gibbz
Mar 25, 10:36 PM
What? this seems hard to believe... Already done on development? :confused:
Development is never done.
Development is never done.
addicted44
Mar 26, 01:15 AM
About the only thing that I find disappointing about this release is the lack of a new filesystem.
I am disappointed about this too. But I am not surprised. Apple's next filesystem was going to be ZFS. But Sun being purchased by Oracle has probably killed any chance of that happening.
The newer Linux FS'es are just not stable enough at the point (or don't do things Apple has somehow managed to bake into HFS+, like the snapshots, and things like directory Hard Links, etc). I don't see Apple moving to any version of ReiserFS or ext#, so I think we are stuck with HFS+ and extensions/improvements of it, until the ZFS situation gets clearer.
I am disappointed about this too. But I am not surprised. Apple's next filesystem was going to be ZFS. But Sun being purchased by Oracle has probably killed any chance of that happening.
The newer Linux FS'es are just not stable enough at the point (or don't do things Apple has somehow managed to bake into HFS+, like the snapshots, and things like directory Hard Links, etc). I don't see Apple moving to any version of ReiserFS or ext#, so I think we are stuck with HFS+ and extensions/improvements of it, until the ZFS situation gets clearer.
charlituna
Apr 11, 10:00 PM
This is bunk. Apple will not miss Christmas.
Dear Steve.
I read on macrumors.com that the new iPhone won't be ready for Christmas. What should we do.
-- Santa.
Dear Santa.
Move Christmas.
-- Steve
Dear Steve.
I read on macrumors.com that the new iPhone won't be ready for Christmas. What should we do.
-- Santa.
Dear Santa.
Move Christmas.
-- Steve
bryanc
Jul 27, 03:46 PM
Well it's back to the future for all of us. Remember when the Mac was going 64-bit with the introduction of the G5 PowerMac on June 23, 2003? :rolleyes: Only more thanthree years later and we're doing it all over again thanks to Yonah's 7 month retrograde.
Just so long as Steve doesn't say we'll be at 3 GHz in a year. :eek:
Cheers
Just so long as Steve doesn't say we'll be at 3 GHz in a year. :eek:
Cheers
Dan==
Jul 27, 04:06 PM
But its like ATI simply naming one of their chips ATI Radeon with no additional naming (being something like X1800 etc.). Why not something like Mac Plus, Mac Extra, Mac Express... I could go on.
Those are all fine.
Well, the Mac Plus is pretty slow these days. What was that - 8Mhz?
Too bad the Mac Mini wasn't named the Mac Nano. Then we could have named this one the Mac Mini.
Those are all fine.
Well, the Mac Plus is pretty slow these days. What was that - 8Mhz?
Too bad the Mac Mini wasn't named the Mac Nano. Then we could have named this one the Mac Mini.
shawnce
Nov 28, 07:05 PM
I think it is crazy for everyone to think that the music industry is greedy when it getting squeezed out of all of their revenue streams. So, Apple makes hundreds of millions off of their back on the itunes site, and a billion off of iPod sales, and they cannot share in the wealth? Huh?
Apple pays the record labels for every song sold via iTMS, a vast majority of the "99 cents" for a song goes to the record labels (or direct to independent artist). iTMS is providing a new sales channel with effectively zero cost to the record labels (one that avoids manufacturing, shipping and stocking of physical units). This is a totally NEW revenue stream that arguable provides the record labels more bang for their buck then prior revenue streams and it is arguable more secure from copyright violations then prior revenue streams (FairPlay DRM). It also more directly connects customers with music (easy to do impulse purchases, etc.).
Now for the other half of your statement... just why should record companies get money for every iPod sold? This type of thinking is in some ways similar to demanding that paint manufactures should get a cut of the profits of every paint brush sold.
As a side note... I support the record companies/artist going after major copyright violators using legal proceedings.
Apple pays the record labels for every song sold via iTMS, a vast majority of the "99 cents" for a song goes to the record labels (or direct to independent artist). iTMS is providing a new sales channel with effectively zero cost to the record labels (one that avoids manufacturing, shipping and stocking of physical units). This is a totally NEW revenue stream that arguable provides the record labels more bang for their buck then prior revenue streams and it is arguable more secure from copyright violations then prior revenue streams (FairPlay DRM). It also more directly connects customers with music (easy to do impulse purchases, etc.).
Now for the other half of your statement... just why should record companies get money for every iPod sold? This type of thinking is in some ways similar to demanding that paint manufactures should get a cut of the profits of every paint brush sold.
As a side note... I support the record companies/artist going after major copyright violators using legal proceedings.
caspersoong
Apr 13, 04:53 AM
The longer the wait, the less likely for my family to buy it.
�algiris
Mar 31, 03:27 PM
Android > iOS.
I was blind, but now i see. Oh wait ...
I was blind, but now i see. Oh wait ...
Multimedia
Jul 15, 05:22 PM
Too many people are complaining about rumored information that isn't even reliable, and most likely incorrect.
I think we can look at what Apple has done with its other lineups this past year as a guide to the future. Based on what we've seen, I don't think Apple will be redesigning the Mac Pro case -- it's large enough to accommodate anything they wish to throw in there. I also think it's a great industrial design, physically alluding to the power within.
The one question I do have is why is the Mac Pro the last to make this transition, why has it taken so long? Is it simply due to chip availability, is it due to some radical new design, or is it because the Mac Pro is Apple's flagship product and Apple is working long and hard to wedge in some great new technology?
I'll be watching the announcement closely, although my Dual 2.5 GHz G5 (single core) handles everything I throw at it and has never ever given me reason to even want to upgrade. However, if the new Mac Pro hits 3 GHz I may be very tempted... if it doesn't, I'll wait it out. If the new high end Mac Pro doesn't go to 3 GHz like Dell and others, the Mac Pro will sink plenty fast.Well my Dual 2.5 GHz G5 was easily brought to it's knees once I started simultaneously recording EyeTV, Encoding DVD Images and Ripping MP4s from those Images. Thank GOD the Quad went refurb in early February and I was able to sell your model for $2500.
In any event, I think we are all grasping at straws for the next three weeks waiting for Monday morning August 7. :confused: I'm sure there will be some sort of surprise. But I have no idea what that surprise will be. I'll be glad when it's over since we'll all be able to see much more clearly how the next year will be looking.
I think we can look at what Apple has done with its other lineups this past year as a guide to the future. Based on what we've seen, I don't think Apple will be redesigning the Mac Pro case -- it's large enough to accommodate anything they wish to throw in there. I also think it's a great industrial design, physically alluding to the power within.
The one question I do have is why is the Mac Pro the last to make this transition, why has it taken so long? Is it simply due to chip availability, is it due to some radical new design, or is it because the Mac Pro is Apple's flagship product and Apple is working long and hard to wedge in some great new technology?
I'll be watching the announcement closely, although my Dual 2.5 GHz G5 (single core) handles everything I throw at it and has never ever given me reason to even want to upgrade. However, if the new Mac Pro hits 3 GHz I may be very tempted... if it doesn't, I'll wait it out. If the new high end Mac Pro doesn't go to 3 GHz like Dell and others, the Mac Pro will sink plenty fast.Well my Dual 2.5 GHz G5 was easily brought to it's knees once I started simultaneously recording EyeTV, Encoding DVD Images and Ripping MP4s from those Images. Thank GOD the Quad went refurb in early February and I was able to sell your model for $2500.
In any event, I think we are all grasping at straws for the next three weeks waiting for Monday morning August 7. :confused: I'm sure there will be some sort of surprise. But I have no idea what that surprise will be. I'll be glad when it's over since we'll all be able to see much more clearly how the next year will be looking.
Tundraboy
Apr 27, 10:11 AM
Hilarious!!!!! We're not tracking you but we're going to provide a patch soon.......typical Apple response......just DENY!!!!!
There is no antenna issue with the iPhone 4 but we'll give you a free bumper for a limited time, act quickly while supplies last LMAO!!!!!
There is no antenna issue with the iPhone 4 but we'll give you a free bumper for a limited time, act quickly while supplies last LMAO!!!!!
Scottsdale
Apr 6, 11:59 AM
It would be about as fast. The IGP is 150MHz slower though so graphics wise it would be slightly slower. chrmjenkins explained some smaller details but in terms of performance, i7-2649M should be similar to i5-2520M.
Remember that those are numbers under Windows. Anand mentioned in his 2011 MBP review that Intel HD 3000 has brilliant drivers in OS X, and in general it beat the 320M in OS X too. In Windows it got badly beaten by 320M. Sure the LV and especially ULV IGP will be slower than 320M, even in OS X but the Windows numbers don't correspond to OS X numbers.
Are you smoking something? Sure the IGP used in SB 13" MBP might get some fudged numbers by those who report for Apple, but you think the ULV SB IGP is going to even compare to the 320m on any level??? Huh? You are far smarter than that.
A lot of people using the 13" MBP in comparison when there are almost no similaries.
I don't believe a ULV CPU gets used in the 13" MBA. I don't believe this CPU in the story gets used in the 13" MBA. I don't believe Apple is dumb enough to ruin the MBA brand AGAIN with Intel's IGP at this time. I don't believe that what Apple does in the 13" MBP has any correlation with the MBA because the IGP is different. I believe when Apple and Nvidia said Apple will use the Nvidia chipset and GPU for a long time they were specifically citing the MBA, as it make no sense for the MBA to be so challenged as to get such an inferior design leading to tragic real world results.
In 2012 the MBA will get an update when it actually makes sense. People waiting for a ULV SB chip in the 13" MBA will be waiting a long time. People waiting or expecting SB IGP to even compare in ULV variants will be waiting forever as they cannot match the Nvidia offering with the underclocked IGP.
This story is ridiculous as written.
Remember that those are numbers under Windows. Anand mentioned in his 2011 MBP review that Intel HD 3000 has brilliant drivers in OS X, and in general it beat the 320M in OS X too. In Windows it got badly beaten by 320M. Sure the LV and especially ULV IGP will be slower than 320M, even in OS X but the Windows numbers don't correspond to OS X numbers.
Are you smoking something? Sure the IGP used in SB 13" MBP might get some fudged numbers by those who report for Apple, but you think the ULV SB IGP is going to even compare to the 320m on any level??? Huh? You are far smarter than that.
A lot of people using the 13" MBP in comparison when there are almost no similaries.
I don't believe a ULV CPU gets used in the 13" MBA. I don't believe this CPU in the story gets used in the 13" MBA. I don't believe Apple is dumb enough to ruin the MBA brand AGAIN with Intel's IGP at this time. I don't believe that what Apple does in the 13" MBP has any correlation with the MBA because the IGP is different. I believe when Apple and Nvidia said Apple will use the Nvidia chipset and GPU for a long time they were specifically citing the MBA, as it make no sense for the MBA to be so challenged as to get such an inferior design leading to tragic real world results.
In 2012 the MBA will get an update when it actually makes sense. People waiting for a ULV SB chip in the 13" MBA will be waiting a long time. People waiting or expecting SB IGP to even compare in ULV variants will be waiting forever as they cannot match the Nvidia offering with the underclocked IGP.
This story is ridiculous as written.
littleman23408
Dec 7, 08:10 AM
I settled for 2nd on that test. Gold isnt worth the aggravation.
I found a youtube vid of a guy showing him get gold. I am getting oh so close to mimicing him and getting 1st. I almost decided to stay up all night last night if I had to, but then I chose otherwise. Maybe I will try a couple more times later tonight.
I found a youtube vid of a guy showing him get gold. I am getting oh so close to mimicing him and getting 1st. I almost decided to stay up all night last night if I had to, but then I chose otherwise. Maybe I will try a couple more times later tonight.
scottgroovez
Apr 8, 06:09 AM
Why anyone would ever choose to buy an Apple product at Best Buy over the Apple Store is beyond me. :confused:
I just ordered a Macbook pro from BB with 15% off and a further 8% cashback saving me just over �200.
I just ordered a Macbook pro from BB with 15% off and a further 8% cashback saving me just over �200.
Westside guy
Aug 7, 03:50 PM
Hey nice to see osx will have system restore =D
Time machine isn't even similar to MS's System Restore. Time Machine is basically like having CVS or Subversion underneath the file system. It rocks. I don't believe there's ever been anything like it on a client-type computer (a similar feature was present in the server OS VMS, I believe).
You might want to do some reading about CVS and Subversion.
Edit: Now that I think about it, it wouldn't be surprising to find that CVS/Subversion code is the foundation for Time Machine.
Time machine isn't even similar to MS's System Restore. Time Machine is basically like having CVS or Subversion underneath the file system. It rocks. I don't believe there's ever been anything like it on a client-type computer (a similar feature was present in the server OS VMS, I believe).
You might want to do some reading about CVS and Subversion.
Edit: Now that I think about it, it wouldn't be surprising to find that CVS/Subversion code is the foundation for Time Machine.
jmbear
Nov 29, 12:46 PM
Great argument, except that OK Go are signed to a major label, Capitol Records, only one of the most histroically great labels!! Please see: The Beach Boys, Pink Floyd, The Beatles, Nat King Cole, etc.)! :rolleyes: YouTube doesn't sell music; just look at OK Go's numbers, they are mediocre at best. One hugely popular viral video is not going to move that many CDs.
Also, as an aside, they are not "recording studios," they are "recording labels," or more commonly, "record labels."
Those bands became what they are in different times my friend.
And sorry about the recording studios thing, I am not a native english speaker.
Also, as an aside, they are not "recording studios," they are "recording labels," or more commonly, "record labels."
Those bands became what they are in different times my friend.
And sorry about the recording studios thing, I am not a native english speaker.
brepublican
Nov 28, 10:29 PM
This is ridiculous. The record companies are obsessed with money. They didnt seek royalties on CD players but iPods are somehow different. They are MUSIC PLAYERS. They record industry should have no part in music hardware, its just ridiculous.:mad:
I'm glad I'm not the only one who doesnt understand why they would want money for every iPod sold. Is this how Microsoft plans to "kill" the iPod with their Zune? By distorting the mp3 market with such kind of BS :mad:
Idiots
I'm glad I'm not the only one who doesnt understand why they would want money for every iPod sold. Is this how Microsoft plans to "kill" the iPod with their Zune? By distorting the mp3 market with such kind of BS :mad:
Idiots
squeeks
Apr 28, 03:58 PM
Did you ask to see W's birth certificate, or any other president's birth certificate? Why not?
Because there was never a question of wither or not any of those men were born in the US, with Obama the past was always a bit hazy as to if he was actually born in Hawaii or thats just what his parents told him. Obviously he doesn�t remember BEING BORN in hawaii..his parents could have just told him that.
But now we have proof and its all over with there�s no need to be calling names about it.
Because there was never a question of wither or not any of those men were born in the US, with Obama the past was always a bit hazy as to if he was actually born in Hawaii or thats just what his parents told him. Obviously he doesn�t remember BEING BORN in hawaii..his parents could have just told him that.
But now we have proof and its all over with there�s no need to be calling names about it.
MrCrowbar
Aug 26, 10:21 PM
Yes, and as someone has already pointed out, if the Core2 can do 20% better with the same power, can't you just throttle your new Core2 MBP down 20% and get a laptop with the same performance of your old one with 20% better battery life?
Talk about not seeing the forest through the trees. :rolleyes:
You won't get 20% more battery life unless the screens and other components don't get more power efficient too. I think 7% battery life increase is more realistic. You can already upgrade todays macbooks with more RAM (saves HDD work) and more efficient HDDs. With the screen brightness down, I get 6 and a half hours of text editing out of that thing.
Talk about not seeing the forest through the trees. :rolleyes:
You won't get 20% more battery life unless the screens and other components don't get more power efficient too. I think 7% battery life increase is more realistic. You can already upgrade todays macbooks with more RAM (saves HDD work) and more efficient HDDs. With the screen brightness down, I get 6 and a half hours of text editing out of that thing.
citizenzen
Mar 22, 11:00 AM
Oh yeah... and here's a fun little nugget for those who like to tout Obama's coalition:
I'm confused. :confused:
What point is 5P trying to make here?
Is the fact that one list contains more countries by count make it superior to the second? Is that the only way to judge a coalition, by count?
That seems a little too simplistic to me.
For instance, I added up these two lists (after removing duplicates) according to how much the countries spend on their military ...
• Coalition Countries - Iraq - 2003 ~ 152 billion
• Coalition - Libya - 2011 ~ 179 billion
I guess it's just how you want to look at it. :cool:
I'm confused. :confused:
What point is 5P trying to make here?
Is the fact that one list contains more countries by count make it superior to the second? Is that the only way to judge a coalition, by count?
That seems a little too simplistic to me.
For instance, I added up these two lists (after removing duplicates) according to how much the countries spend on their military ...
• Coalition Countries - Iraq - 2003 ~ 152 billion
• Coalition - Libya - 2011 ~ 179 billion
I guess it's just how you want to look at it. :cool:
wpotere
Apr 27, 10:17 AM
Trump is a hero. :rolleyes:
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/04/27/trump-takes-credit-for-release-of-obamas-long-form-birth-certificate/
I listened to the report and I can't understand a word he is saying. He babbles about nothing.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/04/27/trump-takes-credit-for-release-of-obamas-long-form-birth-certificate/
I listened to the report and I can't understand a word he is saying. He babbles about nothing.
composer11
Jul 23, 05:00 AM
Apple's business model is based on high margins. I don't think this is going to change.
My guess is that they will release upgraded systems more often, and discontinue the slower systems more often, and leave the prices approximately unchanged.
Don't expect dirt-cheap Macs (aside from closeout sales to dump old stock, of course), but do expect more powerful systems to come out much more rapidly.
You can get tons of great audio gear. But you're going to have to start shopping in music stores and not in computer stores. And be prepared to pay for the quality you get.
Yeah, I know, that's probably what they will do forcing you to pay top dollar.
Hope the Mac Books get dedicated GPU, intel is rumored to be working on something that should be on par with ATI/Nvida to be ready for Vista, meanwhile AMD is scooping up ATI.
Regarding music gear, I have a Mackie 400F which sounds nice, a tube pre amp and Rhodes NT2A, I was speaking of wireless. Everything wireless. LOL!
My guess is that they will release upgraded systems more often, and discontinue the slower systems more often, and leave the prices approximately unchanged.
Don't expect dirt-cheap Macs (aside from closeout sales to dump old stock, of course), but do expect more powerful systems to come out much more rapidly.
You can get tons of great audio gear. But you're going to have to start shopping in music stores and not in computer stores. And be prepared to pay for the quality you get.
Yeah, I know, that's probably what they will do forcing you to pay top dollar.
Hope the Mac Books get dedicated GPU, intel is rumored to be working on something that should be on par with ATI/Nvida to be ready for Vista, meanwhile AMD is scooping up ATI.
Regarding music gear, I have a Mackie 400F which sounds nice, a tube pre amp and Rhodes NT2A, I was speaking of wireless. Everything wireless. LOL!
Bill McEnaney
Apr 29, 12:47 PM
So what? Who said liberals never partake in name calling? You claimed that liberals do more name calling. You want me to go dig out examples of name-calling done by conservative voices such as Limbaugh, Beck, etc.?
Please do dig them out. It's only fair that you should be free to point out point out evil that some conservatives do publicly. Meanwhile, let's see whether this (http://www.mrc.org/Profiles/odonnell/welcome.asp) link works now.
RT, did you notice that I said that whomever does it, name-calling is libel or slander?
Please do dig them out. It's only fair that you should be free to point out point out evil that some conservatives do publicly. Meanwhile, let's see whether this (http://www.mrc.org/Profiles/odonnell/welcome.asp) link works now.
RT, did you notice that I said that whomever does it, name-calling is libel or slander?
BornAgainMac
Aug 17, 09:39 AM
I don't like Adobe anymore. :mad:
daver969
Sep 13, 11:05 AM
A bit pointless given that no software utilises the extra cores yet. But nice to know, I guess.
I'm still getting used to having two cores in my laptop!
What I couldn't understand - I couldn't see it explained in the article - why is the dual core Mac Pro (i.e. with current Mac Pro with 2 cores disabled) faster in so many tests than the 4 core Mac Pro.
I think part of the reason so many people seem to be hung up on the "software doesn't utilize multiple cores" mantra is because benchmarks tend to test only one software component at a time. If a given app isn't multithreaded, then it doesn't benefit from multiple cores in these tests. But that doesn't mean that multiple cores don't affect the overall system speed.
What we need is some kind of a super benchmark: How fast is my computer when I'm watching a quicktime stream of Steve demoing the latest insanely great stuff, while ripping my CD collection to iTunes, while surfing complex Cnet.com pages (w/animation), and compiling the latest version of my Java app, every once in a while flipping over to Dashboard (dashboard seems to take up a lot of system resources every time I invoke it, not just on startup).
At this point I would rather push towards more cores than more raw speed in a single core, since I don't tend to wait on any single process. If something is taking a long time, like loading a page or compiling code, I switch to something else and come back later. I would much rather have the whole system retain its responsive feel than have one app finish its task a few seconds quicker.
I'm still getting used to having two cores in my laptop!
What I couldn't understand - I couldn't see it explained in the article - why is the dual core Mac Pro (i.e. with current Mac Pro with 2 cores disabled) faster in so many tests than the 4 core Mac Pro.
I think part of the reason so many people seem to be hung up on the "software doesn't utilize multiple cores" mantra is because benchmarks tend to test only one software component at a time. If a given app isn't multithreaded, then it doesn't benefit from multiple cores in these tests. But that doesn't mean that multiple cores don't affect the overall system speed.
What we need is some kind of a super benchmark: How fast is my computer when I'm watching a quicktime stream of Steve demoing the latest insanely great stuff, while ripping my CD collection to iTunes, while surfing complex Cnet.com pages (w/animation), and compiling the latest version of my Java app, every once in a while flipping over to Dashboard (dashboard seems to take up a lot of system resources every time I invoke it, not just on startup).
At this point I would rather push towards more cores than more raw speed in a single core, since I don't tend to wait on any single process. If something is taking a long time, like loading a page or compiling code, I switch to something else and come back later. I would much rather have the whole system retain its responsive feel than have one app finish its task a few seconds quicker.
No comments:
Post a Comment