infernohellion
Apr 3, 09:18 AM
The size decrease makes sense right?
Leopard was large because it was built to be run on PPC as well (universal binary)
Snow Leopard was much smaller because it's Intel only
and now further refinement plus 64-bit only stuff (right?)
Leopard was large because it was built to be run on PPC as well (universal binary)
Snow Leopard was much smaller because it's Intel only
and now further refinement plus 64-bit only stuff (right?)
LERsince1991
Mar 1, 09:06 AM
Just a few more images from the iphone as I got the braided sleeving yesterday and fitted it all today, even neater lol :P
http://img845.imageshack.us/img845/6905/img0283.jpg
http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/4329/img0298z.jpg
http://img824.imageshack.us/img824/7519/img0297ny.jpg
http://img687.imageshack.us/img687/4659/img0280ib.jpg
http://img845.imageshack.us/img845/6905/img0283.jpg
http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/4329/img0298z.jpg
http://img824.imageshack.us/img824/7519/img0297ny.jpg
http://img687.imageshack.us/img687/4659/img0280ib.jpg
aswitcher
Jan 11, 05:17 PM
like i submitted and you ignored completely...they are of the aluminum build which would make it appear to be on the PRO side. Why would they build something identical to the current macbook???
Because its not going to be identical.
Neither will have built in superdrive, but will have the same external model.
Pro machine will have additional stuff like backlit keyboard, FW800, graphics card. Probably be even smaller and lighter. Maybe have a touch screen.
They will be quite clearly different and $ differences as well.
Because its not going to be identical.
Neither will have built in superdrive, but will have the same external model.
Pro machine will have additional stuff like backlit keyboard, FW800, graphics card. Probably be even smaller and lighter. Maybe have a touch screen.
They will be quite clearly different and $ differences as well.
timswim78
Aug 30, 09:58 PM
I don't think that is always the case. In this case, specifically, we are likely looking at the high end mini bumping down to the low end price range, and the high end being a new machine. That would meant that the high end mini is basically getting a price drop, which would push the refurb price down: the refurb Core Duo mini is currently MORE than a new Core Solo. I'd definitely expect to see Duos get a price drop in the refurb store if the new mini line up is 1.66 duo and 1.83 duo.
It will be interesting to see how Apple stocks and prices the refurb store once the new chips are in the Intel machines. I have noticed less and less PPC refurbs for iMacs and Minis. I guess that Apple is holding onto them in order to replace PPC machines that go bad while under warranty.
It will be interesting to see how Apple stocks and prices the refurb store once the new chips are in the Intel machines. I have noticed less and less PPC refurbs for iMacs and Minis. I guess that Apple is holding onto them in order to replace PPC machines that go bad while under warranty.
roland.g
Sep 1, 01:32 PM
Has apple done this before? I'm not trying to make it sound like i'm rude, I really just dont know. I know that when the first MBP's came out they did that silent upgrade in power but I didnt think it was price.
When they had 17" Lampshade G4 iMacs, the price came down one day without notice. I think they also dropped the price $100 on G5 iMac when they upped specs adding Airport (and maybe BT) standard. That was when they went $1,799 to $1,699.
When they had 17" Lampshade G4 iMacs, the price came down one day without notice. I think they also dropped the price $100 on G5 iMac when they upped specs adding Airport (and maybe BT) standard. That was when they went $1,799 to $1,699.
No ice please
Nov 27, 06:46 PM
http://www.thinkgeek.com/images/products/zoom/e66e_iphone_case_with_keyboard.gif
Can't wait for it to get here!!!
Can't wait for it to get here!!!
Popeye206
May 2, 05:30 PM
I got a another newbie question
I am planning on moving out of Windows (7) and onto MAC OS X, but I want to wait for Lion since its close to a finished product. Now my question is, if Lion comes out, would that mean every Mac (Mac Pro, iMac, iMac mini, Macbook, MB Pros, etc) would have Lion installed/packaged or is there a specific mac that will have Lion on its first day and the other macs would have to wait???
I wouldn't worry about the OS... all new Macs will run Lion and depending on the specifics, you'll probably get the upgrade for free or very cheap. Also, unless Apple chances something, past upgrades can be easily installed on multiple machines. Where MS has Windows licensed to a CPU, Apple does not care. They don't make that much money on the OS sales, they make the money on the hardware.
So, if you're going to wait for anything, I would wait for the World Wide Developers Conference in June and see what's announced there, then make your purchase. Then you'll have a good idea of what's new and be ready for Lion.
Welcome aboard!
I am planning on moving out of Windows (7) and onto MAC OS X, but I want to wait for Lion since its close to a finished product. Now my question is, if Lion comes out, would that mean every Mac (Mac Pro, iMac, iMac mini, Macbook, MB Pros, etc) would have Lion installed/packaged or is there a specific mac that will have Lion on its first day and the other macs would have to wait???
I wouldn't worry about the OS... all new Macs will run Lion and depending on the specifics, you'll probably get the upgrade for free or very cheap. Also, unless Apple chances something, past upgrades can be easily installed on multiple machines. Where MS has Windows licensed to a CPU, Apple does not care. They don't make that much money on the OS sales, they make the money on the hardware.
So, if you're going to wait for anything, I would wait for the World Wide Developers Conference in June and see what's announced there, then make your purchase. Then you'll have a good idea of what's new and be ready for Lion.
Welcome aboard!
milo
Jul 19, 04:49 PM
No, 75% of Macs sold in the last 3 months were Intels
That's exactly what I meant. I still think that's very impressive.
That's exactly what I meant. I still think that's very impressive.
likemyorbs
Mar 22, 12:48 PM
Agreed!
goddamn i can't make a joke on these forums. i was kidding dude. it's not a choice, if it were a choice it would have been a fad that went away years ago. Some people are naturally attracted to the same sex, and not just people, homosexuality has been demonstrated in animals as well. Some brains are just wired differently, and to deny them rights for it is just not fair.
goddamn i can't make a joke on these forums. i was kidding dude. it's not a choice, if it were a choice it would have been a fad that went away years ago. Some people are naturally attracted to the same sex, and not just people, homosexuality has been demonstrated in animals as well. Some brains are just wired differently, and to deny them rights for it is just not fair.
gr8whtd0pe
Jan 6, 07:53 AM
...but it was seen on Top Gear a few years back (http://i53.tinypic.com/33mv0yb.png) when the boys made their electric car and took it to Oxford.
http://i54.tinypic.com/99hvma.jpg
That. Is. Awesome.
http://i54.tinypic.com/99hvma.jpg
That. Is. Awesome.
dwarnecke11
Sep 30, 10:12 AM
I finally ordered a case. I'm sick of waiting for Best Buy to stock some decent cases.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0042BBHMS/ref=oss_product
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0042BBHMS/ref=oss_product
Sbrocket
Jan 11, 05:20 PM
i highly highly doubt they are calling it the "macbook air." that's borderline laughable. i am willing to bet the phase "there's something in the air" is referring to the soon to be announced rental service, not a piece of hardware. apple is making an obvious attempt to eliminate physical mediums altogether, first cds with mp3s and now dvds with downloadable vids (both via the itunes music store). everything will be available "in the air" or "up in the cloud," if you will. i'll be damned if they name their next product the "macbook air." c'mon people...
You may want to retract that...
Why do you assume that the information was based off the posters, rather than simple coincidence or MR waiting for some corroboration? That's a bad assumption if I had to say so.
You may want to retract that...
Why do you assume that the information was based off the posters, rather than simple coincidence or MR waiting for some corroboration? That's a bad assumption if I had to say so.
Jopling
Nov 29, 05:19 PM
Maybe you can do video iChat sessions with an optional iSight camera right from the livingroom TV?
This reminds me of the old Zenith TVs with space phones where you could talk to a caller from the comfort of your sofa. (but voices usually sounded like it was underwater).
I still have one of those
This reminds me of the old Zenith TVs with space phones where you could talk to a caller from the comfort of your sofa. (but voices usually sounded like it was underwater).
I still have one of those
twoodcc
Dec 27, 09:26 AM
It worked...
just enough points to take 4th place back (at least temporarily)
;)
nice. glad it worked for you!
and congrats to mc68k for 9 million points!
and congrats to whiterabbit for 5 million points!
just enough points to take 4th place back (at least temporarily)
;)
nice. glad it worked for you!
and congrats to mc68k for 9 million points!
and congrats to whiterabbit for 5 million points!
Multimedia
Aug 31, 08:19 PM
Let's hope that those specs aren't the final ones. That they're just to clear inventory.
I'm hoping for Merom based mac minis.. Merom costs the same so why not ?LIMITED SUPPLY of Merom for the first few months. mini will be the last to get C2D probably in November. But you've gotta give kudos to Apple for adopting the Merom Spec Yonahs into the mini right away. This way the switch to Merom in mini can be almost silent with no disruption to the flow of minis to the market.
I'm hoping for Merom based mac minis.. Merom costs the same so why not ?LIMITED SUPPLY of Merom for the first few months. mini will be the last to get C2D probably in November. But you've gotta give kudos to Apple for adopting the Merom Spec Yonahs into the mini right away. This way the switch to Merom in mini can be almost silent with no disruption to the flow of minis to the market.
FubsyGamr
Sep 20, 01:46 PM
Ok guys, I'm torn between two cases. First of all, I just got a case from Amazon, the MiniSuit, and I hate it! )= This was my first case for my first iPod Touch, and I was very disappointed. It is silicone/rubbery, but it is like a magnet for lint, hair, dust, and anything else I don't want to go on it. I put it in my pocket (my pockets are relatively clean, nothing too out of the ordinary) and when I pulled it out, it was just covered in lint. I tried to brush it off, but it won't 'brush off' because the rubber is too sticky. Also, the case is not snug at all, and the sides are always slipping off. Not happy. I am returning the case.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0041PIGMY/ref=oss_product
So now, after scouring these forums, I have seen two cases that I think I will like a lot, but I am not sure which I should get. I am hoping some of you will have some personal experience and can help me out!
The first is the dermaSHOT (http://www.myincipio.com/product/IPOD_TOUCH_IP-900/iPod-touch-4G-dermaSHOT-Silicone-Case---Black.html). I am worried, however, that I will have the same problem with lint-magnet, because it is also made of silicone. Any ideas there?
The other is one of the Melkco Leather Cases (http://www.carrymobile.com/scripts/main/viewitem-A1ITO4LCFT1BK-ITO4.html). Back when I had my first iPod (it was the iPod 3g or 4g, the first to play videos) I had a case very similar and I loved it! Does anyone have any reviews/tips on this case?
Anywho, any help would be very much appreciated! Thanks!
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0041PIGMY/ref=oss_product
So now, after scouring these forums, I have seen two cases that I think I will like a lot, but I am not sure which I should get. I am hoping some of you will have some personal experience and can help me out!
The first is the dermaSHOT (http://www.myincipio.com/product/IPOD_TOUCH_IP-900/iPod-touch-4G-dermaSHOT-Silicone-Case---Black.html). I am worried, however, that I will have the same problem with lint-magnet, because it is also made of silicone. Any ideas there?
The other is one of the Melkco Leather Cases (http://www.carrymobile.com/scripts/main/viewitem-A1ITO4LCFT1BK-ITO4.html). Back when I had my first iPod (it was the iPod 3g or 4g, the first to play videos) I had a case very similar and I loved it! Does anyone have any reviews/tips on this case?
Anywho, any help would be very much appreciated! Thanks!
zelet
Aug 25, 09:20 AM
my beef with the mini is when I boot into 'doze and wanna play games - that GMA950 just cant cut the mustard.
So what would make me rush out and buy a new mini (and put this one under the TV) would be a faster graphics processor.
Cant see that happening any time soon tho.
I agree to that. I got the Mini thinking the GPU couldn't be that bad. I was really wrong. If they up the GPU I'll buy another one and be happy. If not - I'll live with the underpowered video of the mini until Apple finally releases a headless iMac (or something equivalent).
So what would make me rush out and buy a new mini (and put this one under the TV) would be a faster graphics processor.
Cant see that happening any time soon tho.
I agree to that. I got the Mini thinking the GPU couldn't be that bad. I was really wrong. If they up the GPU I'll buy another one and be happy. If not - I'll live with the underpowered video of the mini until Apple finally releases a headless iMac (or something equivalent).
Peterkro
Mar 23, 01:53 PM
Anti-Daffy sites attacked including:
http://feb17.info/
Back up now.:mad:
http://feb17.info/
Back up now.:mad:
jettredmont
Aug 16, 02:00 PM
We need flat data rates on mobiles in the UK. It will happen (esp. if they want people to embrace 3g that they spent all the money on), it's just when.
While it's nice to dream, when you are talking about a service (downloading music from your server to your device) that the vast majority of people are going to be using many hours in a day, I doubt you'll see that being "cheap" on the current setups any time soon. For one, there isn't that kind of capacity in the networks. For another, while it may be different in the UK, there are still many pockets of poor or nonexistent coverage. Finally, the cost of portable storage is decreasing significantly (by which I mean, several orders of magnitude) faster than the cost of network bandwidth.
Network capacity is where it all starts off. Why are ringtones so expensive? Well, for one, because people still buy them. But, offering $1 or $0.25 ringtones would yield a killing for both the record companies (getting $0.25 for 1/6th of a song? Seems about right relative to $1/song) and greatly expand the service in terms of total market size (ie, 1/3rd revenue per download, but much more than 3x increase in number of downloads). Why don't they do this? Because their networks, to a one, could not stand for this traffic to increase enough that the market would expand enough to make the change profitable. When you pay $3 for a ringtone download you are paying primarily to keep other people from doing the same. Sounds perverse, but that's the reality when you have a limited-availability resource, it is the foundation of supply vs demand.
Expanding on the second: I'd never, ever, buy something that I would want to use when driving, for instance, across the "boring states" of Nevada and south-eastern Oregon, that requires a constant connection to any type of service. Why? Because even cell phones are useless for about a three hour stretch of Highway 95 going up from Winnemucca. If cell phones aren't working now, how long will it be before some next-generation service comes in and "wires" the place up?
I might shoot myself without my iPod to listen to during that three hours of scrubgrass, migrating crickets, and mountains.
But, seriously, you guys are talking about a concept that would have garnered a lot of conversation fifteen years ago. The fact of the day is, though, that networking is not getting cheaper at a rate of doubling bandwidth per year, and small, portable hard drive storage (or non-hard drive Flash storage, even moreso) is. Wireless networking isn't winning on power consumption either (Flash storage wins there by a longshot as well).
Until people start having libraries that are infeasible to transport with them (which means, hard drive space can't keep up with library space, which certainly isn't the case today as library space isn't doubling per year either)and which can be trickle-downloaded to a low-profile wireless device in realtime, the idea here is dead. Sorry, that's just the facts.
While it's nice to dream, when you are talking about a service (downloading music from your server to your device) that the vast majority of people are going to be using many hours in a day, I doubt you'll see that being "cheap" on the current setups any time soon. For one, there isn't that kind of capacity in the networks. For another, while it may be different in the UK, there are still many pockets of poor or nonexistent coverage. Finally, the cost of portable storage is decreasing significantly (by which I mean, several orders of magnitude) faster than the cost of network bandwidth.
Network capacity is where it all starts off. Why are ringtones so expensive? Well, for one, because people still buy them. But, offering $1 or $0.25 ringtones would yield a killing for both the record companies (getting $0.25 for 1/6th of a song? Seems about right relative to $1/song) and greatly expand the service in terms of total market size (ie, 1/3rd revenue per download, but much more than 3x increase in number of downloads). Why don't they do this? Because their networks, to a one, could not stand for this traffic to increase enough that the market would expand enough to make the change profitable. When you pay $3 for a ringtone download you are paying primarily to keep other people from doing the same. Sounds perverse, but that's the reality when you have a limited-availability resource, it is the foundation of supply vs demand.
Expanding on the second: I'd never, ever, buy something that I would want to use when driving, for instance, across the "boring states" of Nevada and south-eastern Oregon, that requires a constant connection to any type of service. Why? Because even cell phones are useless for about a three hour stretch of Highway 95 going up from Winnemucca. If cell phones aren't working now, how long will it be before some next-generation service comes in and "wires" the place up?
I might shoot myself without my iPod to listen to during that three hours of scrubgrass, migrating crickets, and mountains.
But, seriously, you guys are talking about a concept that would have garnered a lot of conversation fifteen years ago. The fact of the day is, though, that networking is not getting cheaper at a rate of doubling bandwidth per year, and small, portable hard drive storage (or non-hard drive Flash storage, even moreso) is. Wireless networking isn't winning on power consumption either (Flash storage wins there by a longshot as well).
Until people start having libraries that are infeasible to transport with them (which means, hard drive space can't keep up with library space, which certainly isn't the case today as library space isn't doubling per year either)and which can be trickle-downloaded to a low-profile wireless device in realtime, the idea here is dead. Sorry, that's just the facts.
Baseline
Nov 15, 08:41 AM
seriously though, how hard is it to get a program to multi-thread? (if thats the right term; being a complete programming novice, i've no idea)
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.
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.
ciTiger
Apr 26, 02:43 PM
I bet a lot of money is still gonna be spilled in this...
imac_japan
Mar 18, 05:53 PM
What people don't understand is that Apple is dying....
Everyone is buying IBMs and if Apple doesn't do something then they are dead. I love my Macintoshes but Apple needs market share to grow !
Apple needs customers, Apple needs to start thinking out of their little 5% market share. The Ipod was a good example but you can't keep on counting on people to buy it. For example, Apple had to make Safari due to Microsoft pulling out of the mac - this is just one example where Apple is starting to make software because companies are leaving the platform.
We need a cheap Mac to bring in new Customers. Maybe its their first Mac experience.
Everyone is buying IBMs and if Apple doesn't do something then they are dead. I love my Macintoshes but Apple needs market share to grow !
Apple needs customers, Apple needs to start thinking out of their little 5% market share. The Ipod was a good example but you can't keep on counting on people to buy it. For example, Apple had to make Safari due to Microsoft pulling out of the mac - this is just one example where Apple is starting to make software because companies are leaving the platform.
We need a cheap Mac to bring in new Customers. Maybe its their first Mac experience.
Allotriophagy
Nov 15, 08:37 AM
Perhaps this would allow me to play a large map on Civ4 without the terrible huge long pauses...
Applespider
Jul 19, 04:39 PM
Wow, already up to 75% intel machines. So much for the stupid notion that nobody wants intel because there are still big apps that aren't universal.
No, 75% of Macs sold in the last 3 months were Intels which given that most of the Macs are Intels, isn't that surprising.
The OS X install base has around 940,000 Intel users and several million PPC users
No, 75% of Macs sold in the last 3 months were Intels which given that most of the Macs are Intels, isn't that surprising.
The OS X install base has around 940,000 Intel users and several million PPC users
0 comments:
Post a Comment