mc68k
Dec 12, 12:51 AM
thanks! the points are coming faster these days. i guess they have to to keep up with you guys!
Snowy_River
Nov 15, 07:08 PM
Im really looking forwards to this, if the 8-core 2.66 Macpro its going to cost just a little more than a quad 3ghz Macpro, im going to be buying as soon as it hits the website...
As a recent Mac switcher, coming straight in with a base spec macpro(4x2.66/4gb/1750gbHDD), im now happy to invest in a more powerful machine.
My only concern is the heat... my current Macpro runs 24/7 and 95% of the time is at full load across all 4 cores... and its still silent with temps never going over 52c... will these quad core chips run much hotter, meaning the front fans have to spin faster/noisier to keep the machine cool?
Given your current machine, you might consider just swapping in new CPUs. :)
As a recent Mac switcher, coming straight in with a base spec macpro(4x2.66/4gb/1750gbHDD), im now happy to invest in a more powerful machine.
My only concern is the heat... my current Macpro runs 24/7 and 95% of the time is at full load across all 4 cores... and its still silent with temps never going over 52c... will these quad core chips run much hotter, meaning the front fans have to spin faster/noisier to keep the machine cool?
Given your current machine, you might consider just swapping in new CPUs. :)
AidenShaw
Nov 18, 08:50 PM
When Intel multicore processors are used (as in the Mac Pro) which support hardware virtualization, you can run software (such as Parrallels Desktop) that lets your run additional operating systems (such as Windows, Solaris, and Linux) concurrently with OSX at near full native speeds since one or more cores are used for OSX and one is used for each of the virtual operating systems.
The virtualization example is the same as your multiple application example.
Cores are not dedicated to virtual machines - each virtual machine is an application that needs to use CPU power from time to time.
With multi-core, there are more CPUs so that the VM applications can be scheduled at the same time. Just like more standard applications (or application threads) can be scheduled simultaneously.
Assigning processors to specific applications is almost always a bad idea. It is better to let the operating system schedule any thread that needs CPU on any idle CPU in a multi-CPU (multi-core) system.
The virtualization example is the same as your multiple application example.
Cores are not dedicated to virtual machines - each virtual machine is an application that needs to use CPU power from time to time.
With multi-core, there are more CPUs so that the VM applications can be scheduled at the same time. Just like more standard applications (or application threads) can be scheduled simultaneously.
Assigning processors to specific applications is almost always a bad idea. It is better to let the operating system schedule any thread that needs CPU on any idle CPU in a multi-CPU (multi-core) system.
JFreak
Jul 18, 03:18 AM
Thing is Steve Jobs is going to pull the usual trick (stupid contracts) and only release this to the American public.
We can always hope that they also want to make business outside US.
We can always hope that they also want to make business outside US.
roland.g
Aug 29, 11:29 AM
IF they go to a 1.66ghz Core Duo, 512mb RAM, GMA950, 80gb 5400rpm HD, SD, AE, and BT model for $599 I'll get one immediately.
You can update the Core Solo to a SD for $50. They won't give a SD to the low end stock. But $50 upgrade isn't bad.
You can update the Core Solo to a SD for $50. They won't give a SD to the low end stock. But $50 upgrade isn't bad.
OllyW
Mar 22, 12:49 PM
Agreed!
I think you missed the joke.
I think you missed the joke.
DewGuy1999
Feb 28, 02:39 PM
here is my mess sorry i didnt clean up first
Nice setup. What's the story behind the "double" windows, I've never seen anything like that before.
Nice setup. What's the story behind the "double" windows, I've never seen anything like that before.
zoozx
Sep 7, 08:14 AM
ps this download system will never work until the time it takes to DL a full movie is under 2 hrs. Most films now are 4-8 gigs.
msp
Aug 7, 03:28 AM
It will be interesting to see what tomorrow brings. A couple of notes:
I know I personally would love better SOAP integration with XCode. We use .NET at work all the time to write web services, and we end up using .NET clients running under parallels on our macs, because keeping the SOAP proxy stub code up-to-date is automatic with .NET....you have to go thru hell with Xcode. I think Apple will fill that gap with the new xcode (there were command line tools in the latest version).
Have you tried rubyonrails? I've done some webservices for testing, and this is very slick.
Just give it a testdrive (www.rubyonrails.com)
I know I personally would love better SOAP integration with XCode. We use .NET at work all the time to write web services, and we end up using .NET clients running under parallels on our macs, because keeping the SOAP proxy stub code up-to-date is automatic with .NET....you have to go thru hell with Xcode. I think Apple will fill that gap with the new xcode (there were command line tools in the latest version).
Have you tried rubyonrails? I've done some webservices for testing, and this is very slick.
Just give it a testdrive (www.rubyonrails.com)
Fwink!
Mar 22, 04:36 PM
The suggestion that they will kill a product that has a great niche is kinda silly. My classic still gets plenty of use. A music player doesn't need a touchscreen. though I could see them doing that, changing the form factor a bit. One of the things that kept me from buying a touch when they came out was the limited storage capacity. What I see them doing is thinning the classic down, keeping the scroll wheel, using flash storage and adding airplay functionality. Big hds on portable players are nice but at some level you have to admit, there are very few people who legitimately "own" that much music. And Apple who should remain neural and just make the devices does like to act as ethical gatekeeper. As things shift to cloud storage, first will come non linear access to media, and then slowly but surely accountability and a polite but insistent offer to purchase the rights to all that music you seem to have that you don't have a receipt for from Apple.
mark it.
mark it.
mcbane666
Jan 11, 06:57 PM
Ok here is What I think is coming to MAcworld
New MacBooks with a high level option of a pre pro
a Tablet with a 7 inch screen that has enough power to run OSX, and Video
Probly use a HDD out of the Ipod Classic, Big Feature is Back to my Mac and Screen Sharing. This will give it tons of power as its a portal to you bigger machine.
Back to my mac on the Iphone/Ipod touch
Blu ray
New Airtunes with support for N
Apple Radio deck for your Car that wirelessly connect to your home network and reloads when in the Driveway
And a Home Network System Like a mini Server for Media.
Don't for get a New Mighty mouse for those Keyboards with touch features
New MacBooks with a high level option of a pre pro
a Tablet with a 7 inch screen that has enough power to run OSX, and Video
Probly use a HDD out of the Ipod Classic, Big Feature is Back to my Mac and Screen Sharing. This will give it tons of power as its a portal to you bigger machine.
Back to my mac on the Iphone/Ipod touch
Blu ray
New Airtunes with support for N
Apple Radio deck for your Car that wirelessly connect to your home network and reloads when in the Driveway
And a Home Network System Like a mini Server for Media.
Don't for get a New Mighty mouse for those Keyboards with touch features
rever3nce
Apr 9, 09:16 PM
my 1st baby :D
5 speed manual
2007 chevy cobalt
http://i1196.photobucket.com/albums/aa417/rever3nce/IMAG0032.jpg
5 speed manual
2007 chevy cobalt
http://i1196.photobucket.com/albums/aa417/rever3nce/IMAG0032.jpg
powerbook911
Sep 6, 06:35 PM
The quality needs to be *at least* DVD quality. Of course, with H264 they could do this in smaller file size than traditional DVDs.
However, I somehow doubt they'll do the smart thing and have it DVD quality. We could only hope. If they did, I'd probably buy a handful of movies (3 or 4) before the year ended, if they got some more studios.
However, I somehow doubt they'll do the smart thing and have it DVD quality. We could only hope. If they did, I'd probably buy a handful of movies (3 or 4) before the year ended, if they got some more studios.
techweenie
Apr 3, 01:30 PM
The trolls are out in force today. They seem to be taking cues from the political world where Google is apparently broken. 40% of the population cannot -- or will not -- independently verify claims, and a whole ecosystem has grown up to help insulate them from reality.
Yes, Mr. Al Coholic, iPads do have multiple applications. Your apparent belief that all applications must be promoted in every ad is at best impractical.
If you were able to understand the subtle message of this new ad I wouldn't have to explain to you that this positions the iPad against other tablets with *some* applications and *some* technical spec advantages by saying it's all about the user experience.
The very first brochure we did for the Apple II did the same thing with the headline "Simplicity is the Ultimate Sophistication." How many companies are still operating with the same philosophy 30+ years later?
Yes, Mr. Al Coholic, iPads do have multiple applications. Your apparent belief that all applications must be promoted in every ad is at best impractical.
If you were able to understand the subtle message of this new ad I wouldn't have to explain to you that this positions the iPad against other tablets with *some* applications and *some* technical spec advantages by saying it's all about the user experience.
The very first brochure we did for the Apple II did the same thing with the headline "Simplicity is the Ultimate Sophistication." How many companies are still operating with the same philosophy 30+ years later?
DeSnousa
Sep 6, 06:45 PM
i just hope the quality is good
My thoughts exactly, the current quality is to dry, especially considering the new iMac 24" :)
Also, bring the movies to the other world stores, please Apple :(
My thoughts exactly, the current quality is to dry, especially considering the new iMac 24" :)
Also, bring the movies to the other world stores, please Apple :(
mrapplegate
Apr 3, 06:11 PM
I dont know the significance of the big gray bar on top of the page where it blocks a portion of the page when the menu bar is coming out of auto hide -they could of made it semi transparent Hopefully they change that in the final release
I see how some might not like how it is handled. I guess my point was it was by design and is not a bug.
I see how some might not like how it is handled. I guess my point was it was by design and is not a bug.
wizard
Mar 24, 01:58 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
I wonder if this may imply the coming of that unicorn rider we all know and love, the 'headless mac" (aka xMac).
Removable drives, no screen, more powerful than an iMac, 1499.99.
That is exactly what I'm thinking! Seriously there is no need for that many GPUs in the Pro and IMac requires a custom card. So where would all of these cards go - XMac is my guess.
Or it could simply be a sign of a unified driver from AMD. That would make sense as it is a smarter approach than the highly targeted drivers of the past.
I wonder if this may imply the coming of that unicorn rider we all know and love, the 'headless mac" (aka xMac).
Removable drives, no screen, more powerful than an iMac, 1499.99.
That is exactly what I'm thinking! Seriously there is no need for that many GPUs in the Pro and IMac requires a custom card. So where would all of these cards go - XMac is my guess.
Or it could simply be a sign of a unified driver from AMD. That would make sense as it is a smarter approach than the highly targeted drivers of the past.
Tmelon
Apr 2, 02:12 PM
You feel like it�s a new experience? So much better?
Well it's still Mac OS X so I can't call it a completely new experience. There's still a menu bar, still a dock, etc. But they've definitely made some improvements. And there's most likely still more to come in terms of speed and stability.
Well it's still Mac OS X so I can't call it a completely new experience. There's still a menu bar, still a dock, etc. But they've definitely made some improvements. And there's most likely still more to come in terms of speed and stability.
notsofatjames
Jan 12, 10:38 AM
I'm all for a completely wireless macbook, no matter what its called. I've always wondered why apple has never come up with a dock style thing for macbooks anyway. I'd be happy with one plug, which charged, and connected my mac to every other peripheral that i use. If that dock also had a wireless part that allowed me to connect to it on my home wireless network, it would just make things a whole lot more pleasant.
toddybody
Mar 24, 02:24 PM
Lian Li Hackintosh yo.
Leoff
Nov 27, 09:05 PM
IMAGINED?
Let's look at the facts.
20" Apple $699 - Dell $399
23" Apple $999 - Dell $799 (24")
30" Apple $1999 - Dell $1499
Those are real numbers. Dell has brighter specs, more connection options, and with the 23" they have a 24" that's still $200 cheaper.
What imaginary planet are you on? $300, $200, and $500 difference in price respectively. That's real money. And it pressures people into considering a Dell. (Bad Apple!) All you are really getting for those extra hundres of dollars is a display that looks nice with your mini, MBP, or MP.
You claim that Apple's monitors are selling well, but you have no facts to back that up. Apple doesn't post their sales numbers for products like this so you're just making it up. Those sales numbers could suck a$$ and you wouldn't know. And I believe they do suck, but Apple won't tell you that, it sucks because they want them to suck. Keep reading.
I believe Apple does this to encourage people to buy iMacs. If your willing to pony up $2400 or more on a Mac Pro then maybe an extra $500 doesn't bother you for the two 30" displays your going to use, and if all you can afford is mini Apple doesn't seem to mind you buying that Dell monitor. By pricing the monitors several hundred more than they are really worth, you are now in the iMac price range. I bet if you could see and add up the numbers, buying a mini and an over priced cinema display gives Apple the same profit margin as an iMac. Apple doesn't have a mid range tower. Again, because they want to sell you an iMac. By keeping their product line simple they reduce costs; making one widget as apposed to five different widgets is cheaper. But that limits choice.
I have an iMac, but I really don't want one. I want a mid-range tower and an external monitor. I'm not alone either. Apple's monitor price is a "choice incentive". It may help their bottom line, but it limits my choice. And since I hate Windows I'm forced into Apple's program. This is really what people are complaining about here. They want a mini and 20" cinema for under $1000, and I want a 23" and tower for under $2000, not a 24" iMac!
So, back to a 17" cinema. Why would Apple do this? I don't think they will. A 17" iMac is only $899. That's where they make their money, oh, and people like me willing to pay premium because we value esthetics.
Wow. For someone who seems to have all the answers, you're not reading the rest of this thread very well.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327
In short, Apple's monitors are for higher-end users. Anyone can go out and get a Dell. Most people do. If you want cheap and easy, you get a Dell monitor.
I noticed that you didn't mention any of the 20" NEC Displays that run much, MUCH higher in price than even Apple's. Now why are they so much more expensive? Are they too high-priced? Vastly overpriced?
There are differences. You'd know that if you took the time to look.
Yes, you are indeed correct. Those are "real" numbers. Numbers that are comparing two different types of monitors.
Next time you wish to present facts, try and present them all instead of just the ones that support your case.
Let's look at the facts.
20" Apple $699 - Dell $399
23" Apple $999 - Dell $799 (24")
30" Apple $1999 - Dell $1499
Those are real numbers. Dell has brighter specs, more connection options, and with the 23" they have a 24" that's still $200 cheaper.
What imaginary planet are you on? $300, $200, and $500 difference in price respectively. That's real money. And it pressures people into considering a Dell. (Bad Apple!) All you are really getting for those extra hundres of dollars is a display that looks nice with your mini, MBP, or MP.
You claim that Apple's monitors are selling well, but you have no facts to back that up. Apple doesn't post their sales numbers for products like this so you're just making it up. Those sales numbers could suck a$$ and you wouldn't know. And I believe they do suck, but Apple won't tell you that, it sucks because they want them to suck. Keep reading.
I believe Apple does this to encourage people to buy iMacs. If your willing to pony up $2400 or more on a Mac Pro then maybe an extra $500 doesn't bother you for the two 30" displays your going to use, and if all you can afford is mini Apple doesn't seem to mind you buying that Dell monitor. By pricing the monitors several hundred more than they are really worth, you are now in the iMac price range. I bet if you could see and add up the numbers, buying a mini and an over priced cinema display gives Apple the same profit margin as an iMac. Apple doesn't have a mid range tower. Again, because they want to sell you an iMac. By keeping their product line simple they reduce costs; making one widget as apposed to five different widgets is cheaper. But that limits choice.
I have an iMac, but I really don't want one. I want a mid-range tower and an external monitor. I'm not alone either. Apple's monitor price is a "choice incentive". It may help their bottom line, but it limits my choice. And since I hate Windows I'm forced into Apple's program. This is really what people are complaining about here. They want a mini and 20" cinema for under $1000, and I want a 23" and tower for under $2000, not a 24" iMac!
So, back to a 17" cinema. Why would Apple do this? I don't think they will. A 17" iMac is only $899. That's where they make their money, oh, and people like me willing to pay premium because we value esthetics.
Wow. For someone who seems to have all the answers, you're not reading the rest of this thread very well.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327
In short, Apple's monitors are for higher-end users. Anyone can go out and get a Dell. Most people do. If you want cheap and easy, you get a Dell monitor.
I noticed that you didn't mention any of the 20" NEC Displays that run much, MUCH higher in price than even Apple's. Now why are they so much more expensive? Are they too high-priced? Vastly overpriced?
There are differences. You'd know that if you took the time to look.
Yes, you are indeed correct. Those are "real" numbers. Numbers that are comparing two different types of monitors.
Next time you wish to present facts, try and present them all instead of just the ones that support your case.
alfagta
Apr 1, 04:16 PM
Faster? Not so sure. More stable? Definitely. All of my main bugs have been fixed aside from the full screen apps on dual screens.
So I guess we won�t see any new features� Apple is busy polishing what we�ve got now�:/
So I guess we won�t see any new features� Apple is busy polishing what we�ve got now�:/
aristotle
Apr 2, 11:41 PM
Great concept, I love it. But it was poorly executed. Who picked the music for this ad? It's terrible. And the voiceover is on the verge of creepy.
I miss old Apple ads. Their advertising is going downhill while their products keep getting better.
Dude, the people who think everything is "creepy" are usually creepy themselves. I'm not trying to antagonize you but it is just an observation of mine that I've seen so often. It is all about self esteem and redirection on someone or something else. People who are happy with themselves don't go out of their way to put people or things down. I'm just a little sick and tired of the fad to overuse words like "creepy" so that they begin to lose all meaning. It does not make so seem "cool" in my eyes.
I've seen teens who were awkward and odd looking who used "creepy" a lot whereas those with self confidence just lived their lives instead of trying to label strangers walking by minding their own business.
I'll "believe" when they fix the currently unresolved and widespread quality control issues...light bleed on virtually every unit and blemishes, dents and scratches on units straight out of the box.
Fix those issues, Apple, and then I will "believe" enough to get an iPad 2.
That's funny. There was no bleed, blemishes, dents or scratches on my iPad 2 when I took it out of the box.
Are you sure that are not talking to people who are getting "returns" as "new"?
Back on topic, I loved the part with the plucked strings. With the angle they used and the responsiveness it seemed as if it was 3 dimensional.
I miss old Apple ads. Their advertising is going downhill while their products keep getting better.
Dude, the people who think everything is "creepy" are usually creepy themselves. I'm not trying to antagonize you but it is just an observation of mine that I've seen so often. It is all about self esteem and redirection on someone or something else. People who are happy with themselves don't go out of their way to put people or things down. I'm just a little sick and tired of the fad to overuse words like "creepy" so that they begin to lose all meaning. It does not make so seem "cool" in my eyes.
I've seen teens who were awkward and odd looking who used "creepy" a lot whereas those with self confidence just lived their lives instead of trying to label strangers walking by minding their own business.
I'll "believe" when they fix the currently unresolved and widespread quality control issues...light bleed on virtually every unit and blemishes, dents and scratches on units straight out of the box.
Fix those issues, Apple, and then I will "believe" enough to get an iPad 2.
That's funny. There was no bleed, blemishes, dents or scratches on my iPad 2 when I took it out of the box.
Are you sure that are not talking to people who are getting "returns" as "new"?
Back on topic, I loved the part with the plucked strings. With the angle they used and the responsiveness it seemed as if it was 3 dimensional.
mattster16
Nov 28, 02:51 AM
I think this is a good move. I would never buy a monitor that small personally, but it would match up perfectly with the Mini. Right now there really isn't a good option; the 20" is just too expensive.
A huge amount of customers buying a basic PC are still going with 15" and 17" LCDs, mostly not widescreen.
A huge amount of customers buying a basic PC are still going with 15" and 17" LCDs, mostly not widescreen.
