Quartz Extreme
Sep 1, 07:55 AM
With you so far, but I don't think Core 2 Duo is realy all that much of a big deal for Apple in the grand scheme of things. It's a small speed bump, with 64 bit as a bonus extra.
Well, for the Merom, you get about 20% performance for the same clock speed as well as slightly improved power usage. With the Conroe, the change is much more noticable, providing 40% more performance, while using 40% less power than the Pentium D.
The Core 2 Duo models also sport these cheesy Intel-named features. (Translation in parenthesis)
- Intel® Wide Dynamic Execution (Widens the execution core by 33% and adds Macro-fusion to combine x86 instructions)
- Intel® Intelligent Power Capability (better SpeedStep technology)
- Intel® Advanced Smart Cache (refined, faster cache design)
- Intel® Smart Memory Access (lower latency memory access)
- Intel® Advanced Digital Media Boost (do SSE instructions in one cycle)
The Core 2 is basically a refinement of everything in Yonah. For Merom, it's a modest increase, but for the Conroe, there will be a bigger difference.
I don't believe any of this. The intel MacBook Pros just came out,
Announced in January, released in February, speed bumped in May. I'm in the market for a MBP, so I hope they update it soon.
Why screw aroud with a proven design, when there's absolutely no need.
I'm thinking they'll make minor changes, like make the top bezel thinner, as it's a little wider right now for the camera, and change the case slightly if necessary to accomodate a dual-layer burner. And please, give back the FW800 and add another USB port!
As far as features go, It'd be neat to offer 802.11N (probably not because the spec isn't final yet, though I don't think G was final when they made Airport Extreme) and maybe a bumped GPU also.
The same goes for the iMac, it's a great design. They had a chance to rev the designs when they moved to intel and chose not to.
I think what Apple has been doing by keeping most of their models with virtually the same look with the switch to Intel is to create a sense of continuity with the PPC Macs.
They might change the case to be more accessable (I think that was lost somewhere in the G5 era) and to loose some of the blank white space below the screen (It doesn't bother me, but I've heard people say it does a bit).
Just minor refinements because, yes I agree, it is a great design. It kinda reminds me of a futuristic original Macintosh.
Oh, and maybe they'll have it in black.
As for movie download, it's possible but I think it would be a premature move. Further expansion of their TV show range is much more likely as it fits the casual listening/watching pattern of iPod owners.
Well, when Apple does it (I do say when because there is a ton of evidence pointing that way), they will change the iPod to make it more feasable for people to watch full-length movies on it...with a widescreen touch display, and maybe crank up the output resolution so it's decent for watching on TV. Then throw in Bluetooth for remote control and wireless audio streaming.
Well, for the Merom, you get about 20% performance for the same clock speed as well as slightly improved power usage. With the Conroe, the change is much more noticable, providing 40% more performance, while using 40% less power than the Pentium D.
The Core 2 Duo models also sport these cheesy Intel-named features. (Translation in parenthesis)
- Intel® Wide Dynamic Execution (Widens the execution core by 33% and adds Macro-fusion to combine x86 instructions)
- Intel® Intelligent Power Capability (better SpeedStep technology)
- Intel® Advanced Smart Cache (refined, faster cache design)
- Intel® Smart Memory Access (lower latency memory access)
- Intel® Advanced Digital Media Boost (do SSE instructions in one cycle)
The Core 2 is basically a refinement of everything in Yonah. For Merom, it's a modest increase, but for the Conroe, there will be a bigger difference.
I don't believe any of this. The intel MacBook Pros just came out,
Announced in January, released in February, speed bumped in May. I'm in the market for a MBP, so I hope they update it soon.
Why screw aroud with a proven design, when there's absolutely no need.
I'm thinking they'll make minor changes, like make the top bezel thinner, as it's a little wider right now for the camera, and change the case slightly if necessary to accomodate a dual-layer burner. And please, give back the FW800 and add another USB port!
As far as features go, It'd be neat to offer 802.11N (probably not because the spec isn't final yet, though I don't think G was final when they made Airport Extreme) and maybe a bumped GPU also.
The same goes for the iMac, it's a great design. They had a chance to rev the designs when they moved to intel and chose not to.
I think what Apple has been doing by keeping most of their models with virtually the same look with the switch to Intel is to create a sense of continuity with the PPC Macs.
They might change the case to be more accessable (I think that was lost somewhere in the G5 era) and to loose some of the blank white space below the screen (It doesn't bother me, but I've heard people say it does a bit).
Just minor refinements because, yes I agree, it is a great design. It kinda reminds me of a futuristic original Macintosh.
Oh, and maybe they'll have it in black.
As for movie download, it's possible but I think it would be a premature move. Further expansion of their TV show range is much more likely as it fits the casual listening/watching pattern of iPod owners.
Well, when Apple does it (I do say when because there is a ton of evidence pointing that way), they will change the iPod to make it more feasable for people to watch full-length movies on it...with a widescreen touch display, and maybe crank up the output resolution so it's decent for watching on TV. Then throw in Bluetooth for remote control and wireless audio streaming.
Vegasman
Mar 30, 12:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vegasman
Examples of uses (Dvorak in his references to "killer app"):
2005: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/a-k...or-real-estate
2004: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,1599324,00.asp
2003: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,1191830,00.asp
What I understood is that the word "App" by itself is not the reason for the lawsuit, but the term "App Store" is; both words used together. .
Correct. I was simply providing additional evidence that "app" was used before the App Store. Something the poster I was replying to was saying and something a lot of other posters are claiming is not true.
Originally Posted by Vegasman
Examples of uses (Dvorak in his references to "killer app"):
2005: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/a-k...or-real-estate
2004: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,1599324,00.asp
2003: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,1191830,00.asp
What I understood is that the word "App" by itself is not the reason for the lawsuit, but the term "App Store" is; both words used together. .
Correct. I was simply providing additional evidence that "app" was used before the App Store. Something the poster I was replying to was saying and something a lot of other posters are claiming is not true.
cmaier
Nov 13, 04:10 PM
they are using the OS X API in the context it was meant to be used in. as far as i can tell these images aren't loaded into the iPhone application itself and are rather transmitted over-the-air as the application is being used, thus they are being called by the OS while the application is being run and are merely being displayed through the iPhone application, its like saying you can't see any apple trademark icons through a VPN client.
Or like saying that if my app has a UIWebView, I have to prevent the user from navigating to Apple.com lest he be subjected to seeing Apple's trademarked logos and pictures of Apple computers.
Or like saying that if my app has a UIWebView, I have to prevent the user from navigating to Apple.com lest he be subjected to seeing Apple's trademarked logos and pictures of Apple computers.
Multimedia
Sep 9, 01:30 PM
That's because the second pass only uses one core.No. it's still using more than one core. More likely because of the speed limitation of the hard drive writing the mp4 file.
dukebound85
Apr 25, 12:22 AM
You know what I hate more? effing speeders:rolleyes:
Scratch that....effing speeders who don't even have a years worth of driving under their belt and think it's safe to go 20 over
Man I wish the driving age was upped to at least 18
It's people like you who piss me off when I am riding my motorcycle as you guys are so effing unpredictable it is dangerous for everyone around you. Never mind my bike can easily outgun pretty much any car out there trying to go fast...
and you say you want to blow up cars obeying the law...unbelievable
/rant
Scratch that....effing speeders who don't even have a years worth of driving under their belt and think it's safe to go 20 over
Man I wish the driving age was upped to at least 18
It's people like you who piss me off when I am riding my motorcycle as you guys are so effing unpredictable it is dangerous for everyone around you. Never mind my bike can easily outgun pretty much any car out there trying to go fast...
and you say you want to blow up cars obeying the law...unbelievable
/rant
rtkane
Apr 4, 12:17 PM
I'm as pro gun rights as anyone, but this sounds like a problem for the security guard. Unless that guard's life was in danger, there was no reason to shoot anyone, especially in the head. The placement of that shot was no accident.
That being said, I'm sure there are a lot of facts we don't know. Innocent until proven guilty, of course.
Unfortunately justified shooting or not it's always a problem for the shooter. I highly doubt the headshot was intentional. Unless he's an ex-special forces guy, he probably was just shooting wildly and got a lucky shot (well, lucky might not be the right word). When bullets started flying, he was probably terrified without enough composure to aim for the head. And if he came upon armed people, identified himself and they pointed guns at him, he has a very valid reason to shoot them. The mere presence of weapons puts the guard's life in danger.
It's odd that you judge his actions in the first part of your post, but then say that there's not enough facts in the second. :confused:
That being said, I'm sure there are a lot of facts we don't know. Innocent until proven guilty, of course.
Unfortunately justified shooting or not it's always a problem for the shooter. I highly doubt the headshot was intentional. Unless he's an ex-special forces guy, he probably was just shooting wildly and got a lucky shot (well, lucky might not be the right word). When bullets started flying, he was probably terrified without enough composure to aim for the head. And if he came upon armed people, identified himself and they pointed guns at him, he has a very valid reason to shoot them. The mere presence of weapons puts the guard's life in danger.
It's odd that you judge his actions in the first part of your post, but then say that there's not enough facts in the second. :confused:
ten-oak-druid
May 4, 11:10 AM
Too bad the mac mini that works with this iMac doesn't exist. Nor does that tower you're speaking of.
????
Has nothing to do with my comment.
????
Has nothing to do with my comment.
pondosinatra
Mar 24, 08:42 AM
Im with you on the glossy iMacs, there AWFUL to actually sit in front of and use for any lenght of time, talk about eye strain.
MATT option iMac and im there in a flash, but im not holding out hope, the �1600 ive sat waiting for a new desktop is more and more likely going towards a home built i7 sandybridge rig, and windows 7 so that when i sit with my back to the window the screen doesnt just refelect the outside world and i have to squint through it rather than just see what im working on. I dont need a tree or a bus in my spreadsheets or word documents thank you apple.
I Love my Macbook pro, with its MATT screen, i cant justify a MacPro expense, and the Mac Mini just doesnt cut it at the graphics card level, so that leaves the iMac, love the form factor, love the OS, hate the unusable migrane inducing shiney screen.
However,
the iPad i prefer the glossy screen, same with the iPhone, but then the occasions ill be using an iPad require me to have a bright colour screen for PDFs, and the lighting is usually bad enough that the reflective qualities are not a problem.
Well it looks like my iMac will meet the minimum specs for Lion, so I might upgrade, but then that's it for me. I'll probably go to Linux or some alternative operating system. - Maybe I'll crack out my NeXT Dimension Cube :D
MATT option iMac and im there in a flash, but im not holding out hope, the �1600 ive sat waiting for a new desktop is more and more likely going towards a home built i7 sandybridge rig, and windows 7 so that when i sit with my back to the window the screen doesnt just refelect the outside world and i have to squint through it rather than just see what im working on. I dont need a tree or a bus in my spreadsheets or word documents thank you apple.
I Love my Macbook pro, with its MATT screen, i cant justify a MacPro expense, and the Mac Mini just doesnt cut it at the graphics card level, so that leaves the iMac, love the form factor, love the OS, hate the unusable migrane inducing shiney screen.
However,
the iPad i prefer the glossy screen, same with the iPhone, but then the occasions ill be using an iPad require me to have a bright colour screen for PDFs, and the lighting is usually bad enough that the reflective qualities are not a problem.
Well it looks like my iMac will meet the minimum specs for Lion, so I might upgrade, but then that's it for me. I'll probably go to Linux or some alternative operating system. - Maybe I'll crack out my NeXT Dimension Cube :D
SeniorGato1
Apr 19, 08:23 AM
I think Apple should sue any cell phone manufacturer that uses a screen and buttons.
milo
Sep 6, 08:03 AM
Either way, what are you going to do with a HD version of the movie on your computer?
HD is not going to happen, at least not next tuesday.
Worth revisiting.
The raw uncompressed bitrate for 720p = 1280*720*24bpp*30fps/(1024*1024) = 633 Mbps for 1080i it's ~711 Mbps 320x240 it's more like 53 Mbps.
720p compressed in H.264 with 5.1 sound seems to work out to about 1100 MB for your typical 45 minute drama show (i.e. compressed down to ~3 Mbps). This compares to 200 MB for the same show from iTMS in 320x240 H.264 (700 kbps). Not bad when you consider that 720p has 12X as many pixels (1280/320=4, 720/240=3)
Basically your typical movie would be about 2GB.
B
So what would be the size for a decent encoding of 480 (p or i)? Basically about DVD quality, but with a more efficient codec, which is the most likely format for release next week.
HD is not going to happen, at least not next tuesday.
Worth revisiting.
The raw uncompressed bitrate for 720p = 1280*720*24bpp*30fps/(1024*1024) = 633 Mbps for 1080i it's ~711 Mbps 320x240 it's more like 53 Mbps.
720p compressed in H.264 with 5.1 sound seems to work out to about 1100 MB for your typical 45 minute drama show (i.e. compressed down to ~3 Mbps). This compares to 200 MB for the same show from iTMS in 320x240 H.264 (700 kbps). Not bad when you consider that 720p has 12X as many pixels (1280/320=4, 720/240=3)
Basically your typical movie would be about 2GB.
B
So what would be the size for a decent encoding of 480 (p or i)? Basically about DVD quality, but with a more efficient codec, which is the most likely format for release next week.
alent1234
Apr 29, 12:48 PM
x-box wasn't a money loser for that long. on the financial statements i think they had bing/live whatever in the same category making it seem as though they were losing money. recently they took it out.
microsoft had a gaming division that made money since the mid to late 1990's with some of the best games on the market.
the first x-box wasnt that big a seller as the PS and gamecube but it had a higher rate of people buying games and x-box live was a hit from the start.
same with the 360, it wasn't a top seller but people bought more games for it than for the PS or Wii. a lot of people like myself have a PS3 with no games because it's a killer media box and blu ray player. when it first came out at $499 it was the same price as a blu ray player. at $299 it's the same price as a high end internet enabled player but with better support and a hard drive to store data
i had the wii as well and only used it for the balance board. just like a lot of people that bought it. compared to a health club membership it was a killer deal
and with gamestop in the used business, it's even more profits for MS due to all the DLC that is sold now
microsoft had a gaming division that made money since the mid to late 1990's with some of the best games on the market.
the first x-box wasnt that big a seller as the PS and gamecube but it had a higher rate of people buying games and x-box live was a hit from the start.
same with the 360, it wasn't a top seller but people bought more games for it than for the PS or Wii. a lot of people like myself have a PS3 with no games because it's a killer media box and blu ray player. when it first came out at $499 it was the same price as a blu ray player. at $299 it's the same price as a high end internet enabled player but with better support and a hard drive to store data
i had the wii as well and only used it for the balance board. just like a lot of people that bought it. compared to a health club membership it was a killer deal
and with gamestop in the used business, it's even more profits for MS due to all the DLC that is sold now
scoobydoo99
Apr 20, 02:09 PM
You have no proof of this.
I'm sure they do... but for the most part they just subpoena the telecom provider for whatever records they require.
lol. they don't even have to subpoena these days. just ask nicely and the companies simply hand over anything they want (all in the name of being good patriots.) Of course, sometimes they charge the government for it:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-05-10-nsa_x.htm
I'm sure they do... but for the most part they just subpoena the telecom provider for whatever records they require.
lol. they don't even have to subpoena these days. just ask nicely and the companies simply hand over anything they want (all in the name of being good patriots.) Of course, sometimes they charge the government for it:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-05-10-nsa_x.htm
ChristianJapan
Apr 22, 08:05 AM
If I can stream and download to a iDevice I would be a happy camper. Should be users choice based on need. Streaming in many cases will not make it.
And SJ knows soon WHAT you listen WHERE and WHEN and HOW OFTEN. I'm sure there is marketing to be done. At least when iPhone or iPad are used.
And SJ knows soon WHAT you listen WHERE and WHEN and HOW OFTEN. I'm sure there is marketing to be done. At least when iPhone or iPad are used.
Dunepilot
Oct 27, 09:01 AM
I didn't even know there was an Expo on!
Anyway, before anyone even considers their opinion on the work of Greenpeace, they should read The Skeptical Environmentalist by Bjorn Lomborg (http://www.lomborg.com/).
Anyway, before anyone even considers their opinion on the work of Greenpeace, they should read The Skeptical Environmentalist by Bjorn Lomborg (http://www.lomborg.com/).
guywithabike
Aug 31, 12:58 PM
gugy-
You aren't a graphics professional, I take it.
Glossy screens are, indeed, typically better than the "diffused" screens. Diffused screens prevent glare by adding a layer of diffusing material that scatters light to avoid the "mirror" effect. The problem with this is that it also scatters the light coming from the monitor. This reduces color contrast and vibrancy greatly. Put a diffused and glossy MacBook Pro next to each other. The difference is immediately obvious.
With glossy screens, the image from the monitor isn't diffused, which gives you a virtually wider gamut with much better color contrast and quality. Of course, because it's glossy, you'll have to make sure your environmental lighting doesn't interfere with it.
So, for instance, if you're a filmmaker with a PowerBook for on-site video editing, you might want a diffused screen if you do a lot of outdoor work. If you're a designer that uses a desktop screen in a controlled studio/office environment, you'll want a glossy screen.
Of course, regardless of coating, LCDs have a much wider color gamut than print, so it's really not that important whether or not your screen is glossy or diffused, as long as it's a quality monitor if you're a print designer. For true precision color work, DTP pros go with insane monitors that would make your wallet cry. Most of those screens have glossy coatings. TV work relies on insanely expensive "reference" monitors for emulating the "average" TV with precision.
You aren't a graphics professional, I take it.
Glossy screens are, indeed, typically better than the "diffused" screens. Diffused screens prevent glare by adding a layer of diffusing material that scatters light to avoid the "mirror" effect. The problem with this is that it also scatters the light coming from the monitor. This reduces color contrast and vibrancy greatly. Put a diffused and glossy MacBook Pro next to each other. The difference is immediately obvious.
With glossy screens, the image from the monitor isn't diffused, which gives you a virtually wider gamut with much better color contrast and quality. Of course, because it's glossy, you'll have to make sure your environmental lighting doesn't interfere with it.
So, for instance, if you're a filmmaker with a PowerBook for on-site video editing, you might want a diffused screen if you do a lot of outdoor work. If you're a designer that uses a desktop screen in a controlled studio/office environment, you'll want a glossy screen.
Of course, regardless of coating, LCDs have a much wider color gamut than print, so it's really not that important whether or not your screen is glossy or diffused, as long as it's a quality monitor if you're a print designer. For true precision color work, DTP pros go with insane monitors that would make your wallet cry. Most of those screens have glossy coatings. TV work relies on insanely expensive "reference" monitors for emulating the "average" TV with precision.
berkleeboy210
Sep 4, 07:31 PM
With all these rumors around, I feel like this event is Tomorrow, and not next week, but still we don't even have a confirmed date yet.
Now don't get me wrong, I'd love to see everything happen in one event that AppleInsider recently predicted.
But I just there are too many rumors floating around at this point.
Anyone agree w/ me on this one?
Now don't get me wrong, I'd love to see everything happen in one event that AppleInsider recently predicted.
But I just there are too many rumors floating around at this point.
Anyone agree w/ me on this one?
guzhogi
Sep 19, 01:41 PM
Hmm. Lets see $1M in a week, 52 weeks in a year, yup - that's about $50M. Wow - that dude is a genius!
Just wait. I have a feeling that once people get used to buying movies off of iTS, they'll convince all their friends to buy more movies and those friends would convince their friends and so on. I wouldn't be surprised if they sell 50m w/in 9 months. Hopefully, people will like the movies.
I hope that the iTV would someday get DVR capabilities like saving episodes on TV. Also, I'd like iPods to have radios & Airport built-in too.
Just wait. I have a feeling that once people get used to buying movies off of iTS, they'll convince all their friends to buy more movies and those friends would convince their friends and so on. I wouldn't be surprised if they sell 50m w/in 9 months. Hopefully, people will like the movies.
I hope that the iTV would someday get DVR capabilities like saving episodes on TV. Also, I'd like iPods to have radios & Airport built-in too.
mbrannon47
Apr 22, 01:59 AM
I think it's Eddy Cue not Eddie.
zer0sum
Mar 18, 07:06 PM
It certainly has a huge amount to do with market share and therefore return on investment in creating malware.
It all used to be done for fun and a little destruction and now its about the $
Windows = ~87%
OS X = ~6%
IOS = ~2%
Linux = ~1%
Android = ~0.5%
So...the malware authors can either put all the time and effort into an amazing exploit and payload that successfully owns 100% of the OS X devices in the world or they can bash something together that only needs to work out on a very small percentage of windows machines.
Criminals are not generally the hardest working people in the world :)
Which option do you think they are most likely to take?
But there will come a time...simple as that!
For now OS X is a nice place to be and with knowledge as an end user it is extremely easy to avoid being exploited.
Certainly no need for AV unless you are situated in a company that mandates all end points must have AV regardless of OS and even then traditional AV is dead and should be combined with a complete endpoint security solution.
I highly recommend getting your firewall and little snitch running on your mac to get some security and visibility of exactly what is happening under the hood.
It all used to be done for fun and a little destruction and now its about the $
Windows = ~87%
OS X = ~6%
IOS = ~2%
Linux = ~1%
Android = ~0.5%
So...the malware authors can either put all the time and effort into an amazing exploit and payload that successfully owns 100% of the OS X devices in the world or they can bash something together that only needs to work out on a very small percentage of windows machines.
Criminals are not generally the hardest working people in the world :)
Which option do you think they are most likely to take?
But there will come a time...simple as that!
For now OS X is a nice place to be and with knowledge as an end user it is extremely easy to avoid being exploited.
Certainly no need for AV unless you are situated in a company that mandates all end points must have AV regardless of OS and even then traditional AV is dead and should be combined with a complete endpoint security solution.
I highly recommend getting your firewall and little snitch running on your mac to get some security and visibility of exactly what is happening under the hood.
vitaboy
Aug 24, 04:20 AM
Is this a one-time payment to include all future uses?
It seems to be the case, as the agreement resolves "all disputes." I'm sure there is a stipulation that Creative agrees not to pursue patent claims against Apple in the future.
Which is why the whole "Creative won" argument doesn't wash. Considering that iPod will end up generating tens of billions of dollars in future revenue for Apple (on top of the billions it's already made), settling for $100 million is not exactly a sign of Creative dealing from a position of strength.
I mean think about it. Creative is basically claiming Apple stole its goose that lays golden eggs. Apple says "No, we didn't, in fact, you stole our spinning wheel that can spin threads of gold from straw!" They both argue and threaten each other, but in the end Apple offers Creative a little piece of golden eggshell, and Creative is so happy about winning, it tells Apple, "Aww, shucks, thanks for the piece of shell, you can keep the goose!"
I don't think so. :P
Which is why the deal has all the signs of Creative gulping down its pride and accepting a settlement on Apple's terms. Creative accepted because if it didn't, the chances were quite high that it would not be in business a year from now, mainly because Zune will wipe out its ability to sell in a crowded market. At least now, it has a big stick it can use against Microsoft.
In the end, it's a big win for Apple.
It seems to be the case, as the agreement resolves "all disputes." I'm sure there is a stipulation that Creative agrees not to pursue patent claims against Apple in the future.
Which is why the whole "Creative won" argument doesn't wash. Considering that iPod will end up generating tens of billions of dollars in future revenue for Apple (on top of the billions it's already made), settling for $100 million is not exactly a sign of Creative dealing from a position of strength.
I mean think about it. Creative is basically claiming Apple stole its goose that lays golden eggs. Apple says "No, we didn't, in fact, you stole our spinning wheel that can spin threads of gold from straw!" They both argue and threaten each other, but in the end Apple offers Creative a little piece of golden eggshell, and Creative is so happy about winning, it tells Apple, "Aww, shucks, thanks for the piece of shell, you can keep the goose!"
I don't think so. :P
Which is why the deal has all the signs of Creative gulping down its pride and accepting a settlement on Apple's terms. Creative accepted because if it didn't, the chances were quite high that it would not be in business a year from now, mainly because Zune will wipe out its ability to sell in a crowded market. At least now, it has a big stick it can use against Microsoft.
In the end, it's a big win for Apple.
EagerDragon
Sep 14, 06:33 PM
I doubt we'll see some headless tower (apart from the macpro) i honestly don't think its in apple's interest to openup a new price point. Mac mini provides a nice entry for windows users, people wanting something next to their tv, or have the monitor etc already. MacBook provides mobile low end. iMac allows a bit more power and features over the mini for home users wanting a bit more and companies and people who dont need the power of the Mac Pro. MacBook Pro is high end portable allowing for graphics, photography, design, etc, and to some extent gaming on the go. The Mac Pro is the beast, a workstation more than a desktop and therefore is over specced for the normal user. But why put in a new model in between a imac and a mac pro when having the gap forces people looking for more than an imac to go for the mac pro and increase revenue. By creating an 'in between' model it takes sales away from the popular imac and the expensive mac pro, would probably have to have lower margins to get people to buy it and would just float about in the middle. Maybe die a fate similar to the cube? I don't see it being a smart move.
Mac Pro is not a gaming machine. The memory kills it. It is a server/workstation class designed to worked on large pieces of data.
Gaming is very different and can not use slow memory, it needs to be snappy. Apple does need to make the Gamer machine but it does not have to be as big as the Mac Pro. Kensfield is a real possibility in that system, and yes it is coming in my opinion. Not so much for us but for selling to Wintel users and potential switchers.
Mac Pro is not a gaming machine. The memory kills it. It is a server/workstation class designed to worked on large pieces of data.
Gaming is very different and can not use slow memory, it needs to be snappy. Apple does need to make the Gamer machine but it does not have to be as big as the Mac Pro. Kensfield is a real possibility in that system, and yes it is coming in my opinion. Not so much for us but for selling to Wintel users and potential switchers.
kettle
Oct 27, 01:47 PM
Yes, they should just just shut-up and vote for corporate-sponsored Republicrats or Converalabour every four or five years and take it.
It's a shame that there is no longer any meaningful democracy.
I think that's pretty accurate (well observed) whichever side of this particular fence people are sitting.
It's a shame that there is no longer any meaningful democracy.
I think that's pretty accurate (well observed) whichever side of this particular fence people are sitting.
rovex
Apr 22, 11:42 AM
I think the building consensus is that PC gaming is wearing. Intel's graphic chip shouldn't detour many with the much improved CPU to boot. I'm totally happy I skipped the 2010 refresh.
TallManNY
Apr 22, 08:22 AM
If single use ownership is the wave of the future and that results in people buying more stuff, stuff like CDs, DVDs, and Digital Books which are basically infinite unconstrained resources (i.e., no supply issue for any of these), then prices for them will go down. So this is unlikely to be a negative for the consumer.
I have my iPhone with me at all times and it has enough songs on it that I don't feel constrained. So streaming doesn't seem too exciting. Also, I doubt AT&T's New York cell coverage will be able to handle it to make this a nice experience.
I have my iPhone with me at all times and it has enough songs on it that I don't feel constrained. So streaming doesn't seem too exciting. Also, I doubt AT&T's New York cell coverage will be able to handle it to make this a nice experience.
0 comments:
Post a Comment