superleccy
Aug 24, 07:56 PM
What the @*!& is Labour Day? Something to do with Tony Blair?
milo
Aug 29, 12:31 PM
ALL desktop machines......
Apple posted their 3rd Quarter 2006 financial results today.
http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060719164004.shtml
That was before the Pro shipped, it's a safe bet since it's released desktop numbers have gone up. And that's just one quarter, I doubt desktop numbers have been on the decline for the last twelve months.
Apple posted their 3rd Quarter 2006 financial results today.
http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060719164004.shtml
That was before the Pro shipped, it's a safe bet since it's released desktop numbers have gone up. And that's just one quarter, I doubt desktop numbers have been on the decline for the last twelve months.
bobbleheadbob
Apr 2, 09:17 PM
Keep up that attitude and continue wondering why no one talks with you as you type on your laptop in the middle of the coffee shop across from De Anza college. Sure, you may have helped get DB2 started and you still work in a DOS window but don't blame your wife for leaving you as you worked late at night too long. How much of the money from the IPO went to family attorney and court fees?
De Anza college? Is that anywhere near Faber College, Flounder? :cool:
De Anza college? Is that anywhere near Faber College, Flounder? :cool:
zep1977
Apr 21, 12:31 PM
al franken?
I thought it was just us "tinfoil hats" as was said yesterday by some in these forums, who would be upset about this?
Guess not. :rolleyes:
I thought it was just us "tinfoil hats" as was said yesterday by some in these forums, who would be upset about this?
Guess not. :rolleyes:
shurcooL
Mar 26, 08:41 AM
"silky smooth" 30 frames per second
Welcome to where the above phrase is not considered an oxymoron. :rolleyes:
Welcome to where the above phrase is not considered an oxymoron. :rolleyes:
Horrortaxi
Mar 20, 08:32 AM
a hell of alot more people buy IBMs here eg: Toshiba, Hitachi and Sony.
I don't want to sound excessively picky, but only IBM makes IBM computers. Toshiba makes Toshiba computers and Sony makes Sony computers.
I don't want to sound excessively picky, but only IBM makes IBM computers. Toshiba makes Toshiba computers and Sony makes Sony computers.
kdarling
Apr 22, 09:33 PM
Why is it necessary to keep your location a secret? What are Google and Apple going to do to you? What *exactly* and *specifically* is there to be afraid of?
Your location is *never* a secret, unless you're the President and it's a national crisis.
There are many people whose movements are best kept secret from certain others, with risk of life if revealed.
Battered women or kids in a secret shelter home, witness protection participants, undercover agents of all sorts, dissidents and rebels.
On a less serious note, there are probably some bosses who gave out iPhones, checking company iTunes hosts this weekned to see if their employees' travel receipts and sick days match their movements.
Your location is *never* a secret, unless you're the President and it's a national crisis.
There are many people whose movements are best kept secret from certain others, with risk of life if revealed.
Battered women or kids in a secret shelter home, witness protection participants, undercover agents of all sorts, dissidents and rebels.
On a less serious note, there are probably some bosses who gave out iPhones, checking company iTunes hosts this weekned to see if their employees' travel receipts and sick days match their movements.
Daveway
Aug 7, 07:36 AM
[B]Leopard
-Native NTFS write
-Soltaire game as a dashboard widget
-PC-run Mac OS X, but only via virtualization
-Tabs in Finder and Safari be draggable, Dragon Drop style tabbed windows-like OS 9, and be easily recalled-bookmarks.
There will never be NTFS write abilities in Mac OS X for a long time as Microsoft still keeps NTFS writing a propritary technology only licensed for use in Windows XP.
-Native NTFS write
-Soltaire game as a dashboard widget
-PC-run Mac OS X, but only via virtualization
-Tabs in Finder and Safari be draggable, Dragon Drop style tabbed windows-like OS 9, and be easily recalled-bookmarks.
There will never be NTFS write abilities in Mac OS X for a long time as Microsoft still keeps NTFS writing a propritary technology only licensed for use in Windows XP.
Nuvi
Apr 13, 02:10 AM
PS i really think that apple is powerfully positioning themselves by selling final cut so cheap. Now you can justify paying more for a Mac box because the software is so much less than the competition. Brilliant if you ask me - make software cheap, sell more macs and cost kick your competition out of the market.
First of all we have no idea what full price of FCS (like?) suit is. Is it $300 for each app or what? Do they deliver also on physical discs and with printed manuals (we want real manuals)? If you think about upgrade pricing, the current FCS suit upgrade is around $300 so if Apple starts asking that money for each of the FCS suit app upgrades via App Store (without physical media or manuals) then upgrade to Avid MC Production Suit under $1000 is cheap option for old FCP users.
First of all we have no idea what full price of FCS (like?) suit is. Is it $300 for each app or what? Do they deliver also on physical discs and with printed manuals (we want real manuals)? If you think about upgrade pricing, the current FCS suit upgrade is around $300 so if Apple starts asking that money for each of the FCS suit app upgrades via App Store (without physical media or manuals) then upgrade to Avid MC Production Suit under $1000 is cheap option for old FCP users.
vand0576
Sep 1, 01:03 PM
I don't think they'll ever make the iMac very upgradable. While iMac and Mac Pro users tend to be a different type, I still think if they leave to much room for the iMac to grow at a bargain, then there will be no reason for a Mac Pro.
Computer lines (outside of Apple) overlap ALL THE TIME. It seems like all of you are afraid of the iMac outselling the Mac Pro. The smart thing to do is, yes, to make the iMac super-upgradeable but more expensive to do so, something which is probably intuitive anyway. People will then make the choice of an all-in-one or a tower. There is no such thing as a "too powerful" iMac. Apple sets the price, consumers buy.
Computer lines (outside of Apple) overlap ALL THE TIME. It seems like all of you are afraid of the iMac outselling the Mac Pro. The smart thing to do is, yes, to make the iMac super-upgradeable but more expensive to do so, something which is probably intuitive anyway. People will then make the choice of an all-in-one or a tower. There is no such thing as a "too powerful" iMac. Apple sets the price, consumers buy.
Reverend Wally
Jan 2, 10:23 PM
:( How long ago were the MBPs updated? Because I'm looking to buy Jan/Feb and I'm not confident that the current spec is competitive. It at least needs a HD screen.
The C2D upgrade happened in November. The 17s actually shipped toward the last part of November. I can't understand why anyone would think that an improvement is needed in the displays on the MBP line. Some of you must have extaordinary vision if you could expect the video to be crisper or any more HD than it is. When I am viewing HD TV on this MBP, it actually blows the picture that we get on our HDTV set. And movies are really realistic looking on this screen. I perceive that anyone wanting a major upgrade to what I am seeing right here is going after "bragging rights" .... But that is just MHO
I also own a bad A$$ custom built notebook with a kick butt video card and super duper display and I actually like this Mac better. Again ... MHO
:cool:
The C2D upgrade happened in November. The 17s actually shipped toward the last part of November. I can't understand why anyone would think that an improvement is needed in the displays on the MBP line. Some of you must have extaordinary vision if you could expect the video to be crisper or any more HD than it is. When I am viewing HD TV on this MBP, it actually blows the picture that we get on our HDTV set. And movies are really realistic looking on this screen. I perceive that anyone wanting a major upgrade to what I am seeing right here is going after "bragging rights" .... But that is just MHO
I also own a bad A$$ custom built notebook with a kick butt video card and super duper display and I actually like this Mac better. Again ... MHO
:cool:
twoodcc
May 8, 05:22 PM
a3's on the '08
-bigadv on the '09s (they occasionally pickup an a3)
Sorry about the confusion (I should reread what I type) :o
oh ok i gotcha. what kind of times per frame (every 1%) are you getting with the 09s on the bigadv units?
-bigadv on the '09s (they occasionally pickup an a3)
Sorry about the confusion (I should reread what I type) :o
oh ok i gotcha. what kind of times per frame (every 1%) are you getting with the 09s on the bigadv units?
gekko513
Jul 18, 04:52 AM
It does make more sense renting movies than renting music. It's not often I like to see the same movie several times.
If the service is cheap enough, I can see that the convenience of getting a movie with just a couple of clicks in iTunes will make this an attractive offer for many. It is a hassle having to rent physical DVDs.
If the service is cheap enough, I can see that the convenience of getting a movie with just a couple of clicks in iTunes will make this an attractive offer for many. It is a hassle having to rent physical DVDs.
lordonuthin
Nov 8, 07:09 PM
bigadv are not available on windows but many are running virtual machines...
Aha! I knew it, those widozers breaking the rulz again!
Aha! I knew it, those widozers breaking the rulz again!
theBB
Jul 19, 04:17 PM
There are more details here - http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/060719/sfw089.html?.v=60
Desktop sales are down 14% on last quarter, and 23% on a year ago, but laptop sales are up a whopping 60% on last quarter and 61% on a year ago.
23% drop in desktop sales is surprising to me. Is it just due to people waiting for PowerMacs with Intels? It is not a good sign that higher iMac sales are not making up for it.
Of course, maybe Apple sold so many Mac Minis last year, that a drop was inevitable.
Desktop sales are down 14% on last quarter, and 23% on a year ago, but laptop sales are up a whopping 60% on last quarter and 61% on a year ago.
23% drop in desktop sales is surprising to me. Is it just due to people waiting for PowerMacs with Intels? It is not a good sign that higher iMac sales are not making up for it.
Of course, maybe Apple sold so many Mac Minis last year, that a drop was inevitable.
firestarter
Apr 12, 09:39 PM
Yeah BETA sounds like we won't be getting it for a while :(
Ground up rewrite = a whole load of bugs.
It'll be interesting to see how many shops use this for production work when it's finally released.
Ground up rewrite = a whole load of bugs.
It'll be interesting to see how many shops use this for production work when it's finally released.
gnasher729
Nov 15, 09:53 AM
I wonder how Handbrake, iDVD encoding, or Quicktime encoding will take advantage of the extra cores?
For some time, Handbrake didn't use more than two cores - owners of Quad G5s reported CPU usage of exactly 50 percent, then someone changed it and Quad G5s reported 100 percent CPU usage.
What we don't know: Was the code changed to use up to four processors, or as many processors as are available? Developers are usually very unwilling to ship code that they haven't been able to try out, so expect a version using eight cores about two days after the developers have access to an eight core machine.
In the case of Handbrake, encoding to MPEG4 seems already limited by the speed of the DVD drive; you can't encode faster than you can read from the DVD. H.264 is still limited by processor speed. Using eight cores is not too difficult; for example, if you encode 60 minutes of video, just give 7 1/2 minutes to each core.
For some time, Handbrake didn't use more than two cores - owners of Quad G5s reported CPU usage of exactly 50 percent, then someone changed it and Quad G5s reported 100 percent CPU usage.
What we don't know: Was the code changed to use up to four processors, or as many processors as are available? Developers are usually very unwilling to ship code that they haven't been able to try out, so expect a version using eight cores about two days after the developers have access to an eight core machine.
In the case of Handbrake, encoding to MPEG4 seems already limited by the speed of the DVD drive; you can't encode faster than you can read from the DVD. H.264 is still limited by processor speed. Using eight cores is not too difficult; for example, if you encode 60 minutes of video, just give 7 1/2 minutes to each core.
m-dogg
Aug 29, 09:03 AM
This is the lowest end machine Apple makes. Let's be realistic. This is a reasonable update for the base model. And it's probably being done in advance of a Core 2 Duo update to the iMac.
imac_japan
Apr 2, 04:39 AM
problem is, what do you cut down in #1 and still make profit? it's clear that dirt cheap computer market is something apple's not interested in. they believe it makes no economic sense. apple is not a charity organization, it is NOT on some mission to spread the goodness of Mac OS... if they don't see an economic merit in offering dirt cheap Macs, they won't, just like any other businesses.
eMac is not meant to be cheap. iMac is not meant to be cheap. they are meant to be all-in-one. if you know enough to foresee that you may need to upgrade in the future, you get a PowerMac because all-in-one is not for you. if you want a cheap, upgradable machine, then, unfortunately, you are not within apple's target market. thus far, apple has been doing well with this philosophy and who's to tell them to change? (do note that "customers" wanting dirt cheap machines have far less economic leverage because, well, they are cheap. if $800 is too much for a complete computer/OS/bundled software, then nevermind what dell's offering, apple believes they are ok without catering to you. if $400 is your budget, then apple believes it won't matter to you whether you get a dell or a Mac. if you want a Mac for sure, apple is betting that you will put down $400 more and get an eMac.)
even if apple offered custom upgrade parts (and only apple parts will work with Macs - otherwise, people will just go out and buy stock parts), i doubt they will be well received - they will be "overpriced" afterall, just like their computers are "overpriced" especially according to these "cheap" customers.
You have some good points here....but the basic arguement is how to survive in the future - How to grow the business....Itms doesn't make any money for Apple, the ipod is going to have too many similar players. So why not go for the lower end of the market - eg: like they did with the old "LC"s machines. People buy software but they don't want to shell out alot of money for hardware.
eMac is not meant to be cheap. iMac is not meant to be cheap. they are meant to be all-in-one. if you know enough to foresee that you may need to upgrade in the future, you get a PowerMac because all-in-one is not for you. if you want a cheap, upgradable machine, then, unfortunately, you are not within apple's target market. thus far, apple has been doing well with this philosophy and who's to tell them to change? (do note that "customers" wanting dirt cheap machines have far less economic leverage because, well, they are cheap. if $800 is too much for a complete computer/OS/bundled software, then nevermind what dell's offering, apple believes they are ok without catering to you. if $400 is your budget, then apple believes it won't matter to you whether you get a dell or a Mac. if you want a Mac for sure, apple is betting that you will put down $400 more and get an eMac.)
even if apple offered custom upgrade parts (and only apple parts will work with Macs - otherwise, people will just go out and buy stock parts), i doubt they will be well received - they will be "overpriced" afterall, just like their computers are "overpriced" especially according to these "cheap" customers.
You have some good points here....but the basic arguement is how to survive in the future - How to grow the business....Itms doesn't make any money for Apple, the ipod is going to have too many similar players. So why not go for the lower end of the market - eg: like they did with the old "LC"s machines. People buy software but they don't want to shell out alot of money for hardware.
Josias
Oct 23, 07:45 AM
yes baby. give me my mormom MBP!:D
I stopped wondering whether they'll come at all...;)
I stopped wondering whether they'll come at all...;)
Multimedia
Sep 7, 11:31 AM
Did I miss something or did the top end mini model go from $799 to $599. Ok. it has a smaller drive and no superdrive. BUt who uses DVDs anymore?I do. That's how I archive all my HDTV and SDTV recordings. I burn Disk Images with Toast then rip those images to mp4 files with Handbrake to take what starts out as a 6GB HD master and winds up a 351MB mp4 file that looks almost as good as the original - just a little softer is all. So I can get 12 one hour prime time HDTV shows on one 4.38GB DVD or two on a 702.8MB CD.
For me this is the future of TV show recording and storage. I've got it down to a science that is as good as is possible with today's technology to get something that is very big to be very small and still deliver a decent viewing-listening experience on a HD Screen while remaining iPod compatible at the same time.
Only drawback is computing power. Even the 3GHz Mac Pro is too slow to do this in rapid time. So it takes a more time than the programs lengths to do right now that should in future take only a few minutes each. I'm hoping that amount of power will be with us by 2008 or 2009. It's a fundamental challenge that needs to get solved before what I am doing can have mass appeal. It's almost tlike a full itme job - no it is a full time job. Except I'm not getting paid to do it. :eek:
For me this is the future of TV show recording and storage. I've got it down to a science that is as good as is possible with today's technology to get something that is very big to be very small and still deliver a decent viewing-listening experience on a HD Screen while remaining iPod compatible at the same time.
Only drawback is computing power. Even the 3GHz Mac Pro is too slow to do this in rapid time. So it takes a more time than the programs lengths to do right now that should in future take only a few minutes each. I'm hoping that amount of power will be with us by 2008 or 2009. It's a fundamental challenge that needs to get solved before what I am doing can have mass appeal. It's almost tlike a full itme job - no it is a full time job. Except I'm not getting paid to do it. :eek:
NAG
Jan 12, 03:15 PM
Yeah, I doubt they would be referencing already released products.
Multimedia
Nov 20, 01:58 PM
I think the number or cores will finally level off for a while once 8 core machines
become mainstream.Mainstream? I doubt any 8+ core users will be mainstream outside of commercial use.The next goal will be production refinements like 45 nm production for greater energy efficiency.I'll be surprised if that won't lead to a 16-core offering about a year from now or next winter 2008 at the latest. We are about to go from 4 to 8 in little over a year and a half to begin with. So I would guestimate the graduation from 8 to 16 will be in less time than it was from 4 to 8. So i would say that would not be a leveling off.Software developers will need to re-train or hire new software engineers who know how to take advantage of multi-core architecture.Well I'm still into the idea that multi-tasking can be just as big a driver of the need for more cores as multi-threaded within each. So I'm not sure we need to wait for software developers to "catch up". I know I'm not alone when I say I could use 16 cores in a Mac Pro right now with the existing base of software that already exists.The big question for those who must have the newest, most powerful system will be how much RAM they'll need to take advantage of the new architecture.I know that the primary applications I could use all this power for do not use much ram at all. So this specification may vary a lot among users.There are quite a few audio/video production professionals wondering how all this
will help to improve their workflow capabilties.Wondering? I'm pretty sure most are not wondering - more like eagerly anticipating due to KNOWING it will improve workflow tremendously.
become mainstream.Mainstream? I doubt any 8+ core users will be mainstream outside of commercial use.The next goal will be production refinements like 45 nm production for greater energy efficiency.I'll be surprised if that won't lead to a 16-core offering about a year from now or next winter 2008 at the latest. We are about to go from 4 to 8 in little over a year and a half to begin with. So I would guestimate the graduation from 8 to 16 will be in less time than it was from 4 to 8. So i would say that would not be a leveling off.Software developers will need to re-train or hire new software engineers who know how to take advantage of multi-core architecture.Well I'm still into the idea that multi-tasking can be just as big a driver of the need for more cores as multi-threaded within each. So I'm not sure we need to wait for software developers to "catch up". I know I'm not alone when I say I could use 16 cores in a Mac Pro right now with the existing base of software that already exists.The big question for those who must have the newest, most powerful system will be how much RAM they'll need to take advantage of the new architecture.I know that the primary applications I could use all this power for do not use much ram at all. So this specification may vary a lot among users.There are quite a few audio/video production professionals wondering how all this
will help to improve their workflow capabilties.Wondering? I'm pretty sure most are not wondering - more like eagerly anticipating due to KNOWING it will improve workflow tremendously.
cube
Mar 24, 01:23 PM
*Children Screaming in background
Im no snob against AMD GPUS...but their CPU's are nearly 2 generations behind intel. I dont think Bulldozer is going to match the 1155 SB, much less the upcoming 2011 socket chips.
What I want to see is a 27inch iMac with an HD 6970 2GB...Whoa whoa wee wow:eek:
AMD is ahead of Intel with the Fusion CPUs, even if the Llano core is not new.
AMD is ahead of Intel with multicore.
AMD is catching up in instruction set with Bulldozer.
Where AMD is behind is in metal gates (which are coming real soon from AMD), and in process geometry, but AMD does continuous improvement of their process.
Im no snob against AMD GPUS...but their CPU's are nearly 2 generations behind intel. I dont think Bulldozer is going to match the 1155 SB, much less the upcoming 2011 socket chips.
What I want to see is a 27inch iMac with an HD 6970 2GB...Whoa whoa wee wow:eek:
AMD is ahead of Intel with the Fusion CPUs, even if the Llano core is not new.
AMD is ahead of Intel with multicore.
AMD is catching up in instruction set with Bulldozer.
Where AMD is behind is in metal gates (which are coming real soon from AMD), and in process geometry, but AMD does continuous improvement of their process.
