gregorypierce
Apr 11, 02:31 AM
Wow. You'd think a FCP Users group would be able to track down a halfway decent graphic artist to make their banner graphic...
It probably looks great when in motion on a TV screen.....
hey I tried :)
It probably looks great when in motion on a TV screen.....
hey I tried :)
Full of Win
Apr 27, 08:44 AM
It doesn't keep a log of the "location" but which WiFi spots you have been on. Also, the database is not easily accessible. But really, don't complain if you enabled Location Services...
1. Keeping a logic identifiable towers and hot spots is, by proxy, keeping a log of my whereabouts.
2. This tag and track was done with location services OFF, per the WSJ.
1. Keeping a logic identifiable towers and hot spots is, by proxy, keeping a log of my whereabouts.
2. This tag and track was done with location services OFF, per the WSJ.
ready2switch
Sep 19, 09:32 AM
It gets annoying. Why? Because it's true and most people don't want to admit it.
In a few cases here and there, the extra processor power/speed is going to help. But for a majority of people buying a MacBook, they're not going to be burning home-made DVD's, doing intense Music compositions, or using it for hard-core gaming. They're going to SURF and WRITE.
As for the "resale" value, again, most people who are buying a used MacBook are NOT going to ask "is it a Merom?" They're going to ask how nice the case is, how much use it's gotten, and how much it is, and that's it.
Everybody likes to play "ooo, I'm the hard-core computing whiz and I need the BEST out there", but I bet you if you took an honest poll out there of everyone who's answered this thread, you'd find at least 75% these Apple fans have no need for for the extra speed, they just want it because it's "cool" and "fast" and it's the latest thing out there.
62% of all statistics are made up to add false weight to the speaker's argument.
:eek:
Unless you have conducted or can site a scientific study calculating exactly how mac users USE their apple machine, stop calling other people annoying and claiming to know exactly how overpowered these systems are for "most" of the users.
In a few cases here and there, the extra processor power/speed is going to help. But for a majority of people buying a MacBook, they're not going to be burning home-made DVD's, doing intense Music compositions, or using it for hard-core gaming. They're going to SURF and WRITE.
As for the "resale" value, again, most people who are buying a used MacBook are NOT going to ask "is it a Merom?" They're going to ask how nice the case is, how much use it's gotten, and how much it is, and that's it.
Everybody likes to play "ooo, I'm the hard-core computing whiz and I need the BEST out there", but I bet you if you took an honest poll out there of everyone who's answered this thread, you'd find at least 75% these Apple fans have no need for for the extra speed, they just want it because it's "cool" and "fast" and it's the latest thing out there.
62% of all statistics are made up to add false weight to the speaker's argument.
:eek:
Unless you have conducted or can site a scientific study calculating exactly how mac users USE their apple machine, stop calling other people annoying and claiming to know exactly how overpowered these systems are for "most" of the users.
Squire
Jul 14, 08:50 PM
Macs have ALREADY had two optical bays (including twin CD drives). And none of these configs include two drives, you'd only have a second one if you wanted it.
*bold added
Where have you been shopping recently? Only one model PowerMac has ever had two optical drive bay.
The MDD G4 PowerMac towers (August 2002-June 2004) have two optical drive bays. The G4 PowerMacs that came before only have one (the lower bay is only big enough for floppy-size devices, like zip drives.) The G5 PowerMacs only have one externally-accessible bay of any size.
I would love the ability to install two optical drives, but your claim that Apple is currently shipping this somewhere is simply not true.
I think a brush-up lesson on the present perfect tense is in order. :D
Case designers aren't perfect, but they aren't idiots either. Some PCs have power supplies on top, despite the top heaviness and the extra path for the power cable. What's the reason? There must be some tradeoff involved or they'd never build them that way.
Good point. I just realized that my PC case has its power supply on the top. It's just a cheap-o case and it has never fallen over. I've never noticed any top-heaviness, as a matter of fact. In addition, the positioning of the cord hasn't caused any problems. In fact, it might actually be a better position for me-- while there is clutter on both sides of the box, there's nothing on top, making it easy to unplug.
-Squire
P.S. greenstork, where did your 'tar go? It's always been one of my favorites.
*bold added
Where have you been shopping recently? Only one model PowerMac has ever had two optical drive bay.
The MDD G4 PowerMac towers (August 2002-June 2004) have two optical drive bays. The G4 PowerMacs that came before only have one (the lower bay is only big enough for floppy-size devices, like zip drives.) The G5 PowerMacs only have one externally-accessible bay of any size.
I would love the ability to install two optical drives, but your claim that Apple is currently shipping this somewhere is simply not true.
I think a brush-up lesson on the present perfect tense is in order. :D
Case designers aren't perfect, but they aren't idiots either. Some PCs have power supplies on top, despite the top heaviness and the extra path for the power cable. What's the reason? There must be some tradeoff involved or they'd never build them that way.
Good point. I just realized that my PC case has its power supply on the top. It's just a cheap-o case and it has never fallen over. I've never noticed any top-heaviness, as a matter of fact. In addition, the positioning of the cord hasn't caused any problems. In fact, it might actually be a better position for me-- while there is clutter on both sides of the box, there's nothing on top, making it easy to unplug.
-Squire
P.S. greenstork, where did your 'tar go? It's always been one of my favorites.
jholzner
Jul 27, 03:16 PM
Nice news from intel, good for WWDC ...
... Apple will probably announce right before, since SJ said long ago no hard announcements at WWDC.
Of course he reverses A LOT :eek:
Can you show me where he said that? I don't recall hearing that his year. In the past I recall them stating that but it was only for the particular WWDC not a blanket statement. They intro'd the G5 Powermac at a WWDC.
... Apple will probably announce right before, since SJ said long ago no hard announcements at WWDC.
Of course he reverses A LOT :eek:
Can you show me where he said that? I don't recall hearing that his year. In the past I recall them stating that but it was only for the particular WWDC not a blanket statement. They intro'd the G5 Powermac at a WWDC.
ergle2
Sep 14, 08:09 PM
Not sure about beyond 8 which can be paired into a 16 core Mac. Perhaps. Too far out to tell although it is casually mentioned in the roadmap.
New micro-arch -- Nehalem is due 2008.
New micro-arch -- Nehalem is due 2008.
jonnysods
Apr 6, 08:02 AM
Yikes! Better offload my copy of the current version of FCS before it drops too low.
Any takers? :D
Any takers? :D
asleep
Apr 7, 10:55 PM
Big Brother much?
bigandy
Nov 29, 08:27 AM
Universal can want all they want.
Steve ain't giving up $10 to $16 million a quarter to some music bully.
My thoughts exactly. Apple would laugh this out of the building.
Steve ain't giving up $10 to $16 million a quarter to some music bully.
My thoughts exactly. Apple would laugh this out of the building.
law guy
Aug 6, 04:28 PM
As Apple applied for the trademark, it will not be approved.
It is up to Apple how they want to proceed. A fight that can't win, no matter how much money they have.
Mac Pro has been the premier Mac dealer in the same county as Apple since 1988. Out of all the names for this new line of computers, why choose one that they know they cannot have.
We are already getting countless support calls for the macbook pro. It seems they assume we made them When we can't help them, they seem to get very upset.
Mac Pro is in a position to file for a court order not to release any computer that bears our name.
So get ready WWDC, we will be watching.
Mike Ajlouny
President
MAC-PRO.com
Mike - I'm sure Apple had their IP counsel do an IP search prior to deciding on any names and filing for registration. That is the first and most basic step and is not going going to escape the experienced folks at whatever large firm Apple is using for IP these days. A TM approval from the USPTO doesn't take long at all, 10 to 18 months. Are you operating under the impression that Apple's registration hasn't already been approved? Did you protest the trademark during the time provided for the filing of protests during the trademark registration process? If you've registered mac-pro in the past, did you follow all the guidelines (e.g. providing notice that you were using the term within 6 months of your approval to the USPTO or request a six month extension with USPTO, etc.) have you renewed the registration? If you did file, had it approved, provided the notices of use to the the USPTO, and protested and lost on Apple's application, a bid for a TRO will be interesting as - assuming that last list of events - there are no rights being infringed. Of course, I'm not an IP att'y and there's a long list of assumptions here, and I'm sure if you did have an issue, a post on the MR forum wouldn't be your means of pursuing it.
It is up to Apple how they want to proceed. A fight that can't win, no matter how much money they have.
Mac Pro has been the premier Mac dealer in the same county as Apple since 1988. Out of all the names for this new line of computers, why choose one that they know they cannot have.
We are already getting countless support calls for the macbook pro. It seems they assume we made them When we can't help them, they seem to get very upset.
Mac Pro is in a position to file for a court order not to release any computer that bears our name.
So get ready WWDC, we will be watching.
Mike Ajlouny
President
MAC-PRO.com
Mike - I'm sure Apple had their IP counsel do an IP search prior to deciding on any names and filing for registration. That is the first and most basic step and is not going going to escape the experienced folks at whatever large firm Apple is using for IP these days. A TM approval from the USPTO doesn't take long at all, 10 to 18 months. Are you operating under the impression that Apple's registration hasn't already been approved? Did you protest the trademark during the time provided for the filing of protests during the trademark registration process? If you've registered mac-pro in the past, did you follow all the guidelines (e.g. providing notice that you were using the term within 6 months of your approval to the USPTO or request a six month extension with USPTO, etc.) have you renewed the registration? If you did file, had it approved, provided the notices of use to the the USPTO, and protested and lost on Apple's application, a bid for a TRO will be interesting as - assuming that last list of events - there are no rights being infringed. Of course, I'm not an IP att'y and there's a long list of assumptions here, and I'm sure if you did have an issue, a post on the MR forum wouldn't be your means of pursuing it.
zacman
Apr 19, 03:04 PM
2. You never specified which marketshare you were talking about.
When someone speaks about "smartphone marketshare" he usually means world wide and not only for Botswana. But nice try. :rolleyes:
When someone speaks about "smartphone marketshare" he usually means world wide and not only for Botswana. But nice try. :rolleyes:
QCassidy352
Apr 6, 11:58 AM
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) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
So is that also true for the difference between SV and LV? If that is the case, the Core i7-2649M you cite above (2.3 LV chip) should be faster compared to the 2.3 i5 in the low end Pro 13?
Thanks!
It would be about as fast. The IGP is 150MHz slower though so graphics wise it would be slightly slower. chrmjenkins explained some smaller details but in terms of performance, i7-2649M should be similar to i5-2520M.
Sure clock speed isn't everything. But you better go read up some more on Tue Intel HD3000 IGP. You're using facts from the STD voltage SB IGP and applying them to the ULV SB IGP. Go read about the graphics on the Samsung Series 9 laptops. The 13" model uses this very chip cited. It shows greater than a 50% drop in graphics performance from the 320m to ULV IGP used in SB.
This has been the problem all along with everyone. They're attributing facts that are actually fallacies to this Intel IGP.
Remember that those are numbers under Windows. Anand mentioned in his 2011 MBP review that Intel HD 3000 has brilliant drivers in OS X, and in general it beat the 320M in OS X too. In Windows it got badly beaten by 320M. Sure the LV and especially ULV IGP will be slower than 320M, even in OS X but it may not be as bad as 50% drop.
True. But here's the thing. Apple generally updates these about one a year. With such a slow upgrade cycle, you'd like to see significant improvement on each update. To stay the same would be pretty mediocre. To actually move backwards is just sad.
And yes, I realize options are limited here by the spat between intel and nvidea and by the size of the air (not enough room for a big dedicated card). So I don't know what the right answer is. All I know is I won't be tempted by an upgrade to CPU when it comes with a gpu downgrade.
So is that also true for the difference between SV and LV? If that is the case, the Core i7-2649M you cite above (2.3 LV chip) should be faster compared to the 2.3 i5 in the low end Pro 13?
Thanks!
It would be about as fast. The IGP is 150MHz slower though so graphics wise it would be slightly slower. chrmjenkins explained some smaller details but in terms of performance, i7-2649M should be similar to i5-2520M.
Sure clock speed isn't everything. But you better go read up some more on Tue Intel HD3000 IGP. You're using facts from the STD voltage SB IGP and applying them to the ULV SB IGP. Go read about the graphics on the Samsung Series 9 laptops. The 13" model uses this very chip cited. It shows greater than a 50% drop in graphics performance from the 320m to ULV IGP used in SB.
This has been the problem all along with everyone. They're attributing facts that are actually fallacies to this Intel IGP.
Remember that those are numbers under Windows. Anand mentioned in his 2011 MBP review that Intel HD 3000 has brilliant drivers in OS X, and in general it beat the 320M in OS X too. In Windows it got badly beaten by 320M. Sure the LV and especially ULV IGP will be slower than 320M, even in OS X but it may not be as bad as 50% drop.
True. But here's the thing. Apple generally updates these about one a year. With such a slow upgrade cycle, you'd like to see significant improvement on each update. To stay the same would be pretty mediocre. To actually move backwards is just sad.
And yes, I realize options are limited here by the spat between intel and nvidea and by the size of the air (not enough room for a big dedicated card). So I don't know what the right answer is. All I know is I won't be tempted by an upgrade to CPU when it comes with a gpu downgrade.
Unspeaked
Sep 19, 10:56 AM
Just make a box on the front page that has a picture of a MBP and let it say "the fastest just got faster" or something.
The fastest?
If that were the case, no one here would be complaining...
The fastest?
If that were the case, no one here would be complaining...
ncook06
Sep 13, 09:50 AM
I'm just wondering if I can drop one of these into an iMac... Are they pin-compatible? Also sort of wondering about a heat issue.
deputy_doofy
Mar 31, 04:06 PM
And the Apple haters do yet another 180...
1. Macs
1995 to 2007: Don't use a Mac. Noone uses Macs.
2007 to Present: Don't use a Mac. Everyone uses a Mac.
2. Apps
1995 to 2/22/2011: Don't use Apple. There is no software and they can't do anything.
2/22 to Present: Apps? Who needs Apps as long as you have a robust UI?
3. Open
2007 to Today: Apple is a walled garden that only stupid lemmings use.
Today going forward: Controlling the OS is necessary and good for the consumer.
Honestly... this just needs repeating to drive the point home. Well said and 100000% accurate.
1. Macs
1995 to 2007: Don't use a Mac. Noone uses Macs.
2007 to Present: Don't use a Mac. Everyone uses a Mac.
2. Apps
1995 to 2/22/2011: Don't use Apple. There is no software and they can't do anything.
2/22 to Present: Apps? Who needs Apps as long as you have a robust UI?
3. Open
2007 to Today: Apple is a walled garden that only stupid lemmings use.
Today going forward: Controlling the OS is necessary and good for the consumer.
Honestly... this just needs repeating to drive the point home. Well said and 100000% accurate.
wizard
Mar 26, 10:35 AM
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) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
It is pretty incredible that the ignorance around Mac OS releases never stops. For one thing if you loose data on a computer, the only person to blame is the one staring at you in the mirror.
Even the whine about nothing worthwhile for the user is a bit old and reflects what we heard about SL. Yet SL on my early 2008 MBP was a drastic improvement for the user right out of the box and just got better with each update. User facing features are the only reason to update, fixes to underlying facilities can go a long way to justifying the software update.
As to the server integration, it hasn't and never will be a product worth $500. It is great that Apple is adding support to the base install but people need to realize a few things. One is that Mac OS is UNIX, people need to get that through their heads. Thus Apples server product only really adds in what is already seen in many UNIX intallations in a base install. Speaking of which much of that functionality is well established open source. Second the pricing of "server" software seems to be tailored to fit the mentality of the corporate world, where they feel they need to pay big bucks for something trivial. It is no wonder that Linux as established itself as a server OS in the SOHO world and at some of the more forward thinking larger corporations. As others have pointed out the basics of UNIX have been around for ages now, very little new territory is being cleared here, thus little justification for up charges on server software.
Finally it is a bit cowardly to avoid the future because you see nothing of value there for you personally. It is frightenly similar to the attitude seen in those that cut their own wrists.
It is pretty incredible that the ignorance around Mac OS releases never stops. For one thing if you loose data on a computer, the only person to blame is the one staring at you in the mirror.
Even the whine about nothing worthwhile for the user is a bit old and reflects what we heard about SL. Yet SL on my early 2008 MBP was a drastic improvement for the user right out of the box and just got better with each update. User facing features are the only reason to update, fixes to underlying facilities can go a long way to justifying the software update.
As to the server integration, it hasn't and never will be a product worth $500. It is great that Apple is adding support to the base install but people need to realize a few things. One is that Mac OS is UNIX, people need to get that through their heads. Thus Apples server product only really adds in what is already seen in many UNIX intallations in a base install. Speaking of which much of that functionality is well established open source. Second the pricing of "server" software seems to be tailored to fit the mentality of the corporate world, where they feel they need to pay big bucks for something trivial. It is no wonder that Linux as established itself as a server OS in the SOHO world and at some of the more forward thinking larger corporations. As others have pointed out the basics of UNIX have been around for ages now, very little new territory is being cleared here, thus little justification for up charges on server software.
Finally it is a bit cowardly to avoid the future because you see nothing of value there for you personally. It is frightenly similar to the attitude seen in those that cut their own wrists.
Hallivand
Mar 25, 10:57 PM
Um, there's only been one release since leopard. Too soon to know if Lion will wow or not.
From the developer builds and such, there doesn't appear to be anything compelling or major to warrant anything more than a minor upgrade.
Yeah, disappearing scroll bars. A full size screen. Woo.
The UI and basic functionalities have stayed the same since Leopard, sprinkled with a bit of iOS features. Snow Leopard was a tune up, to establish the Intel line completely and such.
Yet retained most, if not all of the Leopard UI elements.
Personally, it just looks like a rough merge of iOS into the OS X environment without any refinement.
If we have to fork out $120 or something, forget it.
I guess my Leopard PowerPC Macs still look up to date then :)
From the developer builds and such, there doesn't appear to be anything compelling or major to warrant anything more than a minor upgrade.
Yeah, disappearing scroll bars. A full size screen. Woo.
The UI and basic functionalities have stayed the same since Leopard, sprinkled with a bit of iOS features. Snow Leopard was a tune up, to establish the Intel line completely and such.
Yet retained most, if not all of the Leopard UI elements.
Personally, it just looks like a rough merge of iOS into the OS X environment without any refinement.
If we have to fork out $120 or something, forget it.
I guess my Leopard PowerPC Macs still look up to date then :)
kny3twalker
Apr 6, 10:36 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_6 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E200 Safari/6533.18.5)
ULV CPUs (17W) will go to 11.6". The TDP of 320M is not known but 9400M has TDP of 12W so it is quite safe to assume that the TDP is similar to that. That means current 11.6" MBA has TDP of 22W (includes CPU, GPU, chipset) while SB 11.6" MBA would have a TDP of 21W (17W for the CPU and ~4W for the PCH).
13" will go with LV CPUs (25W). Again, currently it has 17W for the CPU and 12W for 320M. That's 29W. 25W CPU and ~4W for PCH gives you the same 29W.
11.6" - Core i5-2537M (option for Core i7-2657M)
13.3" - Core i7-2629M (option for Core i7-2649M)
You should submit this. As the current article had me confused as to the potential configurations, and I am sure I am not alone there as your reply represents.
ULV CPUs (17W) will go to 11.6". The TDP of 320M is not known but 9400M has TDP of 12W so it is quite safe to assume that the TDP is similar to that. That means current 11.6" MBA has TDP of 22W (includes CPU, GPU, chipset) while SB 11.6" MBA would have a TDP of 21W (17W for the CPU and ~4W for the PCH).
13" will go with LV CPUs (25W). Again, currently it has 17W for the CPU and 12W for 320M. That's 29W. 25W CPU and ~4W for PCH gives you the same 29W.
11.6" - Core i5-2537M (option for Core i7-2657M)
13.3" - Core i7-2629M (option for Core i7-2649M)
You should submit this. As the current article had me confused as to the potential configurations, and I am sure I am not alone there as your reply represents.
NATO
Aug 15, 04:49 PM
Interesting results, definitely makes me want to rob the local bank to buy a 3.0GHz Mac Pro :p
Spotted something amusing when browsing the barefeats page, an ad for the Apple store advertising 'The New Power Mac G5 Quad - Shop Now' ... Not so new now :p
Spotted something amusing when browsing the barefeats page, an ad for the Apple store advertising 'The New Power Mac G5 Quad - Shop Now' ... Not so new now :p
milozauckerman
Jul 27, 06:49 PM
looking at reference systems - for $2049, Gateway's Core 2 Duo gets the 2.4GHz/4MB L2 cache Conroe, 2GB of RAM from the factory, an x1900 512MB graphics card, 320GB hard drive, card reader and DL DVD burner.
Apple had better step its game up compared to the prices/specs rumored last week. A weak graphics card and 512MB of RAM aren't going to cut it in the low tower, even if it does have XEON INSIDE or whatever the marketing pitch will be to distract us.
EDIT: Dell would be even cheaper, with a lesser video card, but there doesn't seem to be a way to separate the XPS 410 from the included 20in monitor as of now.
Apple had better step its game up compared to the prices/specs rumored last week. A weak graphics card and 512MB of RAM aren't going to cut it in the low tower, even if it does have XEON INSIDE or whatever the marketing pitch will be to distract us.
EDIT: Dell would be even cheaper, with a lesser video card, but there doesn't seem to be a way to separate the XPS 410 from the included 20in monitor as of now.
maclaptop
Apr 11, 04:51 PM
Where are all these bs claims coming from? Why wouldn't Apple release it in June as always?
I believe there are several factors at work causing this most likely time frame.
1) The effects of Japans disaster on parts supply.
2) Internal issues at Apple regarding more than one model being undecided.
3) Final touches being added to iOS5
Frankly I'd rather have a delay if it meant that Apple's going to make this one their best, most well debugged iPhone to date.
Their is no substitute for excellent final checks through quality control.
I believe there are several factors at work causing this most likely time frame.
1) The effects of Japans disaster on parts supply.
2) Internal issues at Apple regarding more than one model being undecided.
3) Final touches being added to iOS5
Frankly I'd rather have a delay if it meant that Apple's going to make this one their best, most well debugged iPhone to date.
Their is no substitute for excellent final checks through quality control.
redshift1
Apr 6, 02:08 PM
No need to take shots at the Xoom - it's actually nice little device.
Doesn't have the best polish software-wise... but to act like it is THAT far off from the iPad2 is lunacy.
Indeed it is!!!!!
Doesn't have the best polish software-wise... but to act like it is THAT far off from the iPad2 is lunacy.
Indeed it is!!!!!
Viggy
Aug 27, 07:07 PM
HI!
Anyone knows if jointly with this rumor is the rumor of the upgrade of graphic cards on MacBook (not Pro) to Intel GMA 965 (I think is this the reference...)?
Thanks!
Anyone knows if jointly with this rumor is the rumor of the upgrade of graphic cards on MacBook (not Pro) to Intel GMA 965 (I think is this the reference...)?
Thanks!
sjo
Aug 11, 03:41 PM
Are you saying 99% of Europeans use cell phones or that 99% of Europe is cell-ready? If the former, then there must be a ton of kids yapping it up on the wireless. ;)
I'm saying that every one and their dog has a cell phone in Europe. Really. Quite literally. http://www.environmental-studies.de/products/Dog-Tracking/dog-tracking.html ;)
As soon as the kids goes to school they will get a phone and many people have several and machines utilizing mobile phones are getting more common, so in many countries the penetration number is now more than 100%.
I'm saying that every one and their dog has a cell phone in Europe. Really. Quite literally. http://www.environmental-studies.de/products/Dog-Tracking/dog-tracking.html ;)
As soon as the kids goes to school they will get a phone and many people have several and machines utilizing mobile phones are getting more common, so in many countries the penetration number is now more than 100%.