freebooter
Nov 28, 09:39 PM
Just greed, plain and simple.
drsmithy
Sep 13, 08:41 PM
Mac OS X distributes threads and processes across cores/CPUs to optimize performance already. (Subject to some limitations, as noted already.)
[...]
(Note: I keep specifying 'Mac' here. There is a reason. Windows isn't as good at multithreading/processing yet...)
Uh, no. Windows NT is better at multithreading - and particularly multiprocessor scheduling - largely because it's been doing it for a lot longer and on a lot more powerful hardware. NT was running on quad-processor machines a decade ago.
Prior to 10.4, OS X had roughly the same level of SMP support Windows NT had back around the 1993 - 95 timeframe, with Windows NT 3.x.
The improvements in 10.4 start to put it in the ballpark of NT 4.0, ca. 1996.
10.5 will probably put it on par with Windows 2000, maybe XP.
[...]
(Note: I keep specifying 'Mac' here. There is a reason. Windows isn't as good at multithreading/processing yet...)
Uh, no. Windows NT is better at multithreading - and particularly multiprocessor scheduling - largely because it's been doing it for a lot longer and on a lot more powerful hardware. NT was running on quad-processor machines a decade ago.
Prior to 10.4, OS X had roughly the same level of SMP support Windows NT had back around the 1993 - 95 timeframe, with Windows NT 3.x.
The improvements in 10.4 start to put it in the ballpark of NT 4.0, ca. 1996.
10.5 will probably put it on par with Windows 2000, maybe XP.
xPismo
Jul 14, 07:47 PM
WWDC ... it's getting closer ... can't wait to see what's announced. Oh yeah ... we'll see the preview of Leopard too.
Bring it on Steve :D
Yeah. I don't believe a word. No powercord at the top, no tweaked G5 case, no way. Those bits throw the rest into dispute. I think we will all be shocked at what The Steve has for us at wwdc.
OTOH, its been great to finally read the benchmark figures for the new apple processors. It hit me that the mac community will finally have overclocking hardware readily available! Wow!
But this rumor just dosn't look or smell right.
Bring it on Steve :D
Yeah. I don't believe a word. No powercord at the top, no tweaked G5 case, no way. Those bits throw the rest into dispute. I think we will all be shocked at what The Steve has for us at wwdc.
OTOH, its been great to finally read the benchmark figures for the new apple processors. It hit me that the mac community will finally have overclocking hardware readily available! Wow!
But this rumor just dosn't look or smell right.
rfahey
Apr 8, 03:11 AM
Wow. I bought mine at Best Buy on opening day and they sold out of them. Why in anybody's right mind would best buy not sell what they have?
You only "think" they sold out. If this is what they were practicing all along they probably had like 3 weeks rations.
You only "think" they sold out. If this is what they were practicing all along they probably had like 3 weeks rations.
bcharna
Aug 5, 10:17 PM
EVERYONE is missing something that MUST be updated A.S.A.P.!
AirPort Base Stations!
Express and especially the Extreme. The Extreme is YEARS old!!
:eek: :eek:
AirPort Base Stations!
Express and especially the Extreme. The Extreme is YEARS old!!
:eek: :eek:
REDolution
Apr 12, 12:49 PM
This was a very good blog post.
I agree, great read
I agree, great read
dpruitt
Mar 22, 12:48 PM
Looks like another Zune in the making!
Multimedia
Aug 21, 01:25 AM
Mac Pros will need 64bit Leopard to achieve their full multi-core potential. Expect all Core 2 based Macs to hold value well through the next release cycle of OSX Leopard.
Apple is still selling G5's on the website for $3299! Until
Adobe gets out - and optimizes - universal binaries, Quad G5 will sell for more than Quad Xeon Mac Pros! :rolleyes:Quad G5 is only $2799 on the SAVE refurb page. Refurbs are the same as new with a new warranty. But I think that would be a poor choice compared to a Mac Pro. The Mac Pro is not cheaper because you have to add more expensive RAM. But it is faster overall and Rosetta Photoshop performance isn't bad. Quad G5 will also benefit from Leopard don't forget. It's not like Leopard is going to not be written to take advantage of the 64-bit G5 as well.
But I would not recomend a G5 Quad to anyone at this point. I'm pondering a Mac Pro purchase myself. But I'm going to try and hold out for a refurb or even see if I can wait for Clovertown. But I'm likely to be one of the first to snag a Mac Pro refurb when they hit the SAVE page in November-December. By then I may even be thinking about waiting for the January 9th SteveNote. Quad G5 is no slouch. But Mac Pro is faster overall.And I thought you were married to your quad last week ......While I may be married to my Quad G5, we're not exclusive and she likes a threesome with the younger faster models as much as I do too. :p
Apple is still selling G5's on the website for $3299! Until
Adobe gets out - and optimizes - universal binaries, Quad G5 will sell for more than Quad Xeon Mac Pros! :rolleyes:Quad G5 is only $2799 on the SAVE refurb page. Refurbs are the same as new with a new warranty. But I think that would be a poor choice compared to a Mac Pro. The Mac Pro is not cheaper because you have to add more expensive RAM. But it is faster overall and Rosetta Photoshop performance isn't bad. Quad G5 will also benefit from Leopard don't forget. It's not like Leopard is going to not be written to take advantage of the 64-bit G5 as well.
But I would not recomend a G5 Quad to anyone at this point. I'm pondering a Mac Pro purchase myself. But I'm going to try and hold out for a refurb or even see if I can wait for Clovertown. But I'm likely to be one of the first to snag a Mac Pro refurb when they hit the SAVE page in November-December. By then I may even be thinking about waiting for the January 9th SteveNote. Quad G5 is no slouch. But Mac Pro is faster overall.And I thought you were married to your quad last week ......While I may be married to my Quad G5, we're not exclusive and she likes a threesome with the younger faster models as much as I do too. :p
Silentwave
Sep 14, 11:00 PM
One thing's for sure, Intel appears to have learnt a great deal from the Netburst fiasco -- how not to do things, if nothing else. Unfortunately, they still estimate ~50% of processors shipping in 1Q2007 will be netburst-based (mostly Pentium-D).
It is a shame, but sadly those are the real cheap chips right now. The good news is that they'll change those over soon enough with more Allendales, then millville and so on and so on taking on more segments of the market.
I think as they transition to 45nm we'll see more and more Core chips, simply because they'll want as much manufacturing to be on the new process as possible, and they don't need to scale the D's etc. down to it.
It is a shame, but sadly those are the real cheap chips right now. The good news is that they'll change those over soon enough with more Allendales, then millville and so on and so on taking on more segments of the market.
I think as they transition to 45nm we'll see more and more Core chips, simply because they'll want as much manufacturing to be on the new process as possible, and they don't need to scale the D's etc. down to it.
JoeG4
Mar 31, 02:56 PM
lol damn what a bunch of crap.
Google is saying that Honeycomb was designed for tablets, not for mobile phones - and if you've actually used a honeycomb tablet you'd see that yea.. it's more of a computer/tablet thing than a phone thing.
The phone OS isn't that much of an iOS ripoff. Samsung ripped Apple's "grid of rounded off square icons" off but if you look at vanilla Android it doesn't really have that look.
That and home screens with icons in a grid are nothing new.
Google is saying that Honeycomb was designed for tablets, not for mobile phones - and if you've actually used a honeycomb tablet you'd see that yea.. it's more of a computer/tablet thing than a phone thing.
The phone OS isn't that much of an iOS ripoff. Samsung ripped Apple's "grid of rounded off square icons" off but if you look at vanilla Android it doesn't really have that look.
That and home screens with icons in a grid are nothing new.
stephenli
Nov 28, 08:21 PM
If this happens, I will proudly use Bit Torrent and pirate all Universal music that I want. Right now I use itunes because the price scheme is perfect. Universal is making a big mistake.
Yes, ppl pay for their music, how come we should also pay them by purchasing an iPod?!
by the way, I still havent purchase any song in iTunes Store under Universal music label....then WHY SHOULD THEY CHARGE IT ON IPOD?!
Yes, ppl pay for their music, how come we should also pay them by purchasing an iPod?!
by the way, I still havent purchase any song in iTunes Store under Universal music label....then WHY SHOULD THEY CHARGE IT ON IPOD?!
alpacojohn
Aug 25, 05:42 PM
Funny how I just came across this thread, as I'm in the middle of an Apple support nightmare as well (I have one of those MacBooks that just turns itself off for no reason - completely unacceptable). I have been routed through 12 people over 3 calls, with several promises of "expedited resolution"s but no tangible result.
Although it's possible (and likely) that the prevalence of the MacBook defects have been overblown, I do know that Apple's support process puts you through a lot of hoops to get any major issue resolved (e.g., replacing a clearly defective product). Each person I've talked to has been courteous, but in the end I still have no faith in their ability to actually solve my problem in a timely manner.
Frustrated Apple User
Although it's possible (and likely) that the prevalence of the MacBook defects have been overblown, I do know that Apple's support process puts you through a lot of hoops to get any major issue resolved (e.g., replacing a clearly defective product). Each person I've talked to has been courteous, but in the end I still have no faith in their ability to actually solve my problem in a timely manner.
Frustrated Apple User
samcraig
Apr 27, 10:08 AM
revelated, beware! Apple is closing in on you with their black helicopters and vans to take you prisoner for mind control experiments.
OR
If they did this on purpose, maybe they wanted to know why so many people complain about AT&T in certain parts of SF. Or maybe they wanted to know how many users access Internet via all the Starbucks in the world? Maybe they wanted to direct ads at you based upon your location.
All of the above are already being done to you via many other avenues, e.g. your frequent buyer cards, ATMs, CCs, etc.
BUT
If you want to believe there is some BIGGER MYSTERIOUS PURPOSE in mind for them to do this, you go right own. LOOK OUT BEHIND YOU - WAS THAT A BLACK UNMARKED VAN!!!! :D
And maybe purging or limiting this DB won't slow location service based apps/etc either.
It goes both ways.
In fact - if purging this data WAS going to cause a performance issue - do you really think Apple would do it? They aren't exactly the type to sacrifice quality, are they?
OR
If they did this on purpose, maybe they wanted to know why so many people complain about AT&T in certain parts of SF. Or maybe they wanted to know how many users access Internet via all the Starbucks in the world? Maybe they wanted to direct ads at you based upon your location.
All of the above are already being done to you via many other avenues, e.g. your frequent buyer cards, ATMs, CCs, etc.
BUT
If you want to believe there is some BIGGER MYSTERIOUS PURPOSE in mind for them to do this, you go right own. LOOK OUT BEHIND YOU - WAS THAT A BLACK UNMARKED VAN!!!! :D
And maybe purging or limiting this DB won't slow location service based apps/etc either.
It goes both ways.
In fact - if purging this data WAS going to cause a performance issue - do you really think Apple would do it? They aren't exactly the type to sacrifice quality, are they?
daneoni
Aug 27, 07:34 PM
Now. But how much have iMac prices changed since release? I don't think they have. They released the iMac and MBP lines around the same time Yonah was intro'ed, and the iMacs did not see any speed bumps or price changes that I know of. Therefore they should be able to implement similar pricing with Conroe @ 2.4GHz, just with a profit margin closer to the iMac release amounts.
Of course they could always go for the 2.13GHz version, which is less expensive, and still plenty faster than the existing 1.83 :)
20" iMac prices have reduced....at least in the UK
Of course they could always go for the 2.13GHz version, which is less expensive, and still plenty faster than the existing 1.83 :)
20" iMac prices have reduced....at least in the UK
kdarling
Apr 20, 04:34 PM
Knowing about the record label wasn't on the front page of the newspaper, this was the 1970's...there was no internet, it's more than just a little possible that Jobs did not know this. And you're assuming that logo was everywhere, and you're wrong.
Actually, anyone above the age of six knew about Apple Records.
We all lived and breathed vinyl back then :)
Actually, anyone above the age of six knew about Apple Records.
We all lived and breathed vinyl back then :)
mwswami
Jul 21, 01:47 PM
Under $4k whatever state of the offerings are. I am not writing about wanting to pay for expensive servers etc. I am only referring to Mac Pro top of the lines. So I am looking foward to the 8 core starter kit this Winter. :D
Mine is not RAM intensive work. I have 6GB of ram now and it is more than enough. I also have several Terabytes of HDs already. 400GB HDs are down to $100 now so Storage is pretty cheap.
Yes, with the possibility of a Mac Pro with 8 core on the horizon, it makes sense to skip the 4 core altogether. Or, start with lower end of 4 cores (say 2GHz) and then, if necessary and possible, upgrade it to 8 cores. I wonder if waiting for 8 cores is going to be a common sentiment. In that case, it would make sense for Apple to offer an upgrade path to it.
Mine is not RAM intensive work. I have 6GB of ram now and it is more than enough. I also have several Terabytes of HDs already. 400GB HDs are down to $100 now so Storage is pretty cheap.
Yes, with the possibility of a Mac Pro with 8 core on the horizon, it makes sense to skip the 4 core altogether. Or, start with lower end of 4 cores (say 2GHz) and then, if necessary and possible, upgrade it to 8 cores. I wonder if waiting for 8 cores is going to be a common sentiment. In that case, it would make sense for Apple to offer an upgrade path to it.
kiwi-in-uk
Aug 7, 06:51 PM
... as of present the trash can will not allow you to selectively undelete a file?
What?
What?
NoSmokingBandit
Aug 16, 02:18 PM
Shift was good, but i thought it was really easy. Its also very forgiving, you dont need to have a lot of driving skill to finish the top races because drifting is really easy to control, you can enter turns quite a bit faster than you should, and you'll have more money than you know what to do with.
are you rich then? :p
i only hope that GT5 is more realistic then simulated this time..
I drive a Focus, so... no :D
Most people will never be able to afford a ford GT, but most people would be able to save up and buy a WRX and put a little work into it (even if it does take a few years of saving extra money), so i just find it more fun to push a WRX to its limits instead of a GT.
are you rich then? :p
i only hope that GT5 is more realistic then simulated this time..
I drive a Focus, so... no :D
Most people will never be able to afford a ford GT, but most people would be able to save up and buy a WRX and put a little work into it (even if it does take a few years of saving extra money), so i just find it more fun to push a WRX to its limits instead of a GT.
SPUY767
Jul 27, 04:03 PM
It's always a little alarming when a post starts "sorry if I missed it but..."
The 2.7 G5 will be the highest clocked chip in a mac for a while, but probably not the fastest. In a number of benchmarks, Yonah has already beaten dual G5's, the conroes and woodrests will likely widen the gap even more.
I'm sorry. I thought that it was adequately implied that I meant the fastest chip, to date. Anyway, that's what I meant if I've been misunderstood.
The 2.7 G5 will be the highest clocked chip in a mac for a while, but probably not the fastest. In a number of benchmarks, Yonah has already beaten dual G5's, the conroes and woodrests will likely widen the gap even more.
I'm sorry. I thought that it was adequately implied that I meant the fastest chip, to date. Anyway, that's what I meant if I've been misunderstood.
jeanlain
Apr 11, 08:46 AM
No kidding!
280734
Where's Picasso when you need him? :-)
Avid image was from here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYw4vvr7Aq4
OMG, these drop-down menus! It burns....:eek:
280734
Where's Picasso when you need him? :-)
Avid image was from here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYw4vvr7Aq4
OMG, these drop-down menus! It burns....:eek:
janstett
Sep 16, 10:14 AM
Dude, how many times do I have to repeat myself before you myopic '90s-era IT geeks understand me? I was referring to the difference between Windows 9x and Windows NT. I neither knew, nor care, that there were different versions of NT itself. For. Christ's. Sake. I have said this three times now. Don't make me come over there.
Well then, if you are so consistantly misinterpreted, have you ever stopped to think you should CLARIFY yourself, or that you must not be communicating your point clearly? The truth is Microsoft has dealt with two simultaneous families of operating systems from 1987-2003, and the survivor is NT/2K/XP, and it was always the better of the two operating system families that geeks like us would be concerned with, so naturally that's the one most people think of when projecting back in history.
Well then, if you are so consistantly misinterpreted, have you ever stopped to think you should CLARIFY yourself, or that you must not be communicating your point clearly? The truth is Microsoft has dealt with two simultaneous families of operating systems from 1987-2003, and the survivor is NT/2K/XP, and it was always the better of the two operating system families that geeks like us would be concerned with, so naturally that's the one most people think of when projecting back in history.
Riemann Zeta
Mar 25, 10:42 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8G4)
********. If Apple is really done with Lion, then they should only be charging $29 for it (if that), like 10.6. More confusing scrollbars, tiny window controls and a better graphics/OGL support stack...add in the touch-screen readiness and you might have a quick $29 update.
I suppose, following the iOS model, Apple will likely stop charging anything for Mac OS; the OS features will revolve around new hardware features and/or gimmicks.
********. If Apple is really done with Lion, then they should only be charging $29 for it (if that), like 10.6. More confusing scrollbars, tiny window controls and a better graphics/OGL support stack...add in the touch-screen readiness and you might have a quick $29 update.
I suppose, following the iOS model, Apple will likely stop charging anything for Mac OS; the OS features will revolve around new hardware features and/or gimmicks.
mdavis
Mar 26, 08:23 PM
What? this seems hard to believe... Already done on development? :confused:
it's not a particularly large release
it's not a particularly large release
acslater017
Mar 26, 02:07 PM
From the developer builds and such, there doesn't appear to be anything compelling or major to warrant anything more than a minor upgrade.
Yeah, disappearing scroll bars. A full size screen. Woo.
The UI and basic functionalities have stayed the same since Leopard, sprinkled with a bit of iOS features. Snow Leopard was a tune up, to establish the Intel line completely and such.
Yet retained most, if not all of the Leopard UI elements.
Personally, it just looks like a rough merge of iOS into the OS X environment without any refinement.
If we have to fork out $120 or something, forget it.
I guess my Leopard PowerPC Macs still look up to date then :)
New window management system, viewing options
New way to download, install and view apps (app store + launchpad)
New touch controls
New way to save and revise files
Various UI improvements
Dead simple wireless file sharing
Honestly, what were you imagining? Is apple not addressing every basic area of personal computing with Lion? Many of the changes are in mundane areas but are radically different...
Yeah, disappearing scroll bars. A full size screen. Woo.
The UI and basic functionalities have stayed the same since Leopard, sprinkled with a bit of iOS features. Snow Leopard was a tune up, to establish the Intel line completely and such.
Yet retained most, if not all of the Leopard UI elements.
Personally, it just looks like a rough merge of iOS into the OS X environment without any refinement.
If we have to fork out $120 or something, forget it.
I guess my Leopard PowerPC Macs still look up to date then :)
New window management system, viewing options
New way to download, install and view apps (app store + launchpad)
New touch controls
New way to save and revise files
Various UI improvements
Dead simple wireless file sharing
Honestly, what were you imagining? Is apple not addressing every basic area of personal computing with Lion? Many of the changes are in mundane areas but are radically different...
No comments:
Post a Comment