gregor.hoch
Apr 6, 11:21 AM
I'm pretty sure you are aware that Apple would use LV CPU in 13", not ULV. That bumps us to 2.3GHz plus Turbo. You have said this yourself too and I already covered the reason in my other post.
This is just a MR article and surprisingly, they don't have much idea about the TDPs. Hopefully they will correct their article so people won't live in confusion.
Hellhammer, can I ask you something about this? There are SB LV and now SB ULV. Both are for laptops and the Macbook Pro 13 has SB LV, right? Or does the Pro has something else? What is the performance difference between an equally clocked ULV and LV?
Thanks!
This is just a MR article and surprisingly, they don't have much idea about the TDPs. Hopefully they will correct their article so people won't live in confusion.
Hellhammer, can I ask you something about this? There are SB LV and now SB ULV. Both are for laptops and the Macbook Pro 13 has SB LV, right? Or does the Pro has something else? What is the performance difference between an equally clocked ULV and LV?
Thanks!
Bilbo63
Apr 19, 06:44 PM
Which launched 6 months after the original iPhone...and was displayed in February of 2007 with an entirely different interface.
The point is no one will ever confuse this with Apple's iPhone... But what Samsung is doing now is another story.
If you look at each item that Apple takes exception with individually it seems silly, but when you put them all together in a single device it's a twin to the iPhone... An iClone.:rolleyes:
The point is no one will ever confuse this with Apple's iPhone... But what Samsung is doing now is another story.
If you look at each item that Apple takes exception with individually it seems silly, but when you put them all together in a single device it's a twin to the iPhone... An iClone.:rolleyes:
shawnce
Aug 6, 02:45 PM
So to post my top bets for WWDC...
1) A much clearer roadmap for 64 bit support in Mac OS X. I believe they will outline full 64 bit support across all non-10.4 deprecated frameworks (I believe in the initial release of 10.5). Of course it will also fully support 32 bit applications run side by side with 64 bit applications.
2) Resolution Independent UI will be ready for main stream use with display products possible with in the next year or two (would love to be surprised with 150-200 DPI or so display of course).
3) Quartz 2D Extreme will be ready for main stream use along with some good news on the OpenGL front.
4) Full roll out of the unified user interface look and fell across all frameworks and Apple applications (at least most).
5) Improved Quartz API to allow for more advanced window styles and effects.
6) PowerMac replacement with Quad core model... a true workstation class system (likely similar enclosure to what we have now in the PMG5).
... gotta go.
1) A much clearer roadmap for 64 bit support in Mac OS X. I believe they will outline full 64 bit support across all non-10.4 deprecated frameworks (I believe in the initial release of 10.5). Of course it will also fully support 32 bit applications run side by side with 64 bit applications.
2) Resolution Independent UI will be ready for main stream use with display products possible with in the next year or two (would love to be surprised with 150-200 DPI or so display of course).
3) Quartz 2D Extreme will be ready for main stream use along with some good news on the OpenGL front.
4) Full roll out of the unified user interface look and fell across all frameworks and Apple applications (at least most).
5) Improved Quartz API to allow for more advanced window styles and effects.
6) PowerMac replacement with Quad core model... a true workstation class system (likely similar enclosure to what we have now in the PMG5).
... gotta go.
greenstork
Aug 17, 05:26 PM
Calm down. The OP was directing his question towards gamers. I agree with him, why salivate over a Macpro and whine for games when it's clear that the Macpro isn't intended for that kind of user. If I were a games enthusiast, I'd build my own custom PC that would be optimized for gaming performance. Apple is ignoring this segment of the market. For those of us who need to get real work done, the Macpro is a great machine. It will play games, but don't try hauling to a Lan party. You'll probably get laughed at.
Do you see now?
With no intention of jumping into the argument in question here, I have a slight issue with your definition of a gamer. I'm an intermediate photoshop user, web designer, and gamer. I don't just use my computer for games or work, there's this huge gray area in the middle. For me, the Mac Pro is the best of all worlds. I wouldn't dare rely on Windows for my workflow, design, and productivity software, OS X is a must for me. However, the ability to duat boot into Windows and play games natively is a bonus, one that I'm willing to pay a premium for, and whether or not it's even a premium is up for debate. Sure, I could build a PC just for games but if I can't run OS X ever then that machine is useless for me.
I'd be surprised if there weren't many more people out there who welcome the power of the Mac Pros for work and play, recognizing of course that the majority of buyers will be professionals.
Do you see now?
With no intention of jumping into the argument in question here, I have a slight issue with your definition of a gamer. I'm an intermediate photoshop user, web designer, and gamer. I don't just use my computer for games or work, there's this huge gray area in the middle. For me, the Mac Pro is the best of all worlds. I wouldn't dare rely on Windows for my workflow, design, and productivity software, OS X is a must for me. However, the ability to duat boot into Windows and play games natively is a bonus, one that I'm willing to pay a premium for, and whether or not it's even a premium is up for debate. Sure, I could build a PC just for games but if I can't run OS X ever then that machine is useless for me.
I'd be surprised if there weren't many more people out there who welcome the power of the Mac Pros for work and play, recognizing of course that the majority of buyers will be professionals.
simontarr
Sep 15, 07:46 AM
I think all this quad and oct core stuff is fantastic (it would be even more fantastic if I have the money to get such gear...)
But at the moment it's the HDD that slows everything down. Your RAM may be able to send 4GB/s of data to the processor to deal with, but the HD can't write the said executed data at even a 10th of the speed.
I remember reading a BBC news article the other month about mRAM (or magnetic RAM) which has the same write speeds as RAM, but without its volatility. It doesn't loose it's data when the power is off. Ideal for fast HDDs they say.
On an unrelated note, wouldnt it been cool to effectivly install a whole OS on RAM. That would be noticably quicker....
But at the moment it's the HDD that slows everything down. Your RAM may be able to send 4GB/s of data to the processor to deal with, but the HD can't write the said executed data at even a 10th of the speed.
I remember reading a BBC news article the other month about mRAM (or magnetic RAM) which has the same write speeds as RAM, but without its volatility. It doesn't loose it's data when the power is off. Ideal for fast HDDs they say.
On an unrelated note, wouldnt it been cool to effectivly install a whole OS on RAM. That would be noticably quicker....
toddybody
Apr 6, 11:01 AM
You sure as hell can.
SC2 on MBA FTW!
SC2 on MBA FTW!
jav6454
Feb 28, 04:48 PM
Well, I have nothing to say, but that the University has grounds for dismissal if difference of opinion arises.
True, you can argue the gay card, but in this case, they college played the rights cards to get rid of him. Was it the best choice? No.
Still, it's the college's right on who teaches or not; and seeing how it's a Catholic Church college, I'd say it was bound to happen.
True, you can argue the gay card, but in this case, they college played the rights cards to get rid of him. Was it the best choice? No.
Still, it's the college's right on who teaches or not; and seeing how it's a Catholic Church college, I'd say it was bound to happen.
macenforcer
Sep 19, 10:04 AM
I don't understand all the hype over the core 2 duo chip vs the core duo chip. They are basically the same chip. You will barely notice any difference with same speed core 2 duo over a same speed core duo.
iliketyla
Apr 6, 01:53 PM
I don't really watch television at all, so I was just wondering if there are many commercials for tablets besides the iPad?
I can't recall ever seeing a Xoom commercial even in passing, although I have seen an iPad commercial.
I can't recall ever seeing a Xoom commercial even in passing, although I have seen an iPad commercial.
Willis
Jul 27, 04:02 PM
Roz Ho? said at Macworld SF that Microsoft BU was commiting at least 5 more years of mac software.
they say they like the platform... go figure.
ADD: just a thought aswell. Wonder if we may see the next Office at WWDC?
they say they like the platform... go figure.
ADD: just a thought aswell. Wonder if we may see the next Office at WWDC?
fluidinclusion
Aug 27, 06:58 PM
hmmm... the funny part is that it's been done to death.* that's the bit.* i guess you don't see it as funny.* ever heard of a reoccuring joke with a little aphormism mixed in?
All your Powerbook G5's are belong to us
All your Powerbook G5's are belong to us
EricNau
Aug 17, 09:49 AM
I have to say, I actually expected the woodcrest results to be better. It really shows that the G5 was years ahead of the competition. :cool:
ccrandall77
Aug 11, 03:53 PM
I suppose you would be by the cell company.
Well, I had been screwed about 4x as much as a typical cell user... at least when I had the misfortune and poor sense to have a Cingular contract.
Well, I had been screwed about 4x as much as a typical cell user... at least when I had the misfortune and poor sense to have a Cingular contract.
Nuck81
Sep 1, 08:45 AM
I'm going to use my $20 credit from Metroid to pre order this...
CaoCao
Mar 4, 04:30 PM
We can most certainly keep procreating if heterosexuals don't have sex. It's not that difficult.
you and you partner will beget how exactly, oral and anal sex don't produce a child nor does mutual masturbation, so how exactly will you and your partner produce a child?
I've reread the post in question several times, and I am just not seeing it. Would you mind explaining how you came to the conclusion that neko girl was suggesting heterosexuals stop having sex?
I mean, even if she was, good luck with that.
She rephrased what he had said which implied similar meaning
you and you partner will beget how exactly, oral and anal sex don't produce a child nor does mutual masturbation, so how exactly will you and your partner produce a child?
I've reread the post in question several times, and I am just not seeing it. Would you mind explaining how you came to the conclusion that neko girl was suggesting heterosexuals stop having sex?
I mean, even if she was, good luck with that.
She rephrased what he had said which implied similar meaning
Lollypop
Jul 28, 04:07 AM
I would really like to se a mid range mac, not really fond of the illustrations above but the extra expansion of the pro line would be apreciated but at a more affordable price. I use a few older powermacs for servers but I really would like something with a bit more processing power... :D and something with a bit more longevity, something like a nice new Core 2 Duo Extreme! LOL
Unspeaked
Nov 29, 01:08 PM
I agree, they won�t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
Dude, I think you're right on, and your English is fine (better than some native English speakers who post here, in any case!).
Distribution methods like iTunes make the middle men - the labels - obsolete. It puts artists on a level playing field and coupled with viral marketing like MySpace and such it really spells the end for record labels as we know them.
If anything, all a "record label" might hope to be in the future is a marketing branch that works with an artists and takes a small cut of their sales, not the eight headed monster who controls ever aspect of an artists career - from where they record their album to what sizes their t-shirts come in - that we find today.
And as far as radio goes, it's totally done as a means of making hits. Heck, even next generation satellite radio is struggling - you're telling me terrestrial radio, which is nothing more than 15 minutes of talk and 20 minutes of commercial per hour is deciding what's popular today? Nuh uh. Try: MySpace, commercials, blogs, television series background music, etc. THAT's where today's hits come from.
FM radio and MTV lost all significance ages ago. If you're using them to find hits, maybe you should get off your PowerMac 6100 and upgrade your 14,000 baud modem to a DSL connection so you can visit the real world...
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
Dude, I think you're right on, and your English is fine (better than some native English speakers who post here, in any case!).
Distribution methods like iTunes make the middle men - the labels - obsolete. It puts artists on a level playing field and coupled with viral marketing like MySpace and such it really spells the end for record labels as we know them.
If anything, all a "record label" might hope to be in the future is a marketing branch that works with an artists and takes a small cut of their sales, not the eight headed monster who controls ever aspect of an artists career - from where they record their album to what sizes their t-shirts come in - that we find today.
And as far as radio goes, it's totally done as a means of making hits. Heck, even next generation satellite radio is struggling - you're telling me terrestrial radio, which is nothing more than 15 minutes of talk and 20 minutes of commercial per hour is deciding what's popular today? Nuh uh. Try: MySpace, commercials, blogs, television series background music, etc. THAT's where today's hits come from.
FM radio and MTV lost all significance ages ago. If you're using them to find hits, maybe you should get off your PowerMac 6100 and upgrade your 14,000 baud modem to a DSL connection so you can visit the real world...
DocNo
Apr 11, 10:00 AM
I'm sure they will still be shipping since they support the current Final Cut Studio 3 reeaallllyyy well. Lets face it the thing thats coming out will not support the old Plug-ins or workflows and will not be the replacement for FCP that everyone was expecting.
I find this line of "reasoning" fascinating.
If Apple was really intent of "throwing the baby out with the bathwater" and totally re-defining the way FCP works then why, pray tell, are they bothering to (presumably) announce the new FCP to industry and film editing heavyweights?
That seems rather daft - if Apple is no longer catering to them, why announce to them?
How can Apple simultaneously be a marketing genius (it is the only reason people buy iPods, iPhones and iPads after all!) and stupid enough to target people they are getting ready to diss?
I'll have the popcorn ready for tomorrow as well as my running shoes so I can sidestep all the backpedaling that will be happening :rolleyes:
I find this line of "reasoning" fascinating.
If Apple was really intent of "throwing the baby out with the bathwater" and totally re-defining the way FCP works then why, pray tell, are they bothering to (presumably) announce the new FCP to industry and film editing heavyweights?
That seems rather daft - if Apple is no longer catering to them, why announce to them?
How can Apple simultaneously be a marketing genius (it is the only reason people buy iPods, iPhones and iPads after all!) and stupid enough to target people they are getting ready to diss?
I'll have the popcorn ready for tomorrow as well as my running shoes so I can sidestep all the backpedaling that will be happening :rolleyes:
lieb39
Aug 7, 06:47 PM
The new time machine feature looks really cool - and I'm sure that a option for 'secure delete' will be there - so it's not stored in the Time Machine..
Not much chatter about the preview of Leopard Server - Sneak Preview here (http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/leopard/) - Just supporting the new Leopard..
This is interesting; how do they figure that they can get the service to a mobile phone?
http://images.apple.com/au/server/macosx/leopard/images/podcastproducertop20060807.png
http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/leopard/podcastproducer.html
Discuss!
Cheers.
Not much chatter about the preview of Leopard Server - Sneak Preview here (http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/leopard/) - Just supporting the new Leopard..
This is interesting; how do they figure that they can get the service to a mobile phone?
http://images.apple.com/au/server/macosx/leopard/images/podcastproducertop20060807.png
http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/leopard/podcastproducer.html
Discuss!
Cheers.
kdarling
Apr 19, 04:04 PM
You made up your mind and you argue accordingly.
No, that's why I used questions. I'd really like to know if anyone thinks a normal buyer would think the Galaxy is made by Apple.
Consider this: Many people know the name "iPhone" and the way it looks, they may even know the name "Macintosh", but not the name "Apple".
They might have talked to someone who used an iPhone and was very happy with it, were convinced to buy one, and go to a shop and pick up the phone that looks exactly like the one they wanted to buy.
And end up with a Samsung phone when they actually wanted an iPhone.
So your argument is that someone would be familiar with the iPhone UI but not know it's made by Apple?
And that therefore when they went to buy an iPhone, they'd totally ignore the words Samsung Galaxy on the box simply because... what? some of the icons look similar?
Well, who knows. It's certainly happened with Chinese knockoffs!
No, that's why I used questions. I'd really like to know if anyone thinks a normal buyer would think the Galaxy is made by Apple.
Consider this: Many people know the name "iPhone" and the way it looks, they may even know the name "Macintosh", but not the name "Apple".
They might have talked to someone who used an iPhone and was very happy with it, were convinced to buy one, and go to a shop and pick up the phone that looks exactly like the one they wanted to buy.
And end up with a Samsung phone when they actually wanted an iPhone.
So your argument is that someone would be familiar with the iPhone UI but not know it's made by Apple?
And that therefore when they went to buy an iPhone, they'd totally ignore the words Samsung Galaxy on the box simply because... what? some of the icons look similar?
Well, who knows. It's certainly happened with Chinese knockoffs!
playaj82
Aug 7, 03:37 PM
If the rumor sites were right....
Mac Pro
Leopard
iPhone
Core 2 Duo
iMac
Tablet, etc...
the keynote would have been 6 hours.
I'm glad they took their time with Leopard and highlighted some neat new and much needed additions to tiger.
Mac Pro
Leopard
iPhone
Core 2 Duo
iMac
Tablet, etc...
the keynote would have been 6 hours.
I'm glad they took their time with Leopard and highlighted some neat new and much needed additions to tiger.
guzhogi
Jul 15, 10:03 AM
I also wish Apple used standard ATX power supplies. That way, if you need a new power suply, you can get one from your local electronics store. I don't know if Apple already uses them, but I have a beige desktop G3 and the power supply on it is getting old and I have a bunch of extra stuff in it and the power supply can't handle it all. I've been told I can get one from a b&w G3, but going to a best buy or where ever and getting a new one I think would be a lot easier.
kugino
Aug 7, 11:45 PM
Well I for one was kind of disappointed. Leopard is sort of Apple's chance to prove they can out-Vista Vista, and I'm not really sure what we saw today does it. I've been following Vista somewhat closely, and it really does catch Windows up to OS X in terms of features and prettiness.
I really think most of the features shown off today are already present in Windows (I've definitely heard about all of them before) or will be in Vista, and it's too bad Apple didn't have anything truly innovative to show us. Hopefully those secret features are something good...
The other thing that has me a little concerned is the huge amount of Vista-bashing that went on. I feel like if Leopard at this point were truly better than Vista, they'd be silent about Vista entirely and let the new system speak for itself. That would be really slick. That's not what happened however, and instead there was a lot of "look what Vista copied from us" and "check out how much better Leopard is." What I saw today, though, makes the former statement sound whiney and the latter sound foolish, since in my eyes, in terms of features, they're about on-par with each other.
I really hope Apple pulls it together. They've got to do this right, because come next year, most of the myriad reasons for switching to a Mac will be nullified by Vista.
BTW: whoever this "Platform Experience" guy is, get him off the stage and go back to Steve.
hmmm, most of the features are already in windows? what version of windows do you have? are you from the future? and, ummm, who knows what's going to be in vista because it keeps changing...even what you see now may not make the final cut. to say that the two OSs are the same because they both have the same features is akin to saying that a yugo and a mercedes are both the same because they both have four wheels and an engine. look, there are things that vista will have that osx will lack...there are things in osx that vista will lack. neither os will be perfect. still, os x is great because of its underlying architecture and not only b/c of this feature or that feature.
and most people will not be making their buying decision on which os is better...the greater selling point on the mac is boot camp and booting windows on the mac. most people aren't going to care what os is better.
I really think most of the features shown off today are already present in Windows (I've definitely heard about all of them before) or will be in Vista, and it's too bad Apple didn't have anything truly innovative to show us. Hopefully those secret features are something good...
The other thing that has me a little concerned is the huge amount of Vista-bashing that went on. I feel like if Leopard at this point were truly better than Vista, they'd be silent about Vista entirely and let the new system speak for itself. That would be really slick. That's not what happened however, and instead there was a lot of "look what Vista copied from us" and "check out how much better Leopard is." What I saw today, though, makes the former statement sound whiney and the latter sound foolish, since in my eyes, in terms of features, they're about on-par with each other.
I really hope Apple pulls it together. They've got to do this right, because come next year, most of the myriad reasons for switching to a Mac will be nullified by Vista.
BTW: whoever this "Platform Experience" guy is, get him off the stage and go back to Steve.
hmmm, most of the features are already in windows? what version of windows do you have? are you from the future? and, ummm, who knows what's going to be in vista because it keeps changing...even what you see now may not make the final cut. to say that the two OSs are the same because they both have the same features is akin to saying that a yugo and a mercedes are both the same because they both have four wheels and an engine. look, there are things that vista will have that osx will lack...there are things in osx that vista will lack. neither os will be perfect. still, os x is great because of its underlying architecture and not only b/c of this feature or that feature.
and most people will not be making their buying decision on which os is better...the greater selling point on the mac is boot camp and booting windows on the mac. most people aren't going to care what os is better.
shamino
Jul 14, 05:26 PM
Kind of odd/funny how we seem to be going backwards in processor speeds. Instead of 3.6 GHz Pentiums, we are looking at 2.x GHz Intel Cores. It would be interesting to see how well a single Core processor matches up to PowerPC, or a Pentium, or AMD.
It just means that Intel has finally publicly recognized the validity of the MHz Myth.
Raw clock speed is meaningless. You can get better performance at a slower clock speed if you can increase parallelism. This includes features like superscalar architecture (where multiple instructions are executed per clock), deep pipelining, hyperthreading, SIMD instructions, and multi-core chips.
However, I am finding one of my predicitions finally happen...it appears that a ceiling has been currently met on how fast the current line of processors can go, and now we are relying on multiple cores/processors to distribute work, instead of relying on just one fast chip.
That's a part of the equation, but not all of it.
Higher clock speeds are possible, but it's not worth the effort. Pumping up the clock speed creates serious problems in terms of power consumption and heat dissipation. Leaving the clock speed lower, but increasing parallelism will also boost performance, and keeps the power curve down at manageable levels.
It's worth noting that Intel has shipped P4-series chips at 3.4GHz. But the new chips (Woodcrest and Conroe) aren't being sold at speeds above 3GHz.
So when will we start seeing 8 chips in a computer? Perhaps this will become the new measurement...not processor speeds, but the number of processors (or cores).
Pay attention. The answer is "sooner than you think".
There have already been technology briefings from Intel that talk about 4-core chips in early and 32-core chips by 2010. Similar offerings are expected from AMD.
And the Xeon-MP series processors (which will, of course, eventually get all this tech) are designed with 8-way SMP in mind. A theoretical Xeon-MP based on this 32-core tech would produce a system with 256 cores. Of course, it is doubtful that anything other than a large server would be able to take proper advantage of this, so I wouldn't ever expect to find one on a desktop.
(FWIW, Intel is looking to Sun as a rival here. Sun's latest chip - the UltraSPARC T1 (http://www.sun.com/processors/UltraSPARC-T1/) - currently ships in an 8-core configuration, with each core capable of running four threads at a time, and only consuming 72W of power. Even at 1.2GHz - the top speed they're currently shipping at - this makes for a very nice server.)
It just means that Intel has finally publicly recognized the validity of the MHz Myth.
Raw clock speed is meaningless. You can get better performance at a slower clock speed if you can increase parallelism. This includes features like superscalar architecture (where multiple instructions are executed per clock), deep pipelining, hyperthreading, SIMD instructions, and multi-core chips.
However, I am finding one of my predicitions finally happen...it appears that a ceiling has been currently met on how fast the current line of processors can go, and now we are relying on multiple cores/processors to distribute work, instead of relying on just one fast chip.
That's a part of the equation, but not all of it.
Higher clock speeds are possible, but it's not worth the effort. Pumping up the clock speed creates serious problems in terms of power consumption and heat dissipation. Leaving the clock speed lower, but increasing parallelism will also boost performance, and keeps the power curve down at manageable levels.
It's worth noting that Intel has shipped P4-series chips at 3.4GHz. But the new chips (Woodcrest and Conroe) aren't being sold at speeds above 3GHz.
So when will we start seeing 8 chips in a computer? Perhaps this will become the new measurement...not processor speeds, but the number of processors (or cores).
Pay attention. The answer is "sooner than you think".
There have already been technology briefings from Intel that talk about 4-core chips in early and 32-core chips by 2010. Similar offerings are expected from AMD.
And the Xeon-MP series processors (which will, of course, eventually get all this tech) are designed with 8-way SMP in mind. A theoretical Xeon-MP based on this 32-core tech would produce a system with 256 cores. Of course, it is doubtful that anything other than a large server would be able to take proper advantage of this, so I wouldn't ever expect to find one on a desktop.
(FWIW, Intel is looking to Sun as a rival here. Sun's latest chip - the UltraSPARC T1 (http://www.sun.com/processors/UltraSPARC-T1/) - currently ships in an 8-core configuration, with each core capable of running four threads at a time, and only consuming 72W of power. Even at 1.2GHz - the top speed they're currently shipping at - this makes for a very nice server.)
No comments:
Post a Comment