SPUY767
Jul 27, 03:38 PM
Sorry if i missed it, but at what speeds do these run? Don't they know just because they keep bumping and bumping the chip speed don't really mean they have a faster system. Seem just like yesterday when a better design was more important than a super fast chip. Oh well, everyone is buying into the Mhz myth now. Funny that just a year or so ago, Apple was trying to shoot down the Mhz myth, now they have people cheering for it. I guess power consumption is good though.
This is a positively thoughtless remark. No one's cheering the MHz myth on, in fact, Intel itself has abandoned the concept. Until the 3Ghz woodies get dropped in a MacPro, the 2.7 GHZ G5 will still be the fastest chip ever put in a Macintosh. I have a dual core Pentium D in a bastard Mac at the house, it runs at 3.8 GHz. I'm pretty sure that even it is slower in a lot of areas than these Core 2's. So no, you're absolutely wrong, the MHz myth is all but dead.
This is a positively thoughtless remark. No one's cheering the MHz myth on, in fact, Intel itself has abandoned the concept. Until the 3Ghz woodies get dropped in a MacPro, the 2.7 GHZ G5 will still be the fastest chip ever put in a Macintosh. I have a dual core Pentium D in a bastard Mac at the house, it runs at 3.8 GHz. I'm pretty sure that even it is slower in a lot of areas than these Core 2's. So no, you're absolutely wrong, the MHz myth is all but dead.
heisetax
Jul 14, 08:24 PM
Doh! Well, again IMHO, it is my preference to have only one optical drive built in. I could always add an external later.
Why do the rest of us have to settle for your preference?
I know people that have their systems running that could get by with a 5-10 GB hard drive. Does that mean that we should feel that all systems should only have a 5-10 GB hard drive, maybe a CD drive & since we all will have the same small needs a floppy drive. A DVD writer could make a complete backup in most ccases. Why would we need one of them. So why have more than one external 5 1/4" slot.
I may only run probrams that I can download on the internet, why then even one external drive slot?
Sounds a little far out. But what is really far out? Everybody has different needs & wants. Many Windows systems have the ability to have at least 4 internally mounted external 5 1/4" drives 2-4 or more 3.5" external drives, several internal 3.5" drives, 10-in-1 flash card reader/writers & many more things. My old Mac Clones had space for 4 5 1/4" external & 2 3 1/2" external drives, with either 2 or 4 internal 3.5" drives.
There are people that need to run many different drives at once. They don't all want to have more external drives with all of those many, many cords than they absolutely have to. Right now I have 3 external drives hooked to my 17" PowerBook. Then there is usually a flash drive or 2 hook up to this system.
Remember that everyone does their computing different. That means that only a certain group would be happy with what you think is all that needs to be in a system. Others will think that you have too much.
My wife & me each have MDD PowerMac G4's for our desktop units. They both have DVD burne & CD burner drives. I miss the other slots that I have on myy Clones. I may have up to 6 internal 3.5" drives mounted. Usually a couple of SCSI drives, a couple PATA drives, & a couple SATA drives.s I still have 3-6 drives attached externally plus a NAS drive. Most external drives are FW800, with a couple FW400 drives & a 3 CF drives tower by Lexar.
What is the correct amount of drives? To me it is whatever it takes to properly get your computer job down. So to you, it will always be, why more than 1 internal 5 1/4" drive.
Bill the TaxMan
Why do the rest of us have to settle for your preference?
I know people that have their systems running that could get by with a 5-10 GB hard drive. Does that mean that we should feel that all systems should only have a 5-10 GB hard drive, maybe a CD drive & since we all will have the same small needs a floppy drive. A DVD writer could make a complete backup in most ccases. Why would we need one of them. So why have more than one external 5 1/4" slot.
I may only run probrams that I can download on the internet, why then even one external drive slot?
Sounds a little far out. But what is really far out? Everybody has different needs & wants. Many Windows systems have the ability to have at least 4 internally mounted external 5 1/4" drives 2-4 or more 3.5" external drives, several internal 3.5" drives, 10-in-1 flash card reader/writers & many more things. My old Mac Clones had space for 4 5 1/4" external & 2 3 1/2" external drives, with either 2 or 4 internal 3.5" drives.
There are people that need to run many different drives at once. They don't all want to have more external drives with all of those many, many cords than they absolutely have to. Right now I have 3 external drives hooked to my 17" PowerBook. Then there is usually a flash drive or 2 hook up to this system.
Remember that everyone does their computing different. That means that only a certain group would be happy with what you think is all that needs to be in a system. Others will think that you have too much.
My wife & me each have MDD PowerMac G4's for our desktop units. They both have DVD burne & CD burner drives. I miss the other slots that I have on myy Clones. I may have up to 6 internal 3.5" drives mounted. Usually a couple of SCSI drives, a couple PATA drives, & a couple SATA drives.s I still have 3-6 drives attached externally plus a NAS drive. Most external drives are FW800, with a couple FW400 drives & a 3 CF drives tower by Lexar.
What is the correct amount of drives? To me it is whatever it takes to properly get your computer job down. So to you, it will always be, why more than 1 internal 5 1/4" drive.
Bill the TaxMan
dhc
Aug 11, 11:05 AM
I'm stuck in a contract for another year, so I'll be watching to see how this pans out. Hopefully, I'll be able to jump on a Rev B without reservations.
Given Apple's patent on the click-wheel interface, what do you think the likelihood of a virtual rotary phone interface? There are plenty of people who are now adults who've never 'dialled' a phone. It would be really slick if Apple could find a way for all of us old-farts to re-activiate our kinaesthetic memories and dial up and old friend using the click wheel on our new iPhones.
Cheers
Loving that idea..54820
Given Apple's patent on the click-wheel interface, what do you think the likelihood of a virtual rotary phone interface? There are plenty of people who are now adults who've never 'dialled' a phone. It would be really slick if Apple could find a way for all of us old-farts to re-activiate our kinaesthetic memories and dial up and old friend using the click wheel on our new iPhones.
Cheers
Loving that idea..54820
Chundles
Jul 27, 09:56 AM
at last, I may be able to build a system that will run Vista well!
Gee, talk about getting ahead of yourself.
Core 3 will be out before Vista is. I'm going to call it now.
Everybody, be my witness, Core 3 (any processor that goes beyond Core 2 because I don't know if they'll call it "Core 3") will be out before a consumer version of Vista is shipped.
Gee, talk about getting ahead of yourself.
Core 3 will be out before Vista is. I'm going to call it now.
Everybody, be my witness, Core 3 (any processor that goes beyond Core 2 because I don't know if they'll call it "Core 3") will be out before a consumer version of Vista is shipped.
NoSmokingBandit
Dec 10, 10:25 AM
*sexy pics*
Did you take those yourself? I've only played with photo mode a little and i have trouble keeping my car in focus unless i use a huge f-stop. If i shorted the DoF it always ends up focusing on my rear bumper or something stupid.
I probably just need to use it more, but i just get impatient and start another race.
Did you take those yourself? I've only played with photo mode a little and i have trouble keeping my car in focus unless i use a huge f-stop. If i shorted the DoF it always ends up focusing on my rear bumper or something stupid.
I probably just need to use it more, but i just get impatient and start another race.
dethmaShine
Apr 19, 02:40 PM
Boy. Why do we go back and forth like this arguing between fanboys and non. It's pointless. Nobody cares about your or my opinion, and you're not convincing anyone who disagrees with you as people NEVER change their opinions about anything ever.
I'm not why I do it either, but never again.
Talking to me?
I am not trying to convince; simply stating opinions by providing facts. Problem?
I'm not why I do it either, but never again.
Talking to me?
I am not trying to convince; simply stating opinions by providing facts. Problem?
Neb154
Aug 7, 03:39 PM
I'm real excited for the new iChat and Spaces, along with these new "top secret features..." They better be good!
The finder is definately my bet for something to be revamped, along with probably iLife which will be revamped for leopard.
Edit : Also something more with virtualization (boot camp area) as they did not touch that really.
The finder is definately my bet for something to be revamped, along with probably iLife which will be revamped for leopard.
Edit : Also something more with virtualization (boot camp area) as they did not touch that really.
shamino
Jul 20, 09:58 AM
No I think you are confused. :) I meant "Is having more cores, lets say 8, more efficient than one big core equal in processing power to the 8 cores?"
First of all, you assume that it is possible to make "one big core equal in processing power to the 8 cores". I don't think it is possible to do this (at least not with the x86 architecture using today's technology.)
But assuming such a chip exists, the answer depends on what kind of efficiency you're thinking of.
If you mean computational efficiency (meaning the most useful processing per clock-tick), then a single big core will do better. This is because single-threaded apps will be able to use the full power (whereas multiple threads are needed to take advantagte of multiple cores.) Also, the operating system can get rid of the overhead that is needed to keep software running on the multiple cores from stepping on each other.
If you mean energy efficiency (amount of processing per watt of electricity consumed), then it could go either way, depending on how the chips are made. But given today's manufacturing processes and the non-linear power curve that we see as clock speeds are increased, the multiple-core solution will almost definitely use less power.
First of all, you assume that it is possible to make "one big core equal in processing power to the 8 cores". I don't think it is possible to do this (at least not with the x86 architecture using today's technology.)
But assuming such a chip exists, the answer depends on what kind of efficiency you're thinking of.
If you mean computational efficiency (meaning the most useful processing per clock-tick), then a single big core will do better. This is because single-threaded apps will be able to use the full power (whereas multiple threads are needed to take advantagte of multiple cores.) Also, the operating system can get rid of the overhead that is needed to keep software running on the multiple cores from stepping on each other.
If you mean energy efficiency (amount of processing per watt of electricity consumed), then it could go either way, depending on how the chips are made. But given today's manufacturing processes and the non-linear power curve that we see as clock speeds are increased, the multiple-core solution will almost definitely use less power.
Amazing Iceman
Mar 23, 08:45 AM
Is MacRumors branching out to coverage of all tablets and media players now? I can't speak for everyone who visits the site but I come here to read about Apple products, not the competition's knock-offs.
True, but it's always good to know about what's out there to avoid 'falling for temptation'.
When the iPad came out, I thought it was just a toy, and was excited about the 'other' tablets coming out, which in the end never saw the light of day.
It was on part due to my regular visits to the MacRumors website and forums that I got the incentive to go buy an iPad, under the premises that ifnI didn't like, I would return it. And I still haven't.
I have been able to see other tablets too, but none really catched my attention. Some felt like cheap plastic, others had a display that was too small, etc. So far, I want an iPad2, but while I wait for it to become easily available, I don't mind reading and trying other tablets. So far all that keeps showing how great the iPad is.
True, but it's always good to know about what's out there to avoid 'falling for temptation'.
When the iPad came out, I thought it was just a toy, and was excited about the 'other' tablets coming out, which in the end never saw the light of day.
It was on part due to my regular visits to the MacRumors website and forums that I got the incentive to go buy an iPad, under the premises that ifnI didn't like, I would return it. And I still haven't.
I have been able to see other tablets too, but none really catched my attention. Some felt like cheap plastic, others had a display that was too small, etc. So far, I want an iPad2, but while I wait for it to become easily available, I don't mind reading and trying other tablets. So far all that keeps showing how great the iPad is.
AppleFreak89
Jun 8, 07:55 PM
I kind of take offense to the statement that the radioshack employees can ruin your credit. truth is it is impossible..there is no way to touch your credit when running an activation. the used phone incident sounded like a mistake, hardly the norm. I've never heard of that happening. Radioshack is connected to the carries and in fact have their own representative for each carrier. Also, Radioshack offers a 30-day policy same as everywhere. Oh and the cell-phones sold at Walmart, target and Sam's club are owned by Radioshack BTW.
Sydde
Mar 22, 08:47 PM
What I always wonder is what diplomatic efforts were used to pressure Qaddafi? There were no (as far as I know) threats of economic embargoes, freezing of assets, or other less violent methods to coerce Qaddafi.
As I recall, there was some freezing of the assets (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/feb/27/gaddafi-family-assets-frozen-queen), though the figures they show make it look like little more than window dressing.
Really, the reason the west wants him outta there is because no one can agree on how to transliterate his name :confused:
As I recall, there was some freezing of the assets (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/feb/27/gaddafi-family-assets-frozen-queen), though the figures they show make it look like little more than window dressing.
Really, the reason the west wants him outta there is because no one can agree on how to transliterate his name :confused:
BlizzardBomb
Aug 27, 05:37 AM
For a desktop machine those iMac specs are utterly pathetic. A X1600 in 2007? Heck, it was a mediocre card 6 months ago, let alone in 6 months time. A crappy 2Mb cache C2D and both slow as hell compared to what every other desktop manufacturer will be offering?
Crappy 2MB? LOL! So that automatically makes the current iMacs crap. And an X1650 Pro is a brand new card? 600 MHz core/ 700 MHz memory clocks (Apple will probably underclock it though :p) and 12 pixel pipes and great bang-for-buck makes the X1650 Pro the card of choice.
The iMac is a desktop computer and Apple's only desktop computer. It should offer desktop performance, end of. What use is a crippled desktop, with all the problems of a mobile form factor but none of the advantages, to anyone? You might as well buy a Macbook.
You mean only all-in-one. And how is it crippled? You want the GMA 950 from a MacBook? :p
What would be competitive:
MB: 1.83 and 2.0Ghz Merom, Integrated graphics
MBP: 2-2.33Ghz Merom, X1800
iMac 2.4-2.66Ghz Conroe, X1800 and LCD res upgrade
Mac Mini: 1.83Ghz Allendale (going to be much cheaper than Merom, so if they can they will put one in) Integrated graphics
Mac Pro: Dual 2.0-3.0Ghz Xeons
MB: What I said
MBP: What I said
iMac: You'll be pushing up prices as well as getting into Mac Pro's territory. A low-end X1800 is a possibilty but considering Apple's track record for graphics cards, unlikely.
Mac Mini: If you like liquid Mac Minis then sure :) I have even suggested that an Allendale Core 2 Duo along with a 3.5" HD should be put in the Mini but it would require a case redesign.
Mac Pro: It's already like that.
P.S. And you obviously didn't read what I said about cost of going from a 1.83 GHz Yonah to a 2.4 Ghz Conroe.
Crappy 2MB? LOL! So that automatically makes the current iMacs crap. And an X1650 Pro is a brand new card? 600 MHz core/ 700 MHz memory clocks (Apple will probably underclock it though :p) and 12 pixel pipes and great bang-for-buck makes the X1650 Pro the card of choice.
The iMac is a desktop computer and Apple's only desktop computer. It should offer desktop performance, end of. What use is a crippled desktop, with all the problems of a mobile form factor but none of the advantages, to anyone? You might as well buy a Macbook.
You mean only all-in-one. And how is it crippled? You want the GMA 950 from a MacBook? :p
What would be competitive:
MB: 1.83 and 2.0Ghz Merom, Integrated graphics
MBP: 2-2.33Ghz Merom, X1800
iMac 2.4-2.66Ghz Conroe, X1800 and LCD res upgrade
Mac Mini: 1.83Ghz Allendale (going to be much cheaper than Merom, so if they can they will put one in) Integrated graphics
Mac Pro: Dual 2.0-3.0Ghz Xeons
MB: What I said
MBP: What I said
iMac: You'll be pushing up prices as well as getting into Mac Pro's territory. A low-end X1800 is a possibilty but considering Apple's track record for graphics cards, unlikely.
Mac Mini: If you like liquid Mac Minis then sure :) I have even suggested that an Allendale Core 2 Duo along with a 3.5" HD should be put in the Mini but it would require a case redesign.
Mac Pro: It's already like that.
P.S. And you obviously didn't read what I said about cost of going from a 1.83 GHz Yonah to a 2.4 Ghz Conroe.
cloudnine
Aug 25, 05:02 PM
Well, recently there have been problems with people having their mail bounced back to them because somehow the dotMac smtp servers were blacklisted by spamcop and a few other services. They have been having pretty bad, though geographically localized, service disruptions. Friends of mine have also complained that mail they send to me are sometimes bounced back with a "This account doesn't exist" error message even though they have sent me mail before and after the event (yes, they verified the email address).
So, in summary, there are a lot of problems that shouldn't occur with a $100 a year service. DotMac should be at least a 99% uptime service for that kind of money.
Wow... I had no idea. *crosses fingers* I hope that doesn't happen to me :/
So, in summary, there are a lot of problems that shouldn't occur with a $100 a year service. DotMac should be at least a 99% uptime service for that kind of money.
Wow... I had no idea. *crosses fingers* I hope that doesn't happen to me :/
bibbz
Jun 11, 06:40 PM
Bibbz
I just talked to my local radioshack and they are also taking preorders. He told me he can't guarantee me the 24th. He said he's not sure when they will come in. How accurate is this? I really don't want to preorder if its not going to be there on the 24th.
If you pre order, you will have one on the 24th. That's kinda the point of a pre order. You know, to guarantee you get one. I'd try a different store if that's an option. If not, idk what to tell ya. Like I said though, if you pre order, you'll have one on launch day. On the Evo pre orders, you had two days to pick it up, if you didn't, we sold them and you had to wait till we got more to get one(all my preorders came and got theirs). Launch day and the day after. I speculate iPhone 4 will be the same way.
I just talked to my local radioshack and they are also taking preorders. He told me he can't guarantee me the 24th. He said he's not sure when they will come in. How accurate is this? I really don't want to preorder if its not going to be there on the 24th.
If you pre order, you will have one on the 24th. That's kinda the point of a pre order. You know, to guarantee you get one. I'd try a different store if that's an option. If not, idk what to tell ya. Like I said though, if you pre order, you'll have one on launch day. On the Evo pre orders, you had two days to pick it up, if you didn't, we sold them and you had to wait till we got more to get one(all my preorders came and got theirs). Launch day and the day after. I speculate iPhone 4 will be the same way.
rezenclowd3
Aug 14, 11:31 PM
I enjoyed 4 quite a bit until it got into the super fast races. I have more fun racing a slightly tuned 350z instead of a completely modified GT that is putting 800+hp on the road.
I do agree there unless it is an F1 or LMP1 race ;-) Must be due to my gaming driving skill:rolleyes:
I do agree there unless it is an F1 or LMP1 race ;-) Must be due to my gaming driving skill:rolleyes:
chubad
Aug 11, 07:37 PM
If Apple makes a phone, I will order one on the spot. If the interface is as well thought out and simple as the iPod, then it will be a smash hit.:D
bretm
Aug 17, 12:07 AM
Was there any doubt it wouldn't be a lot faster? I mean, I know it was already plenty fast, but come on...
But it's not faster. Slower actually than the G5 at some apps. What's everyone looking at anyway? I'm pretty unimpressed. Other than Adobe's usage of cache (AE is a cache lover and will use all of it, hence the faster performance).
But the actual xeon processors are only as fast as the G5 processors. Look at the average specs... the 2.66 machines are only a teeny bit faster than the G5s except in a few apps like filemaker. But not in the biggies like Final Cut Pro where it actually appears that mhz for mhz the G5 is a faster machine hands down!
But it's not faster. Slower actually than the G5 at some apps. What's everyone looking at anyway? I'm pretty unimpressed. Other than Adobe's usage of cache (AE is a cache lover and will use all of it, hence the faster performance).
But the actual xeon processors are only as fast as the G5 processors. Look at the average specs... the 2.66 machines are only a teeny bit faster than the G5s except in a few apps like filemaker. But not in the biggies like Final Cut Pro where it actually appears that mhz for mhz the G5 is a faster machine hands down!
2IS
Apr 8, 08:24 PM
Intel forced nVidia out of the chipset business. :p Which is what led to this whole GPU downgrade for Sandy Bridge equipped Macs with IGPs.
Well then allow me to be the broken record...
Intel isn't forcing anything. Mac Book pro's are using Sandy Bridge AND have a separate graphics chipset. :rolleyes:
Well then allow me to be the broken record...
Intel isn't forcing anything. Mac Book pro's are using Sandy Bridge AND have a separate graphics chipset. :rolleyes:
sinisterdesign
Jul 20, 10:09 AM
eight cores + Tiger = Octopussy?!?
JoeC2k6
Jun 14, 10:33 AM
radioshack just offered me 36 cents to $40 for a trade in on a 3GS......really great trade in value at RS...
aafuss1
Aug 5, 11:34 PM
No Macbook Pros?? I hope there won't be any. My MBP gets to stay top of the line for few more weeks ;) . Besides, and correct me if I'm wrong, but when was the last time that any notebook was mere updated at WWDC ??
The Lombard-bronze keyboard PB in 1999.
The Lombard-bronze keyboard PB in 1999.
shigzeo
Jul 14, 10:09 PM
there have not been enough reasons other than the 12" PB to be very excited about any computer for a while at apple. Suddenly, macbook and the new macpro look to be delivering, no matter the specs something worthy of a handclap. no money now, but next year or the next, there will be a new mac for me. just sold my ibook to buy a beautiful opus fidelio bicycle. it is much faster downhill than any intel core 2 duo "extreme".
nonameowns
Apr 6, 02:59 PM
ahem
the people want a ipad, not a tablet.
same when they want a ipod, not a mp3 player.
Basic marketing there folks.
the people want a ipad, not a tablet.
same when they want a ipod, not a mp3 player.
Basic marketing there folks.
mdelvecchio
Mar 31, 03:56 PM
Keep in mind that Google tightening up Android and forcing handset makers to adhere to certain guidelines is primarily a problem for the *handset makers* and carriers--but not consumers.
not when Google blocks handset makers from releasing innovations that would be good for consumers but bad for google. they may have tried to do such strong-arming -- a geo-services company claims it was shut-out by the makers due to google not wanting makers to license optional alternatives to google services.
not when Google blocks handset makers from releasing innovations that would be good for consumers but bad for google. they may have tried to do such strong-arming -- a geo-services company claims it was shut-out by the makers due to google not wanting makers to license optional alternatives to google services.
No comments:
Post a Comment