artpease
Aug 5, 06:14 PM
Point is, without an IR sensor in the display, you wouldn't have the OPTION of hiding the computer away.
Yes, but just my opinion, Apple needs to get over this 'Only new computers get FrontRow' crap and provide a USB repeater. Geez, people aren't buying new computers to get FrontRow, they're buying them to get Intel, so providing FrontRow to legacy systems isn't going to cripple sales! The only error in that opinion might be the mini, both the G4 and Intel minis are so crippled, neither makes any sense in a home theater setting but, providing a USB repeater for the G4 mini might effect a few Intel mini sales.
Yes, but just my opinion, Apple needs to get over this 'Only new computers get FrontRow' crap and provide a USB repeater. Geez, people aren't buying new computers to get FrontRow, they're buying them to get Intel, so providing FrontRow to legacy systems isn't going to cripple sales! The only error in that opinion might be the mini, both the G4 and Intel minis are so crippled, neither makes any sense in a home theater setting but, providing a USB repeater for the G4 mini might effect a few Intel mini sales.
Unspeaked
Sep 19, 12:23 PM
Haha... no.
History has shown that having a product out sooner... doesn't mean you win the market. (Sega Dreamcast?) Sony will still kick due to the deluge of developers producing for the PS3. More software == more sales. In addition, the PS3 is completely backwards compatible (which is huge).
Nintendo will live as long as the 8 bit gen kids still are around. The Wii also promises me to play any old Nintendo game via some sort of download... It's cheap... Sign me up.
This is so right. Time and time again in the console wars, the first to market did not win in the end. It's ALWAYS been the system with the best game selection.
3rd Gen:
First to Market: Sega
Best Game Selection: Nintendo
Winner: Nintendo
4th Gen:
First to Market: TurboGraphics 16
Best Game Selection: SuperNintendo/SegaGensis (tie)
Winner: SuperNintendo/SegaGensis (tie)
5th Gen:
First to Market: Atari Jaguar
Best Game Selection: Sony Playstation
Winner: Sony Playstation
6th Gen:
First to Market: Sega Dreamcast
Best Game Selection: Sony PS2
Winner: Sony PS2
The same could be said for advanced hardware; the winners in the game consoles were always the systems with the best game selections, not the ones that were first to market NOR the ones that had the best hardware.
Of course, this has gotten WAY off topic now ;)
(But I must say I'm going to preorder a Wii for sure!)
History has shown that having a product out sooner... doesn't mean you win the market. (Sega Dreamcast?) Sony will still kick due to the deluge of developers producing for the PS3. More software == more sales. In addition, the PS3 is completely backwards compatible (which is huge).
Nintendo will live as long as the 8 bit gen kids still are around. The Wii also promises me to play any old Nintendo game via some sort of download... It's cheap... Sign me up.
This is so right. Time and time again in the console wars, the first to market did not win in the end. It's ALWAYS been the system with the best game selection.
3rd Gen:
First to Market: Sega
Best Game Selection: Nintendo
Winner: Nintendo
4th Gen:
First to Market: TurboGraphics 16
Best Game Selection: SuperNintendo/SegaGensis (tie)
Winner: SuperNintendo/SegaGensis (tie)
5th Gen:
First to Market: Atari Jaguar
Best Game Selection: Sony Playstation
Winner: Sony Playstation
6th Gen:
First to Market: Sega Dreamcast
Best Game Selection: Sony PS2
Winner: Sony PS2
The same could be said for advanced hardware; the winners in the game consoles were always the systems with the best game selections, not the ones that were first to market NOR the ones that had the best hardware.
Of course, this has gotten WAY off topic now ;)
(But I must say I'm going to preorder a Wii for sure!)
jonharris200
Aug 7, 04:00 PM
Will Time Machine mean that you can't permanently delete any file? What about something confidential which you want to "e-shred"?
Belly-laughs
Nov 28, 08:12 PM
I give Universal $1 to compensate for downloading their whole library illegally? Now, that�s a good deal!
ictiosapiens
Aug 17, 04:39 AM
Could you give some evidence for that, except that they are underclocked on the MacBook Pro _when they are idle_?
And the Macbook... Nearly 50% underclocked, like the 950 was so amazing that it could be crippled by half of its mindblowing performance...
And the Macbook... Nearly 50% underclocked, like the 950 was so amazing that it could be crippled by half of its mindblowing performance...
samh004
Nov 28, 07:14 PM
I was under the assumption that the money paid to Universal was to allow the streaming of music from one device to another. I assumed that was the real reason behind the payment.
Seeing as Apple does not stream music to random devices, they shouldn't have to pay a royalty.
I don't think I voiced my opinion about this last time it was brought up, but I reckon although the iPod makes enough profit so as not to pass that royalty onto the consumer (in price), I would still feel like I was paying that royalty, were I to buy an iPod.
If I felt like I paid a royalty, and was already downloading songs legally from iTunes anyway, I'd want to download more stuff illegally than I have before, just to make use of that royalty.
That's what I will do if I have to buy an iPod in the future with a pre-paid royalty. You heard me... this tactic will only encourage more piracy. Stupid really !
Seeing as Apple does not stream music to random devices, they shouldn't have to pay a royalty.
I don't think I voiced my opinion about this last time it was brought up, but I reckon although the iPod makes enough profit so as not to pass that royalty onto the consumer (in price), I would still feel like I was paying that royalty, were I to buy an iPod.
If I felt like I paid a royalty, and was already downloading songs legally from iTunes anyway, I'd want to download more stuff illegally than I have before, just to make use of that royalty.
That's what I will do if I have to buy an iPod in the future with a pre-paid royalty. You heard me... this tactic will only encourage more piracy. Stupid really !
shawnce
Sep 13, 11:48 AM
Yes, that's true.
It's also true that most of the time, most people aren't even maxing out ONE core never mind eight.
And when they do, their program won't get any faster unless it's multithreaded and able to run on multiple cores at once.
Lets not forget things like Spotlight that can now run more rigorously without affecting CPU resource much. You will get more intelligent software that can prepare for what you want to do so that when you go to do it it will be much more responsive. In other words just because some tasks cannot be easily broken up to leverage multiple cores doesn't mean that tasks such as those cannot be speculative run by software on idle cores in preparation for you doing the task.
It's also true that most of the time, most people aren't even maxing out ONE core never mind eight.
And when they do, their program won't get any faster unless it's multithreaded and able to run on multiple cores at once.
Lets not forget things like Spotlight that can now run more rigorously without affecting CPU resource much. You will get more intelligent software that can prepare for what you want to do so that when you go to do it it will be much more responsive. In other words just because some tasks cannot be easily broken up to leverage multiple cores doesn't mean that tasks such as those cannot be speculative run by software on idle cores in preparation for you doing the task.
thunng8
Apr 7, 05:31 PM
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)
The trouble is .. I find the TDP numbers for Sandy Bridge very misleading. For example the previous i7 2.66Ghz dual core had a TDP of 35W and the current i7 2.2Ghz quad core has a TDP of 45W. Theoretically, it should only use 10W more when doing CPU intensive task, but according to anandtech who measured the task, the i7 Sandy Bridge Quad core was using almost 40W more when running cinebench.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4205/the-macbook-pro-review-13-and-15-inch-2011-brings-sandy-bridge/14
It just doesn't make any sense. Going by those figures, if the i7 dual core was 35W, the i7 Sandy Bridge quad core would be around 70W.
Not sure how this relates to potential MacBook Air Sandy Bridge processors, but keep in mind.. there must be a reason why Samsung went for the ULV processor in their 13" laptop instead of the LV one.
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)
The trouble is .. I find the TDP numbers for Sandy Bridge very misleading. For example the previous i7 2.66Ghz dual core had a TDP of 35W and the current i7 2.2Ghz quad core has a TDP of 45W. Theoretically, it should only use 10W more when doing CPU intensive task, but according to anandtech who measured the task, the i7 Sandy Bridge Quad core was using almost 40W more when running cinebench.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4205/the-macbook-pro-review-13-and-15-inch-2011-brings-sandy-bridge/14
It just doesn't make any sense. Going by those figures, if the i7 dual core was 35W, the i7 Sandy Bridge quad core would be around 70W.
Not sure how this relates to potential MacBook Air Sandy Bridge processors, but keep in mind.. there must be a reason why Samsung went for the ULV processor in their 13" laptop instead of the LV one.
gregor.hoch
Apr 6, 11:32 AM
13" MBP uses SV chips, i.e. standard voltage (35W). Before it used MV (medium voltage, 25W) chips but Sandy Bridge does not offer CPUs like that. LV (25W) and ULV (17W) chips have not been released yet but will be released shortly like the article says.
If the clock speed and other specs are the same, then the performance is the same. ULV and LV chips are only separated by the TDP which causes the ULV to have lower clock speed. Otherwise they are the same chips.
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!
If the clock speed and other specs are the same, then the performance is the same. ULV and LV chips are only separated by the TDP which causes the ULV to have lower clock speed. Otherwise they are the same chips.
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!
shawnce
Sep 13, 01:22 PM
As for using a Dell, sure they could've used that. Would Windows use the extra 4 cores? Highly doubtful. Microsoft has sketchy 64 bit support let alone dual core support; I'm not saying "impossible" but I haven't read jack squat about any version of Windows working well with quad cores. You think those fools (the same idiots who came up with Genuine Advantage) actually optimized their OS to run in an 8 core setup? Please pass along what you're smoking. :rolleyes:
:confused:
Yeah because whatever you [zero2dash] are smoking is really screwing with your mind... best to get something else.
:confused:
Yeah because whatever you [zero2dash] are smoking is really screwing with your mind... best to get something else.
radesousa
Sep 13, 11:40 AM
So the question I have is can the latest iMac be CPU upgraded like the MacPro?
Hellhammer
Apr 8, 09:01 AM
The trouble is .. I find the TDP numbers for Sandy Bridge very misleading. For example the previous i7 2.66Ghz dual core had a TDP of 35W and the current i7 2.2Ghz quad core has a TDP of 45W. Theoretically, it should only use 10W more when doing CPU intensive task, but according to anandtech who measured the task, the i7 Sandy Bridge Quad core was using almost 40W more when running cinebench.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4205/the-macbook-pro-review-13-and-15-inch-2011-brings-sandy-bridge/14
It just doesn't make any sense. Going by those figures, if the i7 dual core was 35W, the i7 Sandy Bridge quad core would be around 70W.
Not sure how this relates to potential MacBook Air Sandy Bridge processors, but keep in mind.. there must be a reason why Samsung went for the ULV processor in their 13" laptop instead of the LV one.
CPU isn't the only thing that changed. AMD 6750M (~30W) has higher TDP than NVidia GT 330M (~23W). I had to put ~ because their TDPs are not officially stated by AMD or NVidia so it's just based on previous GPUs and their TDPs. The point is that AMD 6750M has higher TDP.
There is also another thing. TDP is not the maximum power draw. Maximum power dissipation is usually 20-30% more than the actual TDP. While MPD is rarely achieved as it requires maximum voltage and temperature, it can (nearly) be achieved with heavy benchmarking applications.
For example, the combined TDP from quad core SB and AMD 6750M is 75W. If we use 20% extra as the MPD, that is 90W, just from the CPU and GPU! Of course those parts are not using 90W in that test because things like screen, HD, RAM etc need power too. As the MPD is usually in percents, it can explain why the difference is so big in watts.
40W sounds a bit too much to explain with MPD though. IIRC the GT 330M is underclocked but I'm not 100% sure. You have a valid point that the SBs may be using more power than their predecessors. To make this more accurate, we should compare them with C2Ds though ;)
I guess we will have to wait and see, but an ULV in 13" would be more than a disappointment.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4205/the-macbook-pro-review-13-and-15-inch-2011-brings-sandy-bridge/14
It just doesn't make any sense. Going by those figures, if the i7 dual core was 35W, the i7 Sandy Bridge quad core would be around 70W.
Not sure how this relates to potential MacBook Air Sandy Bridge processors, but keep in mind.. there must be a reason why Samsung went for the ULV processor in their 13" laptop instead of the LV one.
CPU isn't the only thing that changed. AMD 6750M (~30W) has higher TDP than NVidia GT 330M (~23W). I had to put ~ because their TDPs are not officially stated by AMD or NVidia so it's just based on previous GPUs and their TDPs. The point is that AMD 6750M has higher TDP.
There is also another thing. TDP is not the maximum power draw. Maximum power dissipation is usually 20-30% more than the actual TDP. While MPD is rarely achieved as it requires maximum voltage and temperature, it can (nearly) be achieved with heavy benchmarking applications.
For example, the combined TDP from quad core SB and AMD 6750M is 75W. If we use 20% extra as the MPD, that is 90W, just from the CPU and GPU! Of course those parts are not using 90W in that test because things like screen, HD, RAM etc need power too. As the MPD is usually in percents, it can explain why the difference is so big in watts.
40W sounds a bit too much to explain with MPD though. IIRC the GT 330M is underclocked but I'm not 100% sure. You have a valid point that the SBs may be using more power than their predecessors. To make this more accurate, we should compare them with C2Ds though ;)
I guess we will have to wait and see, but an ULV in 13" would be more than a disappointment.
ninjadex
Mar 31, 02:44 PM
What so many fail to realize is iOS was made for the iPad from the get-go. It's been mentioned many times that what became the iPad was in development longer than the original iPhone.
This goes to show that iOS conceptualization is light years ahead of Android. It's so obvious Google is scrambling, and seems to be making this stuff as they go along, without any sense of a master design guiding the way.
This goes to show that iOS conceptualization is light years ahead of Android. It's so obvious Google is scrambling, and seems to be making this stuff as they go along, without any sense of a master design guiding the way.
NJRonbo
Jun 23, 12:36 PM
My name is on a list at one of the busier Central
Jersey stores (Monmouth Mall) but I am being told
that they aren't getting any phones on launch day.
So, if THAT store isn't getting any I don't hold much
hope for a lot of these others.
Jersey stores (Monmouth Mall) but I am being told
that they aren't getting any phones on launch day.
So, if THAT store isn't getting any I don't hold much
hope for a lot of these others.
Thomas Veil
Apr 28, 05:46 AM
I lost it a long time ago. Trump is an asshat that should just shut the **** up and go back to diddling eastern european models and building casinos (is that christian right compliant I wonder?).But of course today, instead of looking embarrassed and admitting he was wrong, he's "taking credit" for something. Not sure exactly what.
bonehead
Nov 28, 07:02 PM
It doesn't cost the consumer any more, why wouldn't you want the people who actually make the music you are listening to get compensated?
This debate is stale. People want something for nothing.
Two things.
1) Who says the people who actually make the music would get any of this money in the first place?
2) Digital distribution is more profitable per unit than CDs. There are no manufacturing or shipping costs.
Now who is it that wants something for nothing?
This debate is stale. People want something for nothing.
Two things.
1) Who says the people who actually make the music would get any of this money in the first place?
2) Digital distribution is more profitable per unit than CDs. There are no manufacturing or shipping costs.
Now who is it that wants something for nothing?
TangoCharlie
Jul 20, 11:28 AM
any talk of a quad core merom or mobile cpu?
No. I shouldn't think any laptop will be getting Kentsfield for a while....
No. I shouldn't think any laptop will be getting Kentsfield for a while....
DeVizardofOZ
Aug 30, 06:14 AM
I don't believe Apple would (or should) license out Mac OS X to run on non-Apple hardware. This is because Apple is a hardware company that uses Mac OS X to sell hardware. I wouldn't want it to be licensed out anyway, because then we would have to deal with registration key nightmares. Right now, there's nothing but your conscience and a license agreement you probably threw away keeping you from installing one copy of Mac OS X on every Mac you can get your hands on. Not that I do that, but I sure like just popping in my disk and reinstalling whenever it strikes my fancy.
On to the support issue, I think since the beginning of technical support there have always been those who complain that quality has really gone down and back in the good ol' days, you never had any problems, ever! And now, by golly, it's a coin toss whether you get a machine that even turns on!
Right, gramps, and back in your day, you walked to school uphill both ways in the snow with no boots and you liked it.
And 25% of new machines being lemons? Last quarter, Apple reported they shipped 1,327,000 computers. If we call a quarter 90 days, and assume that 25% of them are dead, that's more than 3,600 computers sold defective every single day. Are you kidding me? You really think a major hardware company would sell 3,600 defective computers every single day and get away with it?
This is what's really happening: Apple is selling more machines than ever. Apple's customers have greater access to the internet than ever. Even if the rate of failure stays the same, you have more customers with more internet savvy to come whine and moan on bulletin boards.
Yes, you deserve a perfectly functioning computer and you have the right to complain when your computer is broken. So call Apple or go down to your local service provider and get your machine serviced under warranty. That's what it's there for. It's also the number 1 best way to help Apple get clued in to potential issues with their products. They're not going to issue a recall because a bunch of bulletin board users complain to each other over and over again until they convince each other that there isn't a single MacBook Pro in the world that functions properly.
_________________________________________________________________________
because, no matter what I hear around the board, all of you forgot to consider, that there must be a large number of faulty products WHICH DID NOT SLIP THROUGH THE SLOPPY CQ AT THE FACTORY. Therefore 20-25% lemons is indeed possible and much too high a percentage in any manufacturing process.
Best
On to the support issue, I think since the beginning of technical support there have always been those who complain that quality has really gone down and back in the good ol' days, you never had any problems, ever! And now, by golly, it's a coin toss whether you get a machine that even turns on!
Right, gramps, and back in your day, you walked to school uphill both ways in the snow with no boots and you liked it.
And 25% of new machines being lemons? Last quarter, Apple reported they shipped 1,327,000 computers. If we call a quarter 90 days, and assume that 25% of them are dead, that's more than 3,600 computers sold defective every single day. Are you kidding me? You really think a major hardware company would sell 3,600 defective computers every single day and get away with it?
This is what's really happening: Apple is selling more machines than ever. Apple's customers have greater access to the internet than ever. Even if the rate of failure stays the same, you have more customers with more internet savvy to come whine and moan on bulletin boards.
Yes, you deserve a perfectly functioning computer and you have the right to complain when your computer is broken. So call Apple or go down to your local service provider and get your machine serviced under warranty. That's what it's there for. It's also the number 1 best way to help Apple get clued in to potential issues with their products. They're not going to issue a recall because a bunch of bulletin board users complain to each other over and over again until they convince each other that there isn't a single MacBook Pro in the world that functions properly.
_________________________________________________________________________
because, no matter what I hear around the board, all of you forgot to consider, that there must be a large number of faulty products WHICH DID NOT SLIP THROUGH THE SLOPPY CQ AT THE FACTORY. Therefore 20-25% lemons is indeed possible and much too high a percentage in any manufacturing process.
Best
DeVizardofOZ
Aug 26, 05:11 AM
It is time APPLE implements clear policies for their WW operations in terms of repairs, returns, and the like. It is not enough, when the service in the US or UK is great it must be great everywhere, including Hongkong and the Mainland. That would send a signal to all those switchers, turned off by the what they read here and their own experiences.
There is no perfection, but at least APPLE should strive visibly in that direction.
There is no perfection, but at least APPLE should strive visibly in that direction.
DStaal
Jul 20, 09:33 AM
...Quad Duo?
...Quadra Duo?
...the "holy hell this is faster than you'll ever need" Mac? :D
If it can't model WW2 D-Day in full holographic 3D, with AI ground troops, AI generals, real physics and weather effects I garuntee you there will be people asking for more power.
(Now, doesn't that sound like a sweet game? :) )
...Quadra Duo?
...the "holy hell this is faster than you'll ever need" Mac? :D
If it can't model WW2 D-Day in full holographic 3D, with AI ground troops, AI generals, real physics and weather effects I garuntee you there will be people asking for more power.
(Now, doesn't that sound like a sweet game? :) )
digitalbiker
Aug 25, 09:51 PM
I thought apple was supposed to be better at support than dell?
I have always exected Dell's support to be top notch and they have never let me down. However,I always paid for the upgraded 3 year support and I have never used the standard 1 year support. I also have always paid for Apple's 3 year AppleCare. In my opinion there is no comparison. Dell is better.
This is one reason I thought that previous surveys always rated Apple too high. The only explaination I could think of that made sense is that Apple has a tremendously loyal fan base. I think this fan base gives Apple rosey numbers and exagerates Apple's support response. Now that Apple marketshare has grown some, I think these users are seeing that it ain't so rosey red at Apple.
I have always exected Dell's support to be top notch and they have never let me down. However,I always paid for the upgraded 3 year support and I have never used the standard 1 year support. I also have always paid for Apple's 3 year AppleCare. In my opinion there is no comparison. Dell is better.
This is one reason I thought that previous surveys always rated Apple too high. The only explaination I could think of that made sense is that Apple has a tremendously loyal fan base. I think this fan base gives Apple rosey numbers and exagerates Apple's support response. Now that Apple marketshare has grown some, I think these users are seeing that it ain't so rosey red at Apple.
DeathChill
Apr 19, 08:06 PM
Me, Urg, first caveman to make rock round! Michelin and Firestone steal idea!
I'm not a lawyer but I play one on the Internet. You have a bulletproof case; let's sue.
I'm not a lawyer but I play one on the Internet. You have a bulletproof case; let's sue.
LethalWolfe
Apr 10, 10:31 PM
Unless, like I posted earlier, the iPad app functions as a UI for the main application over the network. The Mac (or cluster of macs) takes care of the heavy lifting, and the iPad is used to make edits remotely, and broadcast to HDTV's.
AirPlay & AirEdit.
If you had a cluster of Mac Pro's using thunderbolt (or whatever...ethernet, fibre, etc) to talk to each other, and you used the iPad as a remote UI, you could edit, compress, and broadcast from anywhere.
Apple has all the pieces in place to do this. AirPlay, AppleTV, iPad, iTunes as a media hub for all the devices to communicate, Qmaster, etc...
This has been a long time coming. I remember in 2006-2007 hearing rumors that Apple was working on a tablet like controller for logic. It was to be used to edit the timeline, or act as a virtual mixer, etc. This has been brewing for years, and I think it's almost a reality.
Avid demo'd basically this last year at NAB. IIRC all the media was on servers in Virginia and the presenter did the demonstration on a laptop using a web app.
Lethal
AirPlay & AirEdit.
If you had a cluster of Mac Pro's using thunderbolt (or whatever...ethernet, fibre, etc) to talk to each other, and you used the iPad as a remote UI, you could edit, compress, and broadcast from anywhere.
Apple has all the pieces in place to do this. AirPlay, AppleTV, iPad, iTunes as a media hub for all the devices to communicate, Qmaster, etc...
This has been a long time coming. I remember in 2006-2007 hearing rumors that Apple was working on a tablet like controller for logic. It was to be used to edit the timeline, or act as a virtual mixer, etc. This has been brewing for years, and I think it's almost a reality.
Avid demo'd basically this last year at NAB. IIRC all the media was on servers in Virginia and the presenter did the demonstration on a laptop using a web app.
Lethal
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 11, 03:48 PM
I standby my assumption that the amount of internet usage is probably a good gauge of cell phone usage.
I am sure you are...
Care to dispute, then provide your own "facts".
My assumption (http://www.gsmworld.com/index.shtml). I was wrong. It is not 81%, it is 82%. Sorry, I will check my sources better next time.
I am sure you are...
Care to dispute, then provide your own "facts".
My assumption (http://www.gsmworld.com/index.shtml). I was wrong. It is not 81%, it is 82%. Sorry, I will check my sources better next time.