Zadillo
Aug 7, 03:35 PM
anyone else a little underwhelmed with today's WWDC? There isn't anything that really jumped out at me besides the Mac Pro.
I don't know what there is to be underwhelmed about; the rumor has basically been that the main things being covered here would be the Mac Pro (which exceeded my expectations) and the first real glimpse at Leopard (which looks very cool from what I've seen). I didn't find either the Mac Pro or Leopard to be underwhelming, so I don't see anything that would make me feel underwhelmed.
I guess I would be underwhelmed if I had mistaken WWDC for Macworld or something, and expected a bunch of major new product announcements.
I don't know what there is to be underwhelmed about; the rumor has basically been that the main things being covered here would be the Mac Pro (which exceeded my expectations) and the first real glimpse at Leopard (which looks very cool from what I've seen). I didn't find either the Mac Pro or Leopard to be underwhelming, so I don't see anything that would make me feel underwhelmed.
I guess I would be underwhelmed if I had mistaken WWDC for Macworld or something, and expected a bunch of major new product announcements.
Silentwave
Jul 15, 01:12 AM
What about 4 SATA II Drives? This way I can have a mirrored 1TB RAID [clicks heals]
The speed of a RAID with the security of mirroring.. it doesn't get mucho better :)
You mean SATA 3Gbps? Sata II is often confused with Sata 3Gbps and has not been brought to market yet, unfortunately. the sata people even have a page explaining the difference on their site :confused: . the good part though is they're planning 6Gbps and IIRC 12 as well.
I want sata3g or SAS or both.
The speed of a RAID with the security of mirroring.. it doesn't get mucho better :)
You mean SATA 3Gbps? Sata II is often confused with Sata 3Gbps and has not been brought to market yet, unfortunately. the sata people even have a page explaining the difference on their site :confused: . the good part though is they're planning 6Gbps and IIRC 12 as well.
I want sata3g or SAS or both.
peskaa
Apr 28, 06:15 AM
Wow, this thread and the ridiculous nature of this issue are hilarious. Seriously, you wonder why the US is going down the pan when the entire nation seems to get caught up in a fight over a bloody birth certificate?
treblah
Sep 19, 07:45 AM
The mermon G6s should be out before summer.
Fixed. :D
Fixed. :D
Multimedia
Jul 27, 11:48 PM
Duplicate.
Unspeaked
Sep 19, 11:24 AM
I ordered my 15" MBP yesterday and they are telling me it will ship next Tuesday. I sure hope that when the package arrives the MBP will have no stinking Merom, no more than 512 MB RAM, no better than an 80 Gb/5400 rpm HDD, and -- please God -- no magnetic latch! Oh - and one more thing: Apple better not send me a refund if they lower the price before the package hits my doorstep. :mad:
I don't think you've got anything to worry about there...
I don't think you've got anything to worry about there...
Glen Quagmire
Jul 14, 03:31 PM
Why? What are the advantages/disadvantages to having it higher or lower in the case? Does the weight distribution matter?
My PC (in a full tower case) has the PSU at the bottom. Having had a case with the PSU at the top before, it seems more stable with all that weight in the base of the case. It also makes it easier to reach around the back for cables, as I don't need to stretch as far.
I would hope that Apple change the case design a bit more than this. I'm not a huge fan of the cheese grater design. However, it wouldn't prevent me putting in an order for the 2.67Ghz model (exactly when is another matter). It would be nice to have a couple more drive bays and USB ports as well.
The X1800 graphics card appears (from a brief look at the review sites) to be a mid-range card. Hopefully Apple will offer a high-range card (GF7900, X1900) as an option.
My PC (in a full tower case) has the PSU at the bottom. Having had a case with the PSU at the top before, it seems more stable with all that weight in the base of the case. It also makes it easier to reach around the back for cables, as I don't need to stretch as far.
I would hope that Apple change the case design a bit more than this. I'm not a huge fan of the cheese grater design. However, it wouldn't prevent me putting in an order for the 2.67Ghz model (exactly when is another matter). It would be nice to have a couple more drive bays and USB ports as well.
The X1800 graphics card appears (from a brief look at the review sites) to be a mid-range card. Hopefully Apple will offer a high-range card (GF7900, X1900) as an option.
gnasher729
Apr 27, 08:35 AM
A "bug" right? ;)
I thought they said that there was not any concerns?
There was never anything to worry about. However, paranoia strikes, everyone goes mad without any reason, so what is Apple supposed to do? Note that the same paranoia has been striking against Windows phones as well now (look at theregister.com), with dozens and dozens of clueless idiots complaining that Windows is even worse than Apple, or equally bad as Apple, or almost as bad as Apple, based on the fact that Windows is using the same crowd sourcing that Apple (and Google) uses, and a general misunderstanding of what is actually happening.
The only actual _real_ privacy problem that I have seen so far is that Google's database (they have a database of WiFi locations, just as Apple, Windows, Skyhook, and I think Nokia) is not secured enough and lets anyone get access to lookup the location of any WiFi base station (my home network is located within about 100 meters or about 20 homes; the centre of the circle is quite exactly where I live). Which means if for some reason you want to go into hiding, you better don't take your WiFi router with you. (People got all paranoid about the iPhone, but anyone trying to find you first has to find your iPhone, and usually that means they've found you as well, whether there is any data on the phone or not). This problem with Google's database affects _anyone_ with a WiFi router in the whole world, whether they have any phone or not.
How much is it costing me to send the data to apple so they can crowdsource locations for everyone? I doubt AT&T isn't counting this towards data use.
Apple sends this preferably over WiFi, in which case it costs you almost nothing. But you have benefits: Your GPS works immediately when turned on instead of taking up to several minutes (like the bloody TomTom in my car does, which is pretty annoying at times), and you can find yourself quite precisely on a map in the middle of London where GPS just doesn't work because of all the tall buildings; New Yorkers probably appreciate it just as much.
I thought they said that there was not any concerns?
There was never anything to worry about. However, paranoia strikes, everyone goes mad without any reason, so what is Apple supposed to do? Note that the same paranoia has been striking against Windows phones as well now (look at theregister.com), with dozens and dozens of clueless idiots complaining that Windows is even worse than Apple, or equally bad as Apple, or almost as bad as Apple, based on the fact that Windows is using the same crowd sourcing that Apple (and Google) uses, and a general misunderstanding of what is actually happening.
The only actual _real_ privacy problem that I have seen so far is that Google's database (they have a database of WiFi locations, just as Apple, Windows, Skyhook, and I think Nokia) is not secured enough and lets anyone get access to lookup the location of any WiFi base station (my home network is located within about 100 meters or about 20 homes; the centre of the circle is quite exactly where I live). Which means if for some reason you want to go into hiding, you better don't take your WiFi router with you. (People got all paranoid about the iPhone, but anyone trying to find you first has to find your iPhone, and usually that means they've found you as well, whether there is any data on the phone or not). This problem with Google's database affects _anyone_ with a WiFi router in the whole world, whether they have any phone or not.
How much is it costing me to send the data to apple so they can crowdsource locations for everyone? I doubt AT&T isn't counting this towards data use.
Apple sends this preferably over WiFi, in which case it costs you almost nothing. But you have benefits: Your GPS works immediately when turned on instead of taking up to several minutes (like the bloody TomTom in my car does, which is pretty annoying at times), and you can find yourself quite precisely on a map in the middle of London where GPS just doesn't work because of all the tall buildings; New Yorkers probably appreciate it just as much.
Bill McEnaney
Apr 29, 09:34 AM
Presumably because the sources are "too numerous to mention". Can't you read? :p
You'd expect the article to cite some studies when Fr. Martin's article says that those studies are too numerous to mention. And let's not forget the hint of potential bias I noticed when I read that the cited article's author was a "gay affirmative therapist." Have you guys read the undoubtedly objective reviews that Donald Trump's employees write about their boss's business savvy? :)
You'd expect the article to cite some studies when Fr. Martin's article says that those studies are too numerous to mention. And let's not forget the hint of potential bias I noticed when I read that the cited article's author was a "gay affirmative therapist." Have you guys read the undoubtedly objective reviews that Donald Trump's employees write about their boss's business savvy? :)
cult hero
Mar 26, 07:02 PM
Windows manages to run legacy apps still. Even if you do have to resort to using the virtual machine they've called 'XP Mode.'
There's no reason you can't do the exact same thing on a Mac. There are no shortage of virtual machine apps and no room to complain either seeing as VirtualBox is free (and Parallels is almost always available through some cheap MacUpdate bundle). Virtualize.
Rosetta needs to go away. Backward compatibility very often holds back forward progress (just look at how badly web technologies have been stifled by IE 6 even today). Widespread use of virtualization is making it more convenient to move forward and the average computer user simply doesn't need/use software that's a decade old.
There's no reason you can't do the exact same thing on a Mac. There are no shortage of virtual machine apps and no room to complain either seeing as VirtualBox is free (and Parallels is almost always available through some cheap MacUpdate bundle). Virtualize.
Rosetta needs to go away. Backward compatibility very often holds back forward progress (just look at how badly web technologies have been stifled by IE 6 even today). Widespread use of virtualization is making it more convenient to move forward and the average computer user simply doesn't need/use software that's a decade old.
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.
Silentwave
Jul 14, 06:22 PM
320 would be the standard. you could upgrade to a terabyte if there are still two HDD bays.
Heck you could have 1.5TB with the new Seagate 750GB drives!
Heck you could have 1.5TB with the new Seagate 750GB drives!
DiamondGCoupe
Apr 11, 11:58 AM
Where are all these bs claims coming from? Why wouldn't Apple release it in June as always?
realitymonkey
Apr 6, 07:14 AM
It all depends on what you do for a living I suppose. I can see wedding video makers would want to deliver blu-ray.
I don�t do weddings, but I would at least like to have the option to easily make a Blu-Ray longer than 20min . Now every time we give people a HD format of what we have done, we usually end up with an Apple TV HD file and that�s a very compressed HD file IMHO.
Yup I guess as we deliver full "uncompressed" HD via HDCAM SR mainly our needs a rather different. To me Blu-ray is the worst of all formats fairly big cumbersome files that are still to compressed to be useful to any one professionally, and not small enough to simply chuck around on thumb drives.....
I don�t do weddings, but I would at least like to have the option to easily make a Blu-Ray longer than 20min . Now every time we give people a HD format of what we have done, we usually end up with an Apple TV HD file and that�s a very compressed HD file IMHO.
Yup I guess as we deliver full "uncompressed" HD via HDCAM SR mainly our needs a rather different. To me Blu-ray is the worst of all formats fairly big cumbersome files that are still to compressed to be useful to any one professionally, and not small enough to simply chuck around on thumb drives.....
Padraig
Aug 12, 05:04 AM
Exactly the same reaction I had when I first read the rumor. It just doesnt sound like the Steve we know.
But who cares. I just want the iPhone to be launched asap. I really hope it`s unlocked GSM phone so that I can use it in my country. It`ll really suck if it`s USA only.
It may have been leaked on purpose. In light of the recent investigation into financial irregularities, this may have been to steady the floor.
Also regarding mobile-phone saturation in Europe, i'd have to say it's almost 100%. I don't think Americans realise how cheap and easy it is to get a phone in Europe. It has gotten to the stage where they are almost a disposable item. For 50 euro you can get a nokia camera-phone, with 40 euro call credit. Of course this will be an entry level phone, but decent nonetheless.
Every kid here in Ireland seems to have one. Only last week i helped a homeless man enter credit into his phone, I couldn't believe it, i was shocked when he asked me. Turns out its not so uncommon, charities give them old phones and help keep them charged. It represents some security for them, emergency calls are always free.
But who cares. I just want the iPhone to be launched asap. I really hope it`s unlocked GSM phone so that I can use it in my country. It`ll really suck if it`s USA only.
It may have been leaked on purpose. In light of the recent investigation into financial irregularities, this may have been to steady the floor.
Also regarding mobile-phone saturation in Europe, i'd have to say it's almost 100%. I don't think Americans realise how cheap and easy it is to get a phone in Europe. It has gotten to the stage where they are almost a disposable item. For 50 euro you can get a nokia camera-phone, with 40 euro call credit. Of course this will be an entry level phone, but decent nonetheless.
Every kid here in Ireland seems to have one. Only last week i helped a homeless man enter credit into his phone, I couldn't believe it, i was shocked when he asked me. Turns out its not so uncommon, charities give them old phones and help keep them charged. It represents some security for them, emergency calls are always free.
three
Dec 9, 03:28 AM
Anyone else have trouble leveling up your B-Spec driver? Mine really sucks and can't even finish the FF race in whatever car he drives.
teme
Sep 19, 03:45 AM
PowerBook G5 by the holidays.
I wish this board would block automatically "PowerBook G5" and replace it with "************" so this tired so-called-joke would end someday.
I wish this board would block automatically "PowerBook G5" and replace it with "************" so this tired so-called-joke would end someday.
JoeG4
Nov 29, 12:56 AM
In other news: universal thinks they're god.
FF_productions
Jul 15, 01:30 AM
Is it possible that the lower end models (rumored to be single processor) will be upgradeable by BTO or later on by the user by putting in another processor?
Depends on how it is built, I'm sure you will be able to though. I know just as much as you.
Depends on how it is built, I'm sure you will be able to though. I know just as much as you.
Laird Knox
Mar 31, 04:16 PM
Ya got to love this guy.... Mr Gloom and doom!
Glad to see the hot selling iPad 2 only has "one" advantage against the non-selling Android tablets. :rolleyes:
So that advantage is that people actually buy them? ;)
Glad to see the hot selling iPad 2 only has "one" advantage against the non-selling Android tablets. :rolleyes:
So that advantage is that people actually buy them? ;)
Mal
Aug 11, 01:40 PM
My bets are that it will be either with Nokia or with HTC.
Nokia make the best phone interfaces in the world, which is a very Apple-like thing to do. They're also very experienced at phone hardware desigh and integrating it smoothly with the interface.
HTC are a taiwan company that design and make the best phone hardware in the world, and then sell them to companies like O2, T-Mobile etc to put their brand on. Most HTC-built phones run Windows Mobile, which Apple may be interested in replaceing with OSX Mobile...
I can quite easily see Apple commisisoning HTC to make a Apple phone, these people are simply the best at hardware phone design and manufacture.
Someone suggested Blackberry, but Blackberry is more geared to corporate use - not a very Apple-like sector - and also are quite heavily dependent on having access to a Windows server to get the most out of your phone.
Overall, I feel it will be HTC and OSX Mobile...
I'll second the HTC vote. The Cingular 8125 (an HTC PDA phone) is an awesome design and a well-built phone. I'd love it if it wasn't Windows Mobile.
jW
Nokia make the best phone interfaces in the world, which is a very Apple-like thing to do. They're also very experienced at phone hardware desigh and integrating it smoothly with the interface.
HTC are a taiwan company that design and make the best phone hardware in the world, and then sell them to companies like O2, T-Mobile etc to put their brand on. Most HTC-built phones run Windows Mobile, which Apple may be interested in replaceing with OSX Mobile...
I can quite easily see Apple commisisoning HTC to make a Apple phone, these people are simply the best at hardware phone design and manufacture.
Someone suggested Blackberry, but Blackberry is more geared to corporate use - not a very Apple-like sector - and also are quite heavily dependent on having access to a Windows server to get the most out of your phone.
Overall, I feel it will be HTC and OSX Mobile...
I'll second the HTC vote. The Cingular 8125 (an HTC PDA phone) is an awesome design and a well-built phone. I'd love it if it wasn't Windows Mobile.
jW
daneoni
Aug 27, 05:54 PM
I was just checking out the CD vs C2D comparison at Anandtech, pretty interesting stuff.
My question is this, is Santa Rosa strictly the mobile platform? I'm a student holding off for an iMac revision, and am wondering if apple utilizes Conroe in the iMac, will the faster FSB's be supported? Is an updated platform already available for Conroe? (I guess I had more than one question )
Thanks
Santa Rosa is for mobile platforms only. As far as i can tell the Conroe chips already have a rich FSB by default 1066MHz i think. Apple may use conroe and may use merom but conroe is looking to be the slated candidate.
My question is this, is Santa Rosa strictly the mobile platform? I'm a student holding off for an iMac revision, and am wondering if apple utilizes Conroe in the iMac, will the faster FSB's be supported? Is an updated platform already available for Conroe? (I guess I had more than one question )
Thanks
Santa Rosa is for mobile platforms only. As far as i can tell the Conroe chips already have a rich FSB by default 1066MHz i think. Apple may use conroe and may use merom but conroe is looking to be the slated candidate.
peharri
Jul 14, 03:11 PM
Some of this makes sense, some of it not.
I think AppleInsider is right about the case. With the exception of the MacBook, whose design has been rumoured for years and clearly was something Apple would have done even had this been the "iBook G5", Apple has made it a point with all of their Intelizations to use the same case as the predecessor, as if to say "It's business as usual, all we've changed is the processor." So from that point of view, the PowerMac G5 case being, more or less, the Mac Pro case, makes a lot of sense.
Two optical drives? No, sorry, not seeing the reasoning. The reasons given so far don't add up:
- copying DVDs - you can't legally copy 99% of DVDs anyway, if there was no need for twin CD drives, why would there suddenly be for DVDs?
- burning two at once - few people need this, and it's a great sales opportunity for a Firewire external burner anyway. Hell, why stop at TWO?
- Blu-ray - not unless they're really screwed up BR and drives with BR will be incompatible with existing media or something.
Against this, you have the confusion generated by a Mac with two optical drives. I have a Mac with two optical drives (an in-built combo drive, and a FW DVD burner), and it's not terribly elegant. It's fine when reading disks (obviously), but writing them generates some confusion. How sure am I that I'm burning to the right drive? I'm not saying you can't do it, I'm just saying this would be unbelievably un-Mac like. It'd be like the next version of iTunes coming with a menu at the top of its window.
It's also kind of easy to see where this rumour might have originated, in some garbled communication where the rumourmonger says "Two optical drive formats", or "Two bays", or "Multiple media readers" (hey, why not put an SD/CF/MS reader on the front? Pretty much everyone uses them these days, especially the prosumer-market Apple is after. Bet there are more people who'd use an SD card reader than a Firewire port.)
I've been wrong before, but I'm going to go for a traditional PowerMac G5 enclosure, and a single optical drive which may, or may not, support Blu-ray in some shape or form.
I think AppleInsider is right about the case. With the exception of the MacBook, whose design has been rumoured for years and clearly was something Apple would have done even had this been the "iBook G5", Apple has made it a point with all of their Intelizations to use the same case as the predecessor, as if to say "It's business as usual, all we've changed is the processor." So from that point of view, the PowerMac G5 case being, more or less, the Mac Pro case, makes a lot of sense.
Two optical drives? No, sorry, not seeing the reasoning. The reasons given so far don't add up:
- copying DVDs - you can't legally copy 99% of DVDs anyway, if there was no need for twin CD drives, why would there suddenly be for DVDs?
- burning two at once - few people need this, and it's a great sales opportunity for a Firewire external burner anyway. Hell, why stop at TWO?
- Blu-ray - not unless they're really screwed up BR and drives with BR will be incompatible with existing media or something.
Against this, you have the confusion generated by a Mac with two optical drives. I have a Mac with two optical drives (an in-built combo drive, and a FW DVD burner), and it's not terribly elegant. It's fine when reading disks (obviously), but writing them generates some confusion. How sure am I that I'm burning to the right drive? I'm not saying you can't do it, I'm just saying this would be unbelievably un-Mac like. It'd be like the next version of iTunes coming with a menu at the top of its window.
It's also kind of easy to see where this rumour might have originated, in some garbled communication where the rumourmonger says "Two optical drive formats", or "Two bays", or "Multiple media readers" (hey, why not put an SD/CF/MS reader on the front? Pretty much everyone uses them these days, especially the prosumer-market Apple is after. Bet there are more people who'd use an SD card reader than a Firewire port.)
I've been wrong before, but I'm going to go for a traditional PowerMac G5 enclosure, and a single optical drive which may, or may not, support Blu-ray in some shape or form.
Snowy_River
Jul 31, 10:37 AM
Now you've got some skills. I especially like the shadowing, reflections and detail on the back side. Very nice.
I agree with your size assessment.
Actually, our designs are quite close, differing primarily in cosmetics. What I'm refering to is my earlier design, (which I suspect you missed) not boncellis'. boncellis wished to see a wider, flatter version for use in home entertainment, so I conjured that 2nd one up for visualization. While that form factor has grown on me somewhat, I still like the taller version, as I had done earlier, and you've shown here, as well.
Here's my initial design, from earlier in this thread.
http://img92.imageshack.us/img92/9648/macandmacminipx9.jpg
The size of mine is a little smaller (narrower) - I wanted the whole thing less than 8" wide, though it could go back a little deeper, i.e. not necessarily square.
Also, see possible/hoped for product specs earlier in the thread.
Personally, I think I still prefer the smoother Mini-like skin than the perforated look of the Pro, but I'm just quibbling.
Thanks for the imagery.
-Dan
Thank you. I had fun doing it. Although I realized later that my MP is missing the Apple Logo on the side. Oh well.
I did see your earlier design, actually. I had though that it was meant to be the same footprint as the Mac Mini. Seeing it again, I can see that I was mistaken. By comparison, my design is 10"W x 11"D x 4"H. I think to bring it down to the MP 8.1"W, it would have to be made taller, to be reasonable.
Also, in the vein of quibbling, I think that the perforated look of the MP allows for much better cooling, and therefore hotter components, such as extra boards, faster processors, higher-end GPU, etc. That's the reason I went with it... :)
Maybe now I should draw a scene with the Mac++, a keyboard, a mouse, and an ACD. What do you think?
I agree with your size assessment.
Actually, our designs are quite close, differing primarily in cosmetics. What I'm refering to is my earlier design, (which I suspect you missed) not boncellis'. boncellis wished to see a wider, flatter version for use in home entertainment, so I conjured that 2nd one up for visualization. While that form factor has grown on me somewhat, I still like the taller version, as I had done earlier, and you've shown here, as well.
Here's my initial design, from earlier in this thread.
http://img92.imageshack.us/img92/9648/macandmacminipx9.jpg
The size of mine is a little smaller (narrower) - I wanted the whole thing less than 8" wide, though it could go back a little deeper, i.e. not necessarily square.
Also, see possible/hoped for product specs earlier in the thread.
Personally, I think I still prefer the smoother Mini-like skin than the perforated look of the Pro, but I'm just quibbling.
Thanks for the imagery.
-Dan
Thank you. I had fun doing it. Although I realized later that my MP is missing the Apple Logo on the side. Oh well.
I did see your earlier design, actually. I had though that it was meant to be the same footprint as the Mac Mini. Seeing it again, I can see that I was mistaken. By comparison, my design is 10"W x 11"D x 4"H. I think to bring it down to the MP 8.1"W, it would have to be made taller, to be reasonable.
Also, in the vein of quibbling, I think that the perforated look of the MP allows for much better cooling, and therefore hotter components, such as extra boards, faster processors, higher-end GPU, etc. That's the reason I went with it... :)
Maybe now I should draw a scene with the Mac++, a keyboard, a mouse, and an ACD. What do you think?