shawnce
Jul 14, 06:45 PM
Agreed. I can make an argument for the consumer machines, where perhaps 512 MB is sufficient for basic users. Specifically, why force them to pay more for 1 GB if they don't need it. But when it comes to the Pro machines, as if anyone buying one of these beasts is not going to require at least 2 GB of RAM, let alone 1 GB. No one buys a quad Xeon Powermac to just surf the Internet and check their e-mail. :cool:
Personally I go the BTO route at Apple.com for my PowerMacs and downgrade all RAM to the minimum cost and buy my RAM from a trusted 3rd party vendor for a savings of at least 10% if not more so.
Personally I go the BTO route at Apple.com for my PowerMacs and downgrade all RAM to the minimum cost and buy my RAM from a trusted 3rd party vendor for a savings of at least 10% if not more so.
Krevnik
Apr 27, 09:19 AM
Are you somehow trying to imply that because the credit card company knows so much about you that it is OK to keep that information unencrypted on your phone and backup on your computer?
All people are asking for is that personal information is kept encrypted and secured. No more. No less.
Apple provides the option of encrypting your backups. I suggest that anyone concerned about the safety of their personal information use this feature.
Can you trust anyone to completely cover their bases correctly on this issue? Their "meh" data might be your "personal" data. The only way to be certain that the backups are encrypted is to encrypt the whole backup. Doesn't lengthen the time it takes much either, and you get to set the password to use/access the backup.
Yes, Apple made a bone-head move here. But there's a lot more personal information floating in the backups. SMS message history, 3rd party app data, etc. Not all of it is encrypted, and some of it you probably want encrypted.
All people are asking for is that personal information is kept encrypted and secured. No more. No less.
Apple provides the option of encrypting your backups. I suggest that anyone concerned about the safety of their personal information use this feature.
Can you trust anyone to completely cover their bases correctly on this issue? Their "meh" data might be your "personal" data. The only way to be certain that the backups are encrypted is to encrypt the whole backup. Doesn't lengthen the time it takes much either, and you get to set the password to use/access the backup.
Yes, Apple made a bone-head move here. But there's a lot more personal information floating in the backups. SMS message history, 3rd party app data, etc. Not all of it is encrypted, and some of it you probably want encrypted.
maclaptop
Apr 14, 04:48 PM
still, you cannot say the iphone is the best smartphone on the market, just as someone else can't say the atrix is the best. Different strokes for different folks!
+1
+1
epitaphic
Aug 19, 05:53 PM
And I'm not convinced this is only an application problem. When I run Handbrake on the Quad G5 alone it uses just over two cores 203%
So what happened to:
Both Toast and Handbrake can use 4 cores EACH
Looking at the handbrake forums, speeds seem to vary drastically between users with the same machine. Definitely seems to be affected by whatever else you have running or configured in the OS or otherwise. I suppose the "cleanest" install to test is in the Apple store (I'm just assuming they do a clean ghost copy at shutdown or end of day?)
When I ran tests on the Mac Pro at the Apple Store last Saturday between Toast and/or Handbrake, their use of more cores alone and together was much better.
So your benchmarks show the Mac Pro using 15-33% less CPU than the G5? There's no doubt that Woodcrest is a superior chip architecture to the G5 (one would hope after 3 years) and so that's why you're seeing more FPS inspite of less CPU use. But why does it use less cores though? Seems like either its a software problem OR some hardware is being maxed (I/O or FSB perhaps?)
So would it be correct to say that the only app that is even remotely "Quadcore aware" is Toast? It seems like by the time professional apps are made to take advantage of 4 cores we'll probably be on more than 8! :eek:
If only they could build something in the CPU itself that delegates tasks to n cores, we'd all be sorted. :)
So what happened to:
Both Toast and Handbrake can use 4 cores EACH
Looking at the handbrake forums, speeds seem to vary drastically between users with the same machine. Definitely seems to be affected by whatever else you have running or configured in the OS or otherwise. I suppose the "cleanest" install to test is in the Apple store (I'm just assuming they do a clean ghost copy at shutdown or end of day?)
When I ran tests on the Mac Pro at the Apple Store last Saturday between Toast and/or Handbrake, their use of more cores alone and together was much better.
So your benchmarks show the Mac Pro using 15-33% less CPU than the G5? There's no doubt that Woodcrest is a superior chip architecture to the G5 (one would hope after 3 years) and so that's why you're seeing more FPS inspite of less CPU use. But why does it use less cores though? Seems like either its a software problem OR some hardware is being maxed (I/O or FSB perhaps?)
So would it be correct to say that the only app that is even remotely "Quadcore aware" is Toast? It seems like by the time professional apps are made to take advantage of 4 cores we'll probably be on more than 8! :eek:
If only they could build something in the CPU itself that delegates tasks to n cores, we'd all be sorted. :)
maclaptop
Apr 19, 03:26 PM
Pssstt... I think it already is a religion to many.
So True...
Poor lost souls rely on Steve to think for them, bring them courage, and guide them in worship.
Anyone who fails to fall in line, is immediately a threat to them.
It's this weakness is laughable.
So True...
Poor lost souls rely on Steve to think for them, bring them courage, and guide them in worship.
Anyone who fails to fall in line, is immediately a threat to them.
It's this weakness is laughable.
jmgregory1
Apr 6, 03:33 PM
The idea that Apple needs competitors to keep pushing forward with the iPad or any other product makes no sense. Apple brought the iPad, iPhone, iPod to market and it's the competition that is trying to catch up to Apple. By suggesting that Apple needs others to push forward with new designs/ideas is not giving Apple the credit they deserve for creating these markets (as we know them) in the first place.
Competition between tablets is going to potentially benefit the non-iPad tablets most - as they compete on specs, not the bigger picture ecosystem (because for those running android, there will be no ecosystem difference). BB's PB will have to fight for its own share of the non-Apple, non-Android market as will HP.
Competition between tablets is going to potentially benefit the non-iPad tablets most - as they compete on specs, not the bigger picture ecosystem (because for those running android, there will be no ecosystem difference). BB's PB will have to fight for its own share of the non-Apple, non-Android market as will HP.
rickjs
Apr 6, 03:06 PM
The Xoom is a great tablet. I'm willing to bet that the majority of you who have discredited it haven't even used it. And it DOES have 3.0 Honeycomb, which IS made for tablets. The iPad 2 is still a better tablet, but is it not possible some of the iPad 2's sales have come from just the Apple name? People will buy an Apple product even if it didn't have a feature.
SwiftLives
Mar 17, 10:55 AM
While I disagree with your statement that both parties are the same, I will concede that both parties work for interests that are not necessarily the same as those of the people who voted for them...
dethmaShine
Apr 19, 02:57 PM
For Q1/11 aprox. 15% for Apple.
Q4/10 numbers were:
http://www.canalys.com/pr/images/r2011013.gif
Again: Apple sold 3 million more devices in Q4/10 than they did in Q3/10 (16 million compared to 13 million in total numbers) but they lost 0.7% marketshare in that 3 month (Q3/10: 16.7% marketshare, see first graph, Q4/10: 16.0%, see above).
Hmm.
What about this:
http://www.comscore.com/Press_Events/Press_Releases/2011/4/comScore_Reports_February_2011_U.S._Mobile_Subscriber_Market_Share
http://www.comscore.com/Press_Events/Press_Releases/2011/3/comScore_Reports_January_2011_U.S._Mobile_Subscriber_Market_Share
Q4/10 numbers were:
http://www.canalys.com/pr/images/r2011013.gif
Again: Apple sold 3 million more devices in Q4/10 than they did in Q3/10 (16 million compared to 13 million in total numbers) but they lost 0.7% marketshare in that 3 month (Q3/10: 16.7% marketshare, see first graph, Q4/10: 16.0%, see above).
Hmm.
What about this:
http://www.comscore.com/Press_Events/Press_Releases/2011/4/comScore_Reports_February_2011_U.S._Mobile_Subscriber_Market_Share
http://www.comscore.com/Press_Events/Press_Releases/2011/3/comScore_Reports_January_2011_U.S._Mobile_Subscriber_Market_Share
tyroja00
Sep 19, 12:55 AM
Does it even MATTER if Apple keeps up? Do we actually WANT Apple to release a new computer every month when Intel bumps up their chips a few megahertz?
See, it's easy to get lost in the specs war. The Mac Pros came out and I was salivating, even though I have a dual 2.0GHz G5 sitting at home. And then one day, as I was editing some HD footage, it occurred ot me that my G5 here - my now outdated G5 - was editing 1080p high-def footage without so much as a flinch. It was SO fast it was not even necessary at all.
So I really have to ask - does Apple really need to get into that stupid-ass PC specs war? Is it really hurting you guys that Apple has been slow to update? Are you really doing tasks that the current computer lineup cannot do?
It is not the speed that I care about but the 64bit processing. I plan on keeping the thing for a few years and want to take full advantage of any 64bit software on my laptop.
Oh and with the spec wars comes price drops which I also wouldn't mind. We are so use to paying more for our Apples b/c we had no comparison. But, now we can really compare apples to apples. Anything else is just excuses.
However, I am willing to pay more for Apples reliability, ease of use, and lack of numerous viruses. But, not too much more.
See, it's easy to get lost in the specs war. The Mac Pros came out and I was salivating, even though I have a dual 2.0GHz G5 sitting at home. And then one day, as I was editing some HD footage, it occurred ot me that my G5 here - my now outdated G5 - was editing 1080p high-def footage without so much as a flinch. It was SO fast it was not even necessary at all.
So I really have to ask - does Apple really need to get into that stupid-ass PC specs war? Is it really hurting you guys that Apple has been slow to update? Are you really doing tasks that the current computer lineup cannot do?
It is not the speed that I care about but the 64bit processing. I plan on keeping the thing for a few years and want to take full advantage of any 64bit software on my laptop.
Oh and with the spec wars comes price drops which I also wouldn't mind. We are so use to paying more for our Apples b/c we had no comparison. But, now we can really compare apples to apples. Anything else is just excuses.
However, I am willing to pay more for Apples reliability, ease of use, and lack of numerous viruses. But, not too much more.
NoNameBrand
Jul 20, 08:23 AM
The Mactopus
Well, I don't know about Apple, but when I get one, that's the name it'll have.:D
Well, I don't know about Apple, but when I get one, that's the name it'll have.:D
greenstork
Jul 31, 12:05 PM
Update this august... not likely. It will be all pro. Any consumer will be Paris Expo. The imac G5 was launched there. why not a Core 2 Duo iMac?
Why not? Cost...
The prices of the Yonahs just dropped precipitously, thereby increasing Apple's margins on their line of computers in mid product cycle. They'll be selling fewer iMacs anyway because everyone will want the fanciest MB Pros and Mac Pros with the super fast Intel chips. To make up for selling fewer iMacs, they'll be raking in higher margins on each computer.
Look for consumer model speed bumps ahead of the holiday season.
Why not? Cost...
The prices of the Yonahs just dropped precipitously, thereby increasing Apple's margins on their line of computers in mid product cycle. They'll be selling fewer iMacs anyway because everyone will want the fanciest MB Pros and Mac Pros with the super fast Intel chips. To make up for selling fewer iMacs, they'll be raking in higher margins on each computer.
Look for consumer model speed bumps ahead of the holiday season.
Digital Skunk
Mar 23, 07:11 AM
To be fair, every smartphone on the market is an iPhone clone and every tablet an iPad clone, so it is all related to Apple in that way.
Well, there was this now extinct company called Palm. That once a long long time ago had the Palm TX, and full sized 4" touch screen PDA that had everything but the CDMA/GMS chip to make phone calls.
Then there was the Palm Treo which dated back to 2002 with technology the iPhone still doesn't have
Then there are OG (ol' skool) nerd/geeks like myself that emailed and blogged and badgered Palm to merge the two together.
Apple just beat them to the market. The iPhone is essential a conglomeration of many devices and concepts.
The true and ONLY breakthrough that Apple brought was the OS to manage all of that technology.
Everyone needs to take a step back and think a bit deeper on these things if we wish the conversations to ever go anywhere.
Well, there was this now extinct company called Palm. That once a long long time ago had the Palm TX, and full sized 4" touch screen PDA that had everything but the CDMA/GMS chip to make phone calls.
Then there was the Palm Treo which dated back to 2002 with technology the iPhone still doesn't have
Then there are OG (ol' skool) nerd/geeks like myself that emailed and blogged and badgered Palm to merge the two together.
Apple just beat them to the market. The iPhone is essential a conglomeration of many devices and concepts.
The true and ONLY breakthrough that Apple brought was the OS to manage all of that technology.
Everyone needs to take a step back and think a bit deeper on these things if we wish the conversations to ever go anywhere.
JonD25
Aug 8, 04:18 AM
This may have already been discussed somewhere, but the vast amount of threads on all the new Leopard stuff and the 10 pages of this thread are a bit to search through, so just ignore me if someone already brought it up.
Did anyone notice the new iChat got rid of the brushed metal? One of the things I was dissapointed to not see was the talk about an improved/different UI, particularly the banishment of brushed metal. Could this be a preview of that fact? Perhaps part of the "top secret" features to come?
Did anyone notice the new iChat got rid of the brushed metal? One of the things I was dissapointed to not see was the talk about an improved/different UI, particularly the banishment of brushed metal. Could this be a preview of that fact? Perhaps part of the "top secret" features to come?
X2468
Mar 31, 08:09 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8G4)
Finally Google admits Jobs was right about fragmentation and recognises that to fight Apple it must become Apple. But it won't admit it. Prepare for lots of "closed is open and open is closed" stuff. Plus: the state of emergency justifying this closure is temporary: sort of like in Syria 50 years ago.
You know, I am truly sorry for the idealists in the open source community. They deserve better.
Were you attempting to make a point here?
Finally Google admits Jobs was right about fragmentation and recognises that to fight Apple it must become Apple. But it won't admit it. Prepare for lots of "closed is open and open is closed" stuff. Plus: the state of emergency justifying this closure is temporary: sort of like in Syria 50 years ago.
You know, I am truly sorry for the idealists in the open source community. They deserve better.
Were you attempting to make a point here?
MrCrowbar
Aug 27, 04:26 PM
I have a few friends who own PC laptops with glossy screens and all of them have keyboards imprinted on their screens! I cannot say from experience if this happens with the MacBooks but i'd rather not risk it....
I've seen tons of laptops with the keyboard marks on the screen among powerbooks and the expensive Sony things. And those were all matte screens. My glossy Macbook screen is still as it was when I bought it (2 or 3 days after they were announced). The keyboard is a bit lower than on most laptops, so the re's quite some space between the keys and the screen whan it's closed. Unless you have a thick layer of chocklate/peanut butter/anal lube etc.. on your Keyboard, your screen is fine.
As opposed to Multimedia, I don't use foam barriers at all. Those things actually touch your screen, so if you have any dirt on the foam barrier, it's likely to scratch the screen if it moves. I like to bang my laptop lid like a car door and the Macbookhas this nice smooth sound when closeing (gotta love the magnetic latch). :-)
I've seen tons of laptops with the keyboard marks on the screen among powerbooks and the expensive Sony things. And those were all matte screens. My glossy Macbook screen is still as it was when I bought it (2 or 3 days after they were announced). The keyboard is a bit lower than on most laptops, so the re's quite some space between the keys and the screen whan it's closed. Unless you have a thick layer of chocklate/peanut butter/anal lube etc.. on your Keyboard, your screen is fine.
As opposed to Multimedia, I don't use foam barriers at all. Those things actually touch your screen, so if you have any dirt on the foam barrier, it's likely to scratch the screen if it moves. I like to bang my laptop lid like a car door and the Macbookhas this nice smooth sound when closeing (gotta love the magnetic latch). :-)
shawnce
Jul 27, 07:04 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.
make sure to note that is an ATI X1900 CrossFire XT adapter
make sure to note that is an ATI X1900 CrossFire XT adapter
NoSmokingBandit
Aug 19, 02:25 PM
All that I get from that quote is that they are using older models, but that they will, obviously, be rendered in the new GT5 engine. So, the marketing team can say all they want, but actual screen shots of Standard™ cars do not show much improvement, if any at all, resolution increase notwithstanding.
Based on what, old gameplay footage? Game are often tested with old resources while the new models are being built. God of War used a stick man with a sword until they got Kratos done.
Look at this pic:
http://us.gran-turismo.com/c/binary/images/5294/gamescom2010_029a.jpg
That rx-7 looks tons better than anything GT4 ever had, but its still not as nice as the "premium" cars. I am assuming of course that this is live-rendered, and i believe it is due to the jaggies on the rear of the rx-7, which i can't imagine they would let slide on a pre-rendered shot.
Time will tell, of course, but i'm certain they didnt just import models from GT4. What the hell would they have been doing for the past 5 years?
Based on what, old gameplay footage? Game are often tested with old resources while the new models are being built. God of War used a stick man with a sword until they got Kratos done.
Look at this pic:
http://us.gran-turismo.com/c/binary/images/5294/gamescom2010_029a.jpg
That rx-7 looks tons better than anything GT4 ever had, but its still not as nice as the "premium" cars. I am assuming of course that this is live-rendered, and i believe it is due to the jaggies on the rear of the rx-7, which i can't imagine they would let slide on a pre-rendered shot.
Time will tell, of course, but i'm certain they didnt just import models from GT4. What the hell would they have been doing for the past 5 years?
SevenInchScrew
Aug 11, 07:33 PM
i know there have been more 'titles'. but they are not full releases, but i did leave out Gran Turismo for PSP, so they are up to 5 full releases now.
My point is, earlier you were saying that they only have 4 games and they sold 57M copies. If you look at that link, which is right from Polyphony themselves, you will see that if you only count the 4 main games, as you were eluding to, that only totals 46M.
yes i know, but there are more games in that series, and again, it's a different type of racing game.
So, you don't count NFS? Ok then. If I'm understanding you correctly, you are really only comparing GT to 1 other console game; Forza. It is the only other console game of any similar type. But, using your own logic, is it fair to compare GT to Forza, since GT has been out much longer and has many more games in the series? I mean, if we don't get to compare GT to NFS because of that, then surely you shouldn't compare GT to Forza for the same reason.
take a look here: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gran_Turismo_(series)) -{Wikipedia Quote}-
I really like you're choice of quoting.
Largest Number of cars in a Racing game
...of which about 1/3 of them are various Civics, Skylines and Imprezas.
Highest Selling PlayStation Game
...ok, that one is good. That says something.
Oldest Car in a Racing Game
...that no one ever drove, because it couldn't even get up the hilly parts of some tracks. Total waste.
Largest Instruction Guide for a Racing Game
...really? Oldest car and Largest guide?? REALLY?? Yikes.
GT by Citro�n (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GT_by_Citro�n).
granted, only 6 were made, but still, it's a real car. its not a fake one
Um, according to your OWN link, the car was cancelled. And really, that isn't surprising. It is a concept car, plain and simple. So again I ask, what REAL cars have ever ACTUALLY been made just to be in this game??
My point is, earlier you were saying that they only have 4 games and they sold 57M copies. If you look at that link, which is right from Polyphony themselves, you will see that if you only count the 4 main games, as you were eluding to, that only totals 46M.
yes i know, but there are more games in that series, and again, it's a different type of racing game.
So, you don't count NFS? Ok then. If I'm understanding you correctly, you are really only comparing GT to 1 other console game; Forza. It is the only other console game of any similar type. But, using your own logic, is it fair to compare GT to Forza, since GT has been out much longer and has many more games in the series? I mean, if we don't get to compare GT to NFS because of that, then surely you shouldn't compare GT to Forza for the same reason.
take a look here: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gran_Turismo_(series)) -{Wikipedia Quote}-
I really like you're choice of quoting.
Largest Number of cars in a Racing game
...of which about 1/3 of them are various Civics, Skylines and Imprezas.
Highest Selling PlayStation Game
...ok, that one is good. That says something.
Oldest Car in a Racing Game
...that no one ever drove, because it couldn't even get up the hilly parts of some tracks. Total waste.
Largest Instruction Guide for a Racing Game
...really? Oldest car and Largest guide?? REALLY?? Yikes.
GT by Citro�n (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GT_by_Citro�n).
granted, only 6 were made, but still, it's a real car. its not a fake one
Um, according to your OWN link, the car was cancelled. And really, that isn't surprising. It is a concept car, plain and simple. So again I ask, what REAL cars have ever ACTUALLY been made just to be in this game??
DotCom2
Apr 27, 09:25 AM
Problem is, if you turn "Location Services" off, then you can't use "Find My iPhone" which I think is quite a useful feature! :(
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!
LagunaSol
Apr 20, 01:48 AM
But it's ok for Apple to sue and Australian grocery store because they think the letter W looks like their logo? LMAO. Please.
Why do you keep countering an argument that no one is actually making?
Straw man fail.
Why do you keep countering an argument that no one is actually making?
Straw man fail.
fastlane1588
Jul 28, 03:43 PM
Okay, I did some tinkering myself, just for kicks, and here's what I came up with. I thought that we were talking about a computer that was somewhere between a Mac Mini and a Mac Pro (Power Mac), so I thought, maybe the style should be a combination of the two. Let me know what you think.
It's not a Mac Plus... It's a Mac++!
http://www.ghwphoto.com/Mac++1.PNGhttp://www.ghwphoto.com/Mac++2.PNG
thats pretty nice what did u use to make that?
It's not a Mac Plus... It's a Mac++!
http://www.ghwphoto.com/Mac++1.PNGhttp://www.ghwphoto.com/Mac++2.PNG
thats pretty nice what did u use to make that?
Yamcha
Mar 26, 04:00 PM
I'm looking forward to it, but what would be really amazing if on the next major release of Mac OS they add support for running .EXE files. I know there are third party applications out there to do that, but If it could be legally done and done properly where we don't see any major performance hits then it would truly be the end of using Windows for me, and I'm sure for most others..
I think that would be awesome.. But I know probably unlikely..
I think that would be awesome.. But I know probably unlikely..
0 comments:
Post a Comment