one....
I think the 24" iMac G5 is the beginning of the end of the G5 iMac. We all watched as the outstanding G4 iMac grew from a 15" to a 17" and finally to 20". While the stunning design remained the same, the 20" just didn't look as good as the 2 previous models. The proportions were wrong and it looked top-heavy.
I am sitting in front of an original 23" Apple Display (plastic rather than aluminium). The new iMac cannot be much smaller than it. I firmly believe that the 24" will be, and should be, as big as it gets. I just hope that heat doesn't become a problem with the Core 2 Duo chips else the G5 iMac may have to evolve into a new enclosure.
Anyone else have thoughts similar?
What do you mean by "G5"??? PowerPC is long gone from Macs.
I think the 24" iMac G5 is the beginning of the end of the G5 iMac. We all watched as the outstanding G4 iMac grew from a 15" to a 17" and finally to 20". While the stunning design remained the same, the 20" just didn't look as good as the 2 previous models. The proportions were wrong and it looked top-heavy.
I am sitting in front of an original 23" Apple Display (plastic rather than aluminium). The new iMac cannot be much smaller than it. I firmly believe that the 24" will be, and should be, as big as it gets. I just hope that heat doesn't become a problem with the Core 2 Duo chips else the G5 iMac may have to evolve into a new enclosure.
Anyone else have thoughts similar?
What do you mean by "G5"??? PowerPC is long gone from Macs.
k8to
Sep 6, 04:00 PM
No EMT64, no biscuit.
I wonder if Apple will be able to ship a monitorless, affordable, quiet core 2 computer before a boutique vendor fills the gap. If so, no mac for me!
I wonder if Apple will be able to ship a monitorless, affordable, quiet core 2 computer before a boutique vendor fills the gap. If so, no mac for me!
Erwin-Br
May 2, 05:28 PM
No, Microsoft have not got it right. There should be no need for a specific tool to uninstall applications. applications should be self-contained and be deletable with the press of a button�
Many applications work this way on Mac, some developers still put related files into various other locations though unfortunately...
Uhm, not every app can be self-contained, and it's even in Apple's documentation that you need to store your plists OUTSIDE of the App container and in the Library folder instead.
And that makes sense, because for example, there are apps that need to save settings. If you store these settings inside the app, the next time your user updates it the settings are overwritten.
I hate it how dragging a Mac App to the trashcan leaves plists and other files scattered around.
Many applications work this way on Mac, some developers still put related files into various other locations though unfortunately...
Uhm, not every app can be self-contained, and it's even in Apple's documentation that you need to store your plists OUTSIDE of the App container and in the Library folder instead.
And that makes sense, because for example, there are apps that need to save settings. If you store these settings inside the app, the next time your user updates it the settings are overwritten.
I hate it how dragging a Mac App to the trashcan leaves plists and other files scattered around.
surroundfan
Sep 6, 09:24 AM
Sometimes it's about form over function. This is nothing new for Apple.
Well quite, but it's going to lock the Mac Mini into being a poor value proposition.
Well quite, but it's going to lock the Mac Mini into being a poor value proposition.
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий