Raid
Apr 29, 09:35 AM
Labelling birthers as racist, paranoid, or nutters is just pandering to the distraction of all this. The persistence of this "issue" could be more of a logical desire to belittle or erode the political power of the current president; which is akin to schoolyard gossiping, sure, but it's still strangely effective.
Now back to the birthing show!
Now back to the birthing show!
sconnor99
Apr 11, 09:05 AM
Anticipating an exodus, Avid are now offering FCP users a huge discount on Media Composer Software
magbarn
Apr 9, 09:23 AM
Intel did indeed force Apple to use their IGP by not licensing other vendors to provide IGPs. The reason the MBP 13" and MBA 13" use IGPs and not dedicated GPU is one of space. Apple can't magically conjure up space on the logic board.
I push the GPU more often than I push the CPU on my MBA. I doubt I'm in the minority, though I'm probably part of the minority that actual knows this little fact. ;)
No matter how much you try to spin this, Intel got greedy on this one and couldn't back their greed with competence. They have sucked at GPUs since they have been in the GPU game (Intel i740 anyone ?).
I don't think 2IS is getting that IF Intel allowed Nvidia to continue making sandy bridge chipsets, Nvidia could've easily integrated a 320m successor into the south bridge. This would give you the best of both worlds, the downclocked Low-voltage Intel HD graphics when on battery or basic surfing, or the 320m successor in the south bridge when playing games or aperture photo editing. All this WITHOUT raising the motherboard chip count that putting a separate discrete (on it's own, not integrated into the chipset like 320m) would entail.
I push the GPU more often than I push the CPU on my MBA. I doubt I'm in the minority, though I'm probably part of the minority that actual knows this little fact. ;)
No matter how much you try to spin this, Intel got greedy on this one and couldn't back their greed with competence. They have sucked at GPUs since they have been in the GPU game (Intel i740 anyone ?).
I don't think 2IS is getting that IF Intel allowed Nvidia to continue making sandy bridge chipsets, Nvidia could've easily integrated a 320m successor into the south bridge. This would give you the best of both worlds, the downclocked Low-voltage Intel HD graphics when on battery or basic surfing, or the 320m successor in the south bridge when playing games or aperture photo editing. All this WITHOUT raising the motherboard chip count that putting a separate discrete (on it's own, not integrated into the chipset like 320m) would entail.
W. Ademczyk
Aug 27, 09:41 PM
IMO, I believe the new enclosure will basically add easier access to swappable HDD's like the MB. It doesn't seem appropriate for a lower end model computer to have a feature the professional level model should have. That's why you pay the big $. I think the enclosure will remain the same, but we'll see an update that will allow users to change out their hard drives if they choose.
Exactly, allowing the user to swap out components is definately a direction that Apple is taking, which is something that helps them stay competitive in the pc world. The Macbook, as we all know, utilizes a design that makes it easy to swap out ram and HDDs; and the Mac Pro is configured with snazzy slide-out trays so that virtually every piece of hardware can be swapped out easily. This is a feature that the new MBP case design had better incorporate.
In regard to the Ipod incentive, if Intel shipped Merom to manufacturers at the end of July, will announce it's release to the public on the 28th, and Apple's own shipment of Merom toting computers comes in on the 5th, I have a hard time understanding why they would wait 2-3 weeks to put these computers in the hands of the public when Dell, HP, and Lenovo will be updating their websites the second that the announcement is made. As far as I can tell, there were two reasons Apple started giving away free Nanos to college kids. First, they needed to clean out the inventory for the next Ipod line; and second, the back to school rush is the best time to increase the market share since college students probably make up the highest percentage of win to mac switchers. Since Merom reportedly costs Apple the same amount as Yonah, and MBP sales have been a little lackluster, it would make next to no sense for Apple to drop the Ipod rebate. We have to remember that the only reason Macintels were released with Yonah in the first place is that Apple wasn't able to pressure Intel into giving them Merom early(thus explaining the drop from 64bit processing to 32bit and then back up again 7 months later). If Apple wouldn't have released the Intel line when it did, they would have been stuck with a stale product line and, missing out on the back to school rush, wouldn't be enjoying their doubled market share.
I think it's fair to conclude that the 16th was chosen as the date for the Nano rebate not because the Merom will appear after that time, but because most back to school shopping will be done by then. It is in Apple's best interest to try to catch the tail end of the college shopping season with the MBP.
Exactly, allowing the user to swap out components is definately a direction that Apple is taking, which is something that helps them stay competitive in the pc world. The Macbook, as we all know, utilizes a design that makes it easy to swap out ram and HDDs; and the Mac Pro is configured with snazzy slide-out trays so that virtually every piece of hardware can be swapped out easily. This is a feature that the new MBP case design had better incorporate.
In regard to the Ipod incentive, if Intel shipped Merom to manufacturers at the end of July, will announce it's release to the public on the 28th, and Apple's own shipment of Merom toting computers comes in on the 5th, I have a hard time understanding why they would wait 2-3 weeks to put these computers in the hands of the public when Dell, HP, and Lenovo will be updating their websites the second that the announcement is made. As far as I can tell, there were two reasons Apple started giving away free Nanos to college kids. First, they needed to clean out the inventory for the next Ipod line; and second, the back to school rush is the best time to increase the market share since college students probably make up the highest percentage of win to mac switchers. Since Merom reportedly costs Apple the same amount as Yonah, and MBP sales have been a little lackluster, it would make next to no sense for Apple to drop the Ipod rebate. We have to remember that the only reason Macintels were released with Yonah in the first place is that Apple wasn't able to pressure Intel into giving them Merom early(thus explaining the drop from 64bit processing to 32bit and then back up again 7 months later). If Apple wouldn't have released the Intel line when it did, they would have been stuck with a stale product line and, missing out on the back to school rush, wouldn't be enjoying their doubled market share.
I think it's fair to conclude that the 16th was chosen as the date for the Nano rebate not because the Merom will appear after that time, but because most back to school shopping will be done by then. It is in Apple's best interest to try to catch the tail end of the college shopping season with the MBP.
bluedevil14
Nov 28, 10:22 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:
Slumpey
Apr 8, 06:53 AM
To avoid any hastle buy the ipad 2 from target. Was able to buy two on different days using their inventory tracker found on the web.. They don't hastle you with service plans, unnecessary accessories, etc which best buy does.
Sent from my HTC Incredible using Tapatalk
Sent from my HTC Incredible using Tapatalk
katyoshi
Apr 7, 01:18 AM
This is why I waited for them to update the C2D first before purchasing. I will be buying the top 13". :rolleyes:
NJRonbo
Jun 23, 12:36 PM
My name is on a list at one of the busier Central
Jersey stores (Monmouth Mall) but I am being told
that they aren't getting any phones on launch day.
So, if THAT store isn't getting any I don't hold much
hope for a lot of these others.
Jersey stores (Monmouth Mall) but I am being told
that they aren't getting any phones on launch day.
So, if THAT store isn't getting any I don't hold much
hope for a lot of these others.
ergle2
Sep 13, 07:19 PM
Obviously, since Intel is no longer creating new processors with HT.
By the way, previous poster, HT does not double the number of cores. Just the number of virtual cores. A Pentium 4 system with HT will run slower than a dual Pentium 4 system (with HT disabled) at the same clock speed.
Actually, many tasks were faster.
HyperThreading was thrown in to mask other deficiencies in the NetBurst arch by exploiting resources that were otherwise wasted.
There were a few cases where HT ran slower when HT first debuted, but with OS scheduler tweaks and BIOS updates (microcode changes, likely), HT was a net win in most cases.
Core 2 doesn't have the same design issues - mostly down to that excessively long pipeline - that Prescott had, and hence HT makes no sense.
The problem, however, lay with Netburst as a whole, rather than HT -- which offered a minor improvement in performance - a band-aid if you will.
By the way, previous poster, HT does not double the number of cores. Just the number of virtual cores. A Pentium 4 system with HT will run slower than a dual Pentium 4 system (with HT disabled) at the same clock speed.
Actually, many tasks were faster.
HyperThreading was thrown in to mask other deficiencies in the NetBurst arch by exploiting resources that were otherwise wasted.
There were a few cases where HT ran slower when HT first debuted, but with OS scheduler tweaks and BIOS updates (microcode changes, likely), HT was a net win in most cases.
Core 2 doesn't have the same design issues - mostly down to that excessively long pipeline - that Prescott had, and hence HT makes no sense.
The problem, however, lay with Netburst as a whole, rather than HT -- which offered a minor improvement in performance - a band-aid if you will.
KnightWRX
Apr 20, 11:35 AM
I pointed out the Grid layout many times in the other thread and was told that wasn't part of the lawsuit. If it is than Apple isn't just stretching... they are being idiotic.
According to the analysis, it is in the suit, as part of the trade dress claims.
According to the analysis, it is in the suit, as part of the trade dress claims.
Erasmus
Jul 21, 11:55 PM
So I read in this thread that Kentsfield and Clovertown ARE compatible with Conroe and Woodcrest sockets (respectively) (Cloverton or Clovertown?)
Hope for upgrading an iMac to Quad Core is kindled! At least if Apple releases Conroe iMacs.
BTW, In my opinion, one thing a person should never, ever say is some computer has too much power, and that it will never be needed. So when 128 core CPUs come out in ~10 years time, will we still be considering dual core CPUs as fast enough for our use?
I seem to remember that when the original DOS operating system was created, its RAM was limited. I can't remember exactly to how much, but it was decided that people would never use more than a few kilobytes of memory. Now we are arguing that Mac should provide no less than a gigabyte! Now we are moving to 64 bit processing, with its capability to address a few exobytes, or millions of Terabytes of storage, it seems impossible that we will ever need 128bit computing. But, no doubt, one day we will.
When we will be able to download our entire lives, and even conciousness into a computer, as is said to happen in about 40 years (very much looking forward to), I dare say it will take a lot of memory to do, and even more processing power to manage effectively, especially if we wanted to "live" inside computers, as we will no doubt want to do someday.
So as a conclusion to my most recent rant, Please, never tell me a computer is too powerfu, has too many cores, or has too much storage capacity. If it is there to be used, it will be used. It always is.
Hope for upgrading an iMac to Quad Core is kindled! At least if Apple releases Conroe iMacs.
BTW, In my opinion, one thing a person should never, ever say is some computer has too much power, and that it will never be needed. So when 128 core CPUs come out in ~10 years time, will we still be considering dual core CPUs as fast enough for our use?
I seem to remember that when the original DOS operating system was created, its RAM was limited. I can't remember exactly to how much, but it was decided that people would never use more than a few kilobytes of memory. Now we are arguing that Mac should provide no less than a gigabyte! Now we are moving to 64 bit processing, with its capability to address a few exobytes, or millions of Terabytes of storage, it seems impossible that we will ever need 128bit computing. But, no doubt, one day we will.
When we will be able to download our entire lives, and even conciousness into a computer, as is said to happen in about 40 years (very much looking forward to), I dare say it will take a lot of memory to do, and even more processing power to manage effectively, especially if we wanted to "live" inside computers, as we will no doubt want to do someday.
So as a conclusion to my most recent rant, Please, never tell me a computer is too powerfu, has too many cores, or has too much storage capacity. If it is there to be used, it will be used. It always is.
crawdad62
Aug 25, 03:21 PM
I was a "Helper" in the discussions and I'm now a "Level 4." I've been around the discussions for quite a while. I can't say anything about the support people are getting on the phone by personal experience but I've seen a lot of rumblings on the discussions.
As was stated it's hard to gauge exactly how people are treated because most are frustrated even before they call. Same thing happens in the discussions.
My only dealings with Apple Support was a few years ago. On Christmas day the modem on my Pismo went out. I just for a lark called to see if anyone was in and not only was someone there I was taken care of quite nicely. The next day I had a box to send it off and three days later I had it back. Not bad for a notebook that was about two weeks short of the warranty expiring.
I think that Apples growth of late might be the cause of some problems. They've got a bunch of new user (switchers) that might need a bit more "hand holding" (and that's not meant to be derogatory, it's just people that aren't exactly used to Mac in general).
I know one thing for sure. Apple's decision to let their Discussions staff go wasn't a good thing.
As was stated it's hard to gauge exactly how people are treated because most are frustrated even before they call. Same thing happens in the discussions.
My only dealings with Apple Support was a few years ago. On Christmas day the modem on my Pismo went out. I just for a lark called to see if anyone was in and not only was someone there I was taken care of quite nicely. The next day I had a box to send it off and three days later I had it back. Not bad for a notebook that was about two weeks short of the warranty expiring.
I think that Apples growth of late might be the cause of some problems. They've got a bunch of new user (switchers) that might need a bit more "hand holding" (and that's not meant to be derogatory, it's just people that aren't exactly used to Mac in general).
I know one thing for sure. Apple's decision to let their Discussions staff go wasn't a good thing.
akac
Mar 26, 09:40 PM
Details found here :
http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Apple-removes-Samba-from-Mac-OS-X-10-7-Server-1215179.html
Gist of it :
- less features than Samba
- no more Active Directory Services
- Just file sharing now.
Samba developers have also noted that the true motive behind this move might not be the GPLv3 per say, but a more global move away from the GPL. Is Apple moving to close the source on more and more of OS X ?
Anyway, Samba v4 could have given them all the "features" they implemented and much more. Their own in-house version won't necessarily be better just because it's written by Apple. The Samba team does a great job with what Microsoft puts out as documentation (if you can even call it that).
Note that from the article, this change only impacts OS X Server. The client was already an in-house solution.
Although from my understanding from people using this today, the Apple implementation is dramatically faster than the Samba implementation. Just like WebKit started from KHTML and had fewer features than Mozilla, its ended up being the best browser engine out there. Leaner. Meaner. Faster. But it took time. Apple's SMB/CIFS implementation is going the same route. Now I've read elsewhere that it DOES support Active Directory. And elsewhere that it doesn't. The Preview version of Lion was 2 months old by the time devs got it, so its also possible that those reports are all just wrong in as far as what works and what is supposed to work (i.e. it may support AD, but bugs cause it not to work well or at all on some installs).
You will be foolish to wait around unless you want to get buried in the on-slaught of new and improved apps to take advantage of Lion from day one.
Exactly. I know of at least one major app right now that is going to go Lion only...
Windows manages to run legacy apps still. Even if you do have to resort to using the virtual machine they've called 'XP Mode.'
Fortunately, my one and only PPC program does indeed have an intel version that I wasn't aware of, so I'm fine.
You just gave the perfect answer. Using a VM. Run SL in a VM for Rosetta apps :)
It's needed for me.
Look, Rosetta isn't a part of OS X by default. If it is installed, then it is needed by the user, and thus isn't "crap." If the user doesn't need it, it won't be installed. For most users, it will be "cut out." I don't see why having the option there for people who need it stifles progress.
Actually its not a small piece. Its a big piece. EVERY OS X Library has to be provided in PowerPC code as well as x86. So Rosetta itself, by itself is tiny. But all the extra libraries that make up OS X is huge. And that's why its cut out.
In SL, it shipped with all the libraries, but not the Rosetta piece. So it was a simple install of just the Rosetta piece.
http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Apple-removes-Samba-from-Mac-OS-X-10-7-Server-1215179.html
Gist of it :
- less features than Samba
- no more Active Directory Services
- Just file sharing now.
Samba developers have also noted that the true motive behind this move might not be the GPLv3 per say, but a more global move away from the GPL. Is Apple moving to close the source on more and more of OS X ?
Anyway, Samba v4 could have given them all the "features" they implemented and much more. Their own in-house version won't necessarily be better just because it's written by Apple. The Samba team does a great job with what Microsoft puts out as documentation (if you can even call it that).
Note that from the article, this change only impacts OS X Server. The client was already an in-house solution.
Although from my understanding from people using this today, the Apple implementation is dramatically faster than the Samba implementation. Just like WebKit started from KHTML and had fewer features than Mozilla, its ended up being the best browser engine out there. Leaner. Meaner. Faster. But it took time. Apple's SMB/CIFS implementation is going the same route. Now I've read elsewhere that it DOES support Active Directory. And elsewhere that it doesn't. The Preview version of Lion was 2 months old by the time devs got it, so its also possible that those reports are all just wrong in as far as what works and what is supposed to work (i.e. it may support AD, but bugs cause it not to work well or at all on some installs).
You will be foolish to wait around unless you want to get buried in the on-slaught of new and improved apps to take advantage of Lion from day one.
Exactly. I know of at least one major app right now that is going to go Lion only...
Windows manages to run legacy apps still. Even if you do have to resort to using the virtual machine they've called 'XP Mode.'
Fortunately, my one and only PPC program does indeed have an intel version that I wasn't aware of, so I'm fine.
You just gave the perfect answer. Using a VM. Run SL in a VM for Rosetta apps :)
It's needed for me.
Look, Rosetta isn't a part of OS X by default. If it is installed, then it is needed by the user, and thus isn't "crap." If the user doesn't need it, it won't be installed. For most users, it will be "cut out." I don't see why having the option there for people who need it stifles progress.
Actually its not a small piece. Its a big piece. EVERY OS X Library has to be provided in PowerPC code as well as x86. So Rosetta itself, by itself is tiny. But all the extra libraries that make up OS X is huge. And that's why its cut out.
In SL, it shipped with all the libraries, but not the Rosetta piece. So it was a simple install of just the Rosetta piece.
technicolor
Sep 19, 10:15 PM
Why do you care?
Why shouldnt I?
Why shouldnt I?
aswitcher
Aug 27, 04:40 AM
This is great news. Looking forward to a revamp of half the Apple line over the next month or so.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 22, 07:31 PM
Sticking your neck out there, I see. :)
I've always been a risk-taker. ;)
Sounds dangerously like, "the ends justify the means."
From a western perspective, there is legitimate concern for libyan civilians engaged in a popular uprising on the one hand, and both the threat to oil supplies and Gaddafi's enmity towards the international community on the other. Nobody wants to see a long, destructive civil war. Libya's own citizens rose in revolt, in sufficient numbers to wrest huge portions of the country from Gaddafi's control. Gaddafi has himself stated that he will hunt down and kill any person who stands against his regime.
Having grave reservations about intervention is all fine and well, but one has to be realistic - under what circumstances is non-intervention a good option here? Indeed, you could say "the ends justify the means" about that too - the oil keeps flowing, no foreign soldiers are killed and no money spent on military intervention. It also allows you the luxury of occupying the moral high ground, condemning human rights violations without taking sides or lifting a finger to aid anyone. It is obvious the UN has taken sides here, no doubt about it. Do you disagree with that decision?
No he hasn't, the stage management has been quite subtle, actually, for once.
I don't think Obama was "dragged" into this at all, the US has gotten willingly involved - but to what extent do you think it was stage-managed?
I've always been a risk-taker. ;)
Sounds dangerously like, "the ends justify the means."
From a western perspective, there is legitimate concern for libyan civilians engaged in a popular uprising on the one hand, and both the threat to oil supplies and Gaddafi's enmity towards the international community on the other. Nobody wants to see a long, destructive civil war. Libya's own citizens rose in revolt, in sufficient numbers to wrest huge portions of the country from Gaddafi's control. Gaddafi has himself stated that he will hunt down and kill any person who stands against his regime.
Having grave reservations about intervention is all fine and well, but one has to be realistic - under what circumstances is non-intervention a good option here? Indeed, you could say "the ends justify the means" about that too - the oil keeps flowing, no foreign soldiers are killed and no money spent on military intervention. It also allows you the luxury of occupying the moral high ground, condemning human rights violations without taking sides or lifting a finger to aid anyone. It is obvious the UN has taken sides here, no doubt about it. Do you disagree with that decision?
No he hasn't, the stage management has been quite subtle, actually, for once.
I don't think Obama was "dragged" into this at all, the US has gotten willingly involved - but to what extent do you think it was stage-managed?
PeterQVenkman
Apr 27, 11:29 AM
I don't feel like reading through all the butt hurt comments and strangely political attacks in this thread so I'll just ask:
How do we know that Apple anonymizes data they do send?
How do we know that Apple anonymizes data they do send?
walterwhite
Apr 25, 01:54 PM
Lawyers never seem to see or feel the Karma stick for nonsensical and litigious lawsuits that just end up effecting the rest of us... that do our best to be good human beings.
vingochr
Apr 6, 02:58 PM
I've got a thread on most likely processors for the SB MBAs. A lot more powerful is more likely than the post suggests for the 13".
Here it is:
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1103979
Here it is:
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1103979
fivepoint
Apr 27, 03:04 PM
Oh boy. Fivepoint, you wouldn't have happened to visit any such site, now would you?
As stated earlier, which you conveniently ignored, I found the article on the Drudge Report. Am I not allowed to read the Drudge Report? Should I keep it exclusively to HuffPo in the future? I read them both, but you tell me how I should do it.
So typical, focus on the messenger and not on the message. Your guys posts are so littered with red herrings and strawmen its almost beyond imagination.
As stated earlier, which you conveniently ignored, I found the article on the Drudge Report. Am I not allowed to read the Drudge Report? Should I keep it exclusively to HuffPo in the future? I read them both, but you tell me how I should do it.
So typical, focus on the messenger and not on the message. Your guys posts are so littered with red herrings and strawmen its almost beyond imagination.
toddybody
Apr 6, 11:15 AM
BTW: Im so glad to have some MAC rumors to talk about...the 24/7 iOS fest gets tiresome :rolleyes:
KnightWRX
Apr 20, 12:06 PM
Not as a separate thing. It's the grid IN COMBINATION with the other things that constitutes the trade dress.
Then it sure doesn't apply to all models then if the trade dress claim is an AND'd combination. Is the trade dress claim only applicable to certain models in the ones listed in the complaint ?
Then it sure doesn't apply to all models then if the trade dress claim is an AND'd combination. Is the trade dress claim only applicable to certain models in the ones listed in the complaint ?
hob
Apr 6, 04:46 AM
If the new Final Cut is 64-bit it will presumably rely on AV-kit.
folks said the same thing about FCS3 and Snow Leopard and yet as I recall that is exactly what they did.
I always felt the reason FCS3 came out just before SL was precisely because it wasn't 64-bit and was more of a maintenance release, whereas SL was touting Grand Central Dispatch etc etc...
folks said the same thing about FCS3 and Snow Leopard and yet as I recall that is exactly what they did.
I always felt the reason FCS3 came out just before SL was precisely because it wasn't 64-bit and was more of a maintenance release, whereas SL was touting Grand Central Dispatch etc etc...
ValSalva
Apr 6, 11:10 AM
I still don't think this means new MacBook Airs in June. Can anyone really see Apple releasing new hardware before Lion is released?
No comments:
Post a Comment