motulist
Aug 6, 10:44 PM
"You've come to the right platform."
- from WWDC Apple banner http://guides.macrumors.com/Image:Coveredbanners.jpg. Apple is really doing a full court press against Windows!
This era is either the beginning of the Mac gaining serious market share, or the moment history will view as proof that Apple cannot make major market gains no matter how hard they try. My bet is on the former.
- from WWDC Apple banner http://guides.macrumors.com/Image:Coveredbanners.jpg. Apple is really doing a full court press against Windows!
This era is either the beginning of the Mac gaining serious market share, or the moment history will view as proof that Apple cannot make major market gains no matter how hard they try. My bet is on the former.
cwerdna
Dec 5, 01:55 AM
According to http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9595_22-6140649.html "SanDisk tied Apple Computer, with 39 percent of all MP3 players sold for the week, but the similarities end there. iPods led all manufacturers with 66 percent of dollars spent in the category, while SanDisk had 18 percent...
Those figures do not include iPods sold directly from Apple, which does not release sales figures from Apple.com or Apple stores...
Microsoft's much-ballyhooed MP3 player, the Zune, captured 2.1 percent of units sold, tying with Disney and coming in behind Apple, SanDisk, Creative and Memorex."
Those figures do not include iPods sold directly from Apple, which does not release sales figures from Apple.com or Apple stores...
Microsoft's much-ballyhooed MP3 player, the Zune, captured 2.1 percent of units sold, tying with Disney and coming in behind Apple, SanDisk, Creative and Memorex."
twoodcc
Feb 4, 05:09 PM
congrats to badlight for 1 million points!
Porco
Apr 19, 04:55 PM
I've been putting a family member off buying an iMac for months in order to wait for the new ones, I hope the updates are very soon.
wheezy
Nov 15, 06:37 PM
That really depends on the program, on how "parallelizable" the application is.
The simplest way to think of it is like this: Let's say you have a program that first has to calculate A. Then, when it's done that, it uses the result of A to calculate B. Then, when it's done that, uses the result of B to calculate C, then C to D, and so on. That's a *serial* problem there. The calculation of B can't begin until A is done, so it doesn't matter how many processors you have running, all computation is held up on one spot.
On the other hand, let's say you have an application that needs to calculate A, B, C and D, but those four values are not dependent on each other at all. In that case, you can use four processors at the same time, to calculate all four values at the same time.
Think of it like baking a cake. You can't start putting on the icing until the cake is done baking. And you can't start baking the cake until the ingredients are all mixed together. But you can have people simultaneously getting out and measuring the ingredients.
So that problem is partially parallelizable, but the majority of its workload is a serial process.
Some software applications, just by their very nature, will never be able to do anything useful with multiple processors.
What a very lovely analogy. Thank you.
For me... 8 cores for the bragging rights only... so I guess I won't get one anytime soon. I'm sure 4 would suit me fine though, I need to upgrade my 1Ghz G4!!!
The simplest way to think of it is like this: Let's say you have a program that first has to calculate A. Then, when it's done that, it uses the result of A to calculate B. Then, when it's done that, uses the result of B to calculate C, then C to D, and so on. That's a *serial* problem there. The calculation of B can't begin until A is done, so it doesn't matter how many processors you have running, all computation is held up on one spot.
On the other hand, let's say you have an application that needs to calculate A, B, C and D, but those four values are not dependent on each other at all. In that case, you can use four processors at the same time, to calculate all four values at the same time.
Think of it like baking a cake. You can't start putting on the icing until the cake is done baking. And you can't start baking the cake until the ingredients are all mixed together. But you can have people simultaneously getting out and measuring the ingredients.
So that problem is partially parallelizable, but the majority of its workload is a serial process.
Some software applications, just by their very nature, will never be able to do anything useful with multiple processors.
What a very lovely analogy. Thank you.
For me... 8 cores for the bragging rights only... so I guess I won't get one anytime soon. I'm sure 4 would suit me fine though, I need to upgrade my 1Ghz G4!!!
nilk
Mar 25, 02:17 PM
Unless Apple gets clever and uses ThunderBolt for connecting external graphics cards, after all it is a PCI-E based connector.
That's not clever at all. You'd still be stuck with the Intel GPU on the internal screen.
Where I see ThunderBolt being useful is in scenarios where you want to use it at your desk and have all the advantages of a desktop machine. So you put your MBP on your desk and connect via ThunderBolt:
* A drive array with several 3.5" drives, possibly in RAID configuration
* An external video card that is driving a 30" 2560x1600 display with two 1200 x 1920 displays (rotated) on each side of the 30"
You wouldn't bother to use the laptop display for this configuration (I wouldn't at least).
Though, ThunderBolt supposedly allows for daisy-chaining at least 2 monitors, in which case you could run off the laptop's internal video card, but then you need compatible monitors that allow daisy-chaining.
Personally I'd love to see external video cards compatible with ThunderBolt (I use my laptop mostly at my desk), or possibly an enclosure you can put a regular desktop video card in.
That's not clever at all. You'd still be stuck with the Intel GPU on the internal screen.
Where I see ThunderBolt being useful is in scenarios where you want to use it at your desk and have all the advantages of a desktop machine. So you put your MBP on your desk and connect via ThunderBolt:
* A drive array with several 3.5" drives, possibly in RAID configuration
* An external video card that is driving a 30" 2560x1600 display with two 1200 x 1920 displays (rotated) on each side of the 30"
You wouldn't bother to use the laptop display for this configuration (I wouldn't at least).
Though, ThunderBolt supposedly allows for daisy-chaining at least 2 monitors, in which case you could run off the laptop's internal video card, but then you need compatible monitors that allow daisy-chaining.
Personally I'd love to see external video cards compatible with ThunderBolt (I use my laptop mostly at my desk), or possibly an enclosure you can put a regular desktop video card in.
totoum
Mar 22, 03:54 PM
Do people seriously have that many songs?!!! seriously?!!!
220gb = 50,000 songs?!!!!! That is totally not necessary.
As mentioned above,some people want to listen to their songs uncompressed.
220gb = 50,000 songs?!!!!! That is totally not necessary.
As mentioned above,some people want to listen to their songs uncompressed.
nvelker
Sep 14, 08:44 AM
When will it stop??
lordonuthin
Dec 18, 05:43 PM
i may add some more over the break
Cool, you are getting away from me again... but that's a good thing! :p
Cool, you are getting away from me again... but that's a good thing! :p
DIMEZ
Nov 27, 02:08 PM
http://i121.photobucket.com/albums/o222/standup_ent/149049_1477259727631_1117878822_31068280_7582535_n.jpg
Lebron viii south beach
Lebron viii south beach
davidia
Jan 11, 09:32 PM
This Air theme is very plausible. We have AirPort, AirTunes etc. Now we will have more products that will come together via AirPort. Any new products will now have the Air connections. This could be a combination of 802.11x or Bluetooth protocols depending on the level of connectivity required. iPods, iPhones and eventually MacBooks and Macs and even monitors will have no physical connections. We probably won't see this in the laptops or desktops until 802.11 gets up towards USB2.0 speeds. However iPhones and iPods can go without dock connectors sooner as we only sync smaller amounts of data. The size of these devices can then continue to get smaller and look better without the connector which is looking too big on iPod nanos.
So I think something in the air could be this new direction towards complete wirelessness in Apple products. We may see the sub notebook or tablet be the first to have very limited or no non-wireless connectivity. You may need to have an AirPort to sync and transfer data from your desktop.
The idea of a new "DuoDock" with an iMac form factor does appeal to me, but I think what we will see is that the new sub or tablet can sit beside your Desktop or remain in its pouch on a shelf and still sync and be ready with all the data you need for when you next hit the road. No need to plug anything in.
So I think something in the air could be this new direction towards complete wirelessness in Apple products. We may see the sub notebook or tablet be the first to have very limited or no non-wireless connectivity. You may need to have an AirPort to sync and transfer data from your desktop.
The idea of a new "DuoDock" with an iMac form factor does appeal to me, but I think what we will see is that the new sub or tablet can sit beside your Desktop or remain in its pouch on a shelf and still sync and be ready with all the data you need for when you next hit the road. No need to plug anything in.
MightyQuinn
Feb 6, 04:38 AM
Rx-8
mattcube64
Nov 24, 02:08 AM
Picked up a red Wii today at Walmart. I sold my launch system a long time ago, and have been noticing a lot of good deals on some great titles I've missed over the years. I'm all caught up on purchasing most the PC & 360 games I want, so this would give me a lot of choices for Christmas gifts. Kinda backwards... but whatever. :p
It was the last one at Walmart, so I went ahead and bought it. But I'm keeping it sealed until Friday, to see if I can snag one with a $50 gift card online. If I can, this one will be going back to the store.
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4106/5203821726_514fa55e52_b.jpg
It was the last one at Walmart, so I went ahead and bought it. But I'm keeping it sealed until Friday, to see if I can snag one with a $50 gift card online. If I can, this one will be going back to the store.
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4106/5203821726_514fa55e52_b.jpg
LagunaSol
Apr 2, 09:56 PM
I'll "believe" when they fix the currently unresolved and widespread quality control issues...light bleed on virtually every unit
Apparently "virtually every" doesn't mean what you think it means.
Apparently "virtually every" doesn't mean what you think it means.
freebooter
Sep 1, 12:17 PM
Getting rid of the chin would require an external power supply like the ACDs unless you want a power supply sized blank space on the screen :pI don't have any problem with a power supply lurking out of sight on the floor. Why have one heating up the inside of the computer?
budugu
Sep 6, 11:28 PM
Is the 160GB BTO HD perpendicular?
yup!
yup!
maverick808
Oct 23, 10:00 PM
Does anyone really think Apple would do a major hardware update without a press conference of any kind?
Depends what you mean by major hardware update.
The iMac was updated without a press conference of any kind. That update included C2D, brand new larger screen model, FW800, much better video cards (at least as an option) and better speakers. I'd call the release of an entirely new model (the 24"), and processor and other updates across the line, a major hardware update. And that happened with no conference of any kind.
The MacBook (non pro) was released without any event or conference. That update included a completely new enclosure, new processor architecture (and obviously new CPU), increased screen resolution, brightness... well, it was a whole new machine. And again... no press conference.
I'd call that a major hardware update. I guess you must have a different definition of major hardware update... although I can't think what could be more major than the silent MacBook release, which was a completely new machine.
Depends what you mean by major hardware update.
The iMac was updated without a press conference of any kind. That update included C2D, brand new larger screen model, FW800, much better video cards (at least as an option) and better speakers. I'd call the release of an entirely new model (the 24"), and processor and other updates across the line, a major hardware update. And that happened with no conference of any kind.
The MacBook (non pro) was released without any event or conference. That update included a completely new enclosure, new processor architecture (and obviously new CPU), increased screen resolution, brightness... well, it was a whole new machine. And again... no press conference.
I'd call that a major hardware update. I guess you must have a different definition of major hardware update... although I can't think what could be more major than the silent MacBook release, which was a completely new machine.
mac-er
Jul 20, 08:19 AM
"We're not sitting around doing nothing," Apple said about the prospect that mobile phones may soon emerge as very capable digital music players and challenge the iPod.
This was a pretty interesting quote AppleInsider had from the presentation.
This was a pretty interesting quote AppleInsider had from the presentation.
dernhelm
Jan 2, 04:26 AM
Personally speaking I can't get excited about software. An OS is an OS windows, OSX I don't care as long as it works (OK advantage Apple but if MS did the job I would use it) Ilife come on, surely something not as dull as free software no one uses.
Please let it be new stuff you can hold.
Expect both. Steve will spend some time on OS/X, because he promised us all last time he would. But he'll also spend some time on iTV, and there will definitely be some other device. There always is... :)
Please let it be new stuff you can hold.
Expect both. Steve will spend some time on OS/X, because he promised us all last time he would. But he'll also spend some time on iTV, and there will definitely be some other device. There always is... :)
w00master
Dec 30, 10:11 AM
I think a lot of you are expecting way too much on the "iTV" and will be very disappointed when it gets released.
1. DVR Functionality?
Nope, I don't see it. Don't see it happening EVER. This places iTV in direct competition with Cable and Satellite providers, which (imho) is a losing battle. A good example is Tivo. While, Tivo is still lauded in the industry and consumers as having the "best DVR interface/UI," it's still not selling well to consumers. Why? Cable and Satellite providers are providing DVRs and a MUCH lower cost, and even though their UI/interface sucks terribly, because of the LOW COST, the Cable/Satellite boxes are outselling Tivos.
On Demand. This category amongst cable companies are expanding very rapidly and offering free content left and right. Good example is HBO, nearly *ALL* of their shows are On Demand now which is instant access to all of their shows. Generally speaking (for people who use HBO On Demand), this has been extremely popular, maybe this is why HBO is still not being sold on iTunes? Why download when you have access to nearly all of the HBO content for free and instantaneous?
2. Remote Desktop viewer?
Nope, don't see this at all either. If this were a Mac world only, MAYBE I could see this happening, but the harsh reality is that we live in a primarily Windows world. I really don't see Apple moving into utilizing Remote Desktop on Windows machines THROUGH iTV.
You have to remember that unlike iMac, Mac Pro, Macbooks, etc, the iTV will have to satisfy Windows users as well.
What do I see the iTV for? Streaming media, a glorified IP TV box, an easier way to bring the iPod to the living room. I really don't see it doing anything else. I'm hoping that I'm wrong.
w00master
1. DVR Functionality?
Nope, I don't see it. Don't see it happening EVER. This places iTV in direct competition with Cable and Satellite providers, which (imho) is a losing battle. A good example is Tivo. While, Tivo is still lauded in the industry and consumers as having the "best DVR interface/UI," it's still not selling well to consumers. Why? Cable and Satellite providers are providing DVRs and a MUCH lower cost, and even though their UI/interface sucks terribly, because of the LOW COST, the Cable/Satellite boxes are outselling Tivos.
On Demand. This category amongst cable companies are expanding very rapidly and offering free content left and right. Good example is HBO, nearly *ALL* of their shows are On Demand now which is instant access to all of their shows. Generally speaking (for people who use HBO On Demand), this has been extremely popular, maybe this is why HBO is still not being sold on iTunes? Why download when you have access to nearly all of the HBO content for free and instantaneous?
2. Remote Desktop viewer?
Nope, don't see this at all either. If this were a Mac world only, MAYBE I could see this happening, but the harsh reality is that we live in a primarily Windows world. I really don't see Apple moving into utilizing Remote Desktop on Windows machines THROUGH iTV.
You have to remember that unlike iMac, Mac Pro, Macbooks, etc, the iTV will have to satisfy Windows users as well.
What do I see the iTV for? Streaming media, a glorified IP TV box, an easier way to bring the iPod to the living room. I really don't see it doing anything else. I'm hoping that I'm wrong.
w00master
Lollypop
Aug 16, 07:25 AM
Wonder if the wireless ipod wont be the iphone, and the release of itunes 7 will also come along with the release of either?
Going wireless is inevitable, even entry level PDA's not have wifi (802.11b and g) and reviewers are critisising the mac pro for the lack of bluetooth as a default. The world is going wireless, its just a matter of time.
Going wireless is inevitable, even entry level PDA's not have wifi (802.11b and g) and reviewers are critisising the mac pro for the lack of bluetooth as a default. The world is going wireless, its just a matter of time.
chuckles:)
Aug 24, 06:52 PM
Maybe dual optical drives like the Mac pro. This is getting standard on Macs obviously.
:p
Obviously???
the Mac Pro is one thing, but you wont see dual optical drives in an iMac much less a Mini, there's no point 4 the standard consumer market.
:p
Obviously???
the Mac Pro is one thing, but you wont see dual optical drives in an iMac much less a Mini, there's no point 4 the standard consumer market.
Rodimus Prime
Apr 23, 01:09 AM
for all your defending of this feature ... can you give me even one positive reason this is good for the average person that out-weighs the negative ones ... just one
That is a good question.
I have a huge issue with how it is done and the fact that you can not opt out of it. On top of that Apple has piss poor protection of the file and Apple history at security is not exactly the best.
There should be a way to opt out. But collecting them with out my choice is an issue.
I trust Google a hell of a lot more with the info and being more up front about it then Apple and I do not trust Google that much.
If LTD wants an example other wise you can see companies start using these feature on the phones to track employees at all time and what they do. Or in court cases them being pulled it to use against one spouse in a mess divorce.
Spying on ones spouse is another example.
That is a good question.
I have a huge issue with how it is done and the fact that you can not opt out of it. On top of that Apple has piss poor protection of the file and Apple history at security is not exactly the best.
There should be a way to opt out. But collecting them with out my choice is an issue.
I trust Google a hell of a lot more with the info and being more up front about it then Apple and I do not trust Google that much.
If LTD wants an example other wise you can see companies start using these feature on the phones to track employees at all time and what they do. Or in court cases them being pulled it to use against one spouse in a mess divorce.
Spying on ones spouse is another example.
BlizzardBomb
Sep 1, 01:01 PM
No way would I pay an extra $500 for an 8% faster machine and a slighly larger display, when for that money I can go with the 20" and buy a second widescreen 20" display and have a HUGE viewable area.
The 23" is going to have to be a LOT closer to the 20" in order for it to sell. I'm thinking $1899 or $1999, or else it will have to be decked out with extra RAM, HD space, or CPU speed.
There are of course disadvantages to dual displays...
The 23" is going to have to be a LOT closer to the 20" in order for it to sell. I'm thinking $1899 or $1999, or else it will have to be decked out with extra RAM, HD space, or CPU speed.
There are of course disadvantages to dual displays...