shamino
Jul 14, 03:55 PM
So why use woodcrest WITHOUT dual processor configuration? Makes no sense, any single proc models should be conroe.
4M of L2 cache is another good reason. According to recent reports, only the "extreme edition" of the Core 2 (aka Conroe) chip will have 4M. And it will cost more than Woodcrest.
Macs have ALREADY had two optical bays (including twin CD drives). And none of these configs include two drives, you'd only have a second one if you wanted it.
Where have you been shopping recently? Only one model PowerMac has ever had two optical drive bay.
The MDD G4 PowerMac towers (August 2002-June 2004) have two optical drive bays. The G4 PowerMacs that came before only have one (the lower bay is only big enough for floppy-size devices, like zip drives.) The G5 PowerMacs only have one externally-accessible bay of any size.
I would love the ability to install two optical drives, but your claim that Apple is currently shipping this somewhere is simply not true.
4M of L2 cache is another good reason. According to recent reports, only the "extreme edition" of the Core 2 (aka Conroe) chip will have 4M. And it will cost more than Woodcrest.
Macs have ALREADY had two optical bays (including twin CD drives). And none of these configs include two drives, you'd only have a second one if you wanted it.
Where have you been shopping recently? Only one model PowerMac has ever had two optical drive bay.
The MDD G4 PowerMac towers (August 2002-June 2004) have two optical drive bays. The G4 PowerMacs that came before only have one (the lower bay is only big enough for floppy-size devices, like zip drives.) The G5 PowerMacs only have one externally-accessible bay of any size.
I would love the ability to install two optical drives, but your claim that Apple is currently shipping this somewhere is simply not true.
WillEH
Mar 25, 10:26 PM
Good stuff, waiting and ready to pay! :o
mdriftmeyer
Apr 25, 03:57 PM
I'm interested in who funded this research project much to do about nothing and when will this research extend to all the Telcos, corporations and more.
ciTiger
Mar 25, 10:35 PM
What? this seems hard to believe... Already done on development? :confused:
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 11, 01:59 PM
Hell I have only now seen 3G phones that can handle UTMS ( Japan).
Hmmm, I dumped/retired my first UTMS cellphone more than a year ago... and I live in Sweden. Moreover, Japan have had UTMS phones longer than in Sweden
Hmmm, I dumped/retired my first UTMS cellphone more than a year ago... and I live in Sweden. Moreover, Japan have had UTMS phones longer than in Sweden
ChickenSwartz
Jul 27, 11:54 AM
Has anyone ever thought that the reasons the MBPs run hot is because they were originally designed to have a cooler chip in them...Merom.
I know it had been rumored that Apple originally wanted to wait for Merom but "settled" for Yonah to get Intel in faster. Or maybe I am just trying to give myself hope that I will get a super cool MBP in a month (or less?).
I know it had been rumored that Apple originally wanted to wait for Merom but "settled" for Yonah to get Intel in faster. Or maybe I am just trying to give myself hope that I will get a super cool MBP in a month (or less?).
kdarling
Apr 20, 03:35 PM
I noticed that the HTC and Samsung cases only share just one patent: the bounce-back one.
iliketyla
Mar 31, 02:39 PM
I've been wanting to say this for a very long time. Google's OS has no advantage over iOS. You could even say it has a disadvantage. Having to create a vanilla code base that needs to function on multiple pieces of hardware is complex, more complexity creates weaker system.
But here's my point. The ONLY ONLY reason why Android market share is anywhere near what it is today is because of the Buy One Get One options at most phone retailers. iOS has NEVER done that and hopefully never will. If you didn't care about the phone or service but needed two "Newer Smart Phones" one for you and one for your wife, why not go with the "Blah Blah" model from Verizon where if I buy one today I get the second for free (two year agreement and activation fees required).
Market share means nothing. This platform is doomed unless Google reins it in and get control over it. If they do, providers will be less willing to work with them, if they don't, by by Android.
My Two Cents.
-LanPhantom
From my own personal experience, I know very few people that have Android phones that took advantage of the BOGO deal.
I personally bought this Android phone because I read reviews, and it was the best lower end phone, and I can't justify spending an enormous amount of money on something I'll upgrade in a year.
I used an iPhone 3GS for a year, and I don't miss it.
It's a very nice phone, but the features that I can use on Android more than make up for any advantages the iPhone had.
Once again, this is just MY opinion, but I figured I'd throw it out there.
But here's my point. The ONLY ONLY reason why Android market share is anywhere near what it is today is because of the Buy One Get One options at most phone retailers. iOS has NEVER done that and hopefully never will. If you didn't care about the phone or service but needed two "Newer Smart Phones" one for you and one for your wife, why not go with the "Blah Blah" model from Verizon where if I buy one today I get the second for free (two year agreement and activation fees required).
Market share means nothing. This platform is doomed unless Google reins it in and get control over it. If they do, providers will be less willing to work with them, if they don't, by by Android.
My Two Cents.
-LanPhantom
From my own personal experience, I know very few people that have Android phones that took advantage of the BOGO deal.
I personally bought this Android phone because I read reviews, and it was the best lower end phone, and I can't justify spending an enormous amount of money on something I'll upgrade in a year.
I used an iPhone 3GS for a year, and I don't miss it.
It's a very nice phone, but the features that I can use on Android more than make up for any advantages the iPhone had.
Once again, this is just MY opinion, but I figured I'd throw it out there.
LightSpeed1
Apr 11, 03:53 PM
I think I'm done with the iPhone 5 rumors. At this point I think I'll just wait till June-July. It's not that far away.
Koufax80
Apr 25, 02:41 PM
Damnit! I just looked outside and saw Steve Jobs with a clipboard... Apple must have sent him to track my location since I turned my phone off...
reden
Apr 6, 03:14 PM
You list ONE issue with the iPad, that it looks too much like the iPhone, and then go on to a laundry list of issues on the Xoom that culminates in a tech support call and THAT is your preferred device?
Rock on winner. I have a bridge I want to sell you.
This guy, lol. I removed my comment because I'd waste my time with you. :):):)
Rock on winner. I have a bridge I want to sell you.
This guy, lol. I removed my comment because I'd waste my time with you. :):):)
notjustjay
Sep 19, 08:38 AM
All you people who keep whining about "But I want 64 bit!!!" need to step back and think about what possible benefit a 64-bit system will give you. Those of you who need to address more than 4 gigs of RAM are excused. The rest of you, tell me WHY you need 64-bit computing.
When they go Merom I want the MBP's and MB's to have useful, practical features. More ports, user-removable hard drive, better battery life, better video card, stuff like that. I'm waiting just as impatiently as everyone else, but the hype needs to be toned way down.
When they go Merom I want the MBP's and MB's to have useful, practical features. More ports, user-removable hard drive, better battery life, better video card, stuff like that. I'm waiting just as impatiently as everyone else, but the hype needs to be toned way down.
shamino
Jul 21, 10:07 AM
With all these new technologies with 4, 8 and eventually 24-core capacities (some time in the not too distant future) all running at 64-bit, we musn't forget that software also has tobe developed for these machienes in order to get the most out of the hardware. At the moment we aren't even maximising core-duo, let alone a quad core and all the rest!!!!
It really depends on your application.
On the desktop, if you're a typical user that's just interested in web surfing, playing music files, organizing your photo collection, etc., more than two cores will probably not be too useful. For these kinds of users, even two cores may be overkill, but two are useful for keeping a responsive UI when an application starts hogging all the CPU time.
If you start using higher-power applications (like video work - iMovie/iDVD, for instance) then more cores will speed up that kind of work (assuming the app is properly multithreaded, of course.) 4-core systems will definitely benefit this kind of user.
With current applications, however, I don't think more than 4 cores will be useful. The kind of work that will make 8 cores useful is the kinds that requires expensive professional software - which most people don't use.
If you get away from the desktop and look to the server market, however, the picture changes. A web server may only be running one copy of Apache, but it may create a thread for every simultaneous connection. If you have 8 cores, then you can handle 8 times as many connections as a 1-core system can (assuming sufficient memory and I/O bandwidth, of course.) Ditto for database, transaction, and all kinds of other servers. More cores means more simultaneous connections without performance degradation.
Cluster computing has similar benefits. With 8 cores in each processor, it is almost as good as having 8 times as many computers in the cluster, and a lot less expensive. This concept will scale up as the number of cores increases, assuming motherbaords can be designed with enough memory and FSB bandwidth to keep them all busy.
I think we might see a single quad-core chip in consumer systems, like the iMac. I think it is likely that we'll see them in Pro systems, like the Mac Pro (including a high-end model with two quad-core chips.)
I think processors with more than 4 cores will never be seen outside of servers - Xserves and maybe some configurations of Mac Pro. Mostly because that's where there is a need for this kind of power.
It really depends on your application.
On the desktop, if you're a typical user that's just interested in web surfing, playing music files, organizing your photo collection, etc., more than two cores will probably not be too useful. For these kinds of users, even two cores may be overkill, but two are useful for keeping a responsive UI when an application starts hogging all the CPU time.
If you start using higher-power applications (like video work - iMovie/iDVD, for instance) then more cores will speed up that kind of work (assuming the app is properly multithreaded, of course.) 4-core systems will definitely benefit this kind of user.
With current applications, however, I don't think more than 4 cores will be useful. The kind of work that will make 8 cores useful is the kinds that requires expensive professional software - which most people don't use.
If you get away from the desktop and look to the server market, however, the picture changes. A web server may only be running one copy of Apache, but it may create a thread for every simultaneous connection. If you have 8 cores, then you can handle 8 times as many connections as a 1-core system can (assuming sufficient memory and I/O bandwidth, of course.) Ditto for database, transaction, and all kinds of other servers. More cores means more simultaneous connections without performance degradation.
Cluster computing has similar benefits. With 8 cores in each processor, it is almost as good as having 8 times as many computers in the cluster, and a lot less expensive. This concept will scale up as the number of cores increases, assuming motherbaords can be designed with enough memory and FSB bandwidth to keep them all busy.
I think we might see a single quad-core chip in consumer systems, like the iMac. I think it is likely that we'll see them in Pro systems, like the Mac Pro (including a high-end model with two quad-core chips.)
I think processors with more than 4 cores will never be seen outside of servers - Xserves and maybe some configurations of Mac Pro. Mostly because that's where there is a need for this kind of power.
BoyBach
Nov 29, 12:56 PM
We might hate to admit it as Apple fans, but Apple needs the labels for the iTunes store to work just as much as the label needs Apple.
Not true. Apple doesn't need the iTunes Store since all iPods are full of stolen music! ;)
Not true. Apple doesn't need the iTunes Store since all iPods are full of stolen music! ;)
jpine
Apr 25, 03:03 PM
I dont understand how anyone would get the info from your phone.
Easy.
http://thenextweb.com/us/2011/04/20/us-police-can-copy-your-iphones-contents-in-under-two-minutes/
Easy.
http://thenextweb.com/us/2011/04/20/us-police-can-copy-your-iphones-contents-in-under-two-minutes/
ShnikeJSB
Jul 14, 04:30 PM
ONLY DDR2-667?!? :confused:
Come on Apple, you'd BETTER use DDR2-800 or I'll be pissed! :mad:
Come on Apple, you'd BETTER use DDR2-800 or I'll be pissed! :mad:
Bill McEnaney
Mar 3, 10:48 AM
Why do you conflate homosexuality with abuse and paedophilia?
I'm not conflating them. See post 129.
I'm not conflating them. See post 129.
JGowan
Aug 6, 06:46 PM
I have satellite internet and have not been able to see keynote streams since getting it. Quicktime just opens up and says "Connecting" but never does.
Is there some other source that I can expect to show the keynote (in its entirety, please)... Living in the country is a love/hate thing these days.
Thanks.
Is there some other source that I can expect to show the keynote (in its entirety, please)... Living in the country is a love/hate thing these days.
Thanks.
gnasher729
Aug 7, 12:03 PM
Admittedly trademark law isn't my specialty, but I suspect Apple has a trademark on the word "Mac," and adding a generic word like "Pro" to it does not seem like something you could claim any originality with. Especially since it's based on their trademarked word in the first place. Is there something I'm missing?
Oh, and a computer and computer store aren't exactly the same thing. How are you going to claim consumer confusion?
David :cool:
Apple has actually filed for the trademark "Mac Pro" _before_ this guy filed.
Oh, and a computer and computer store aren't exactly the same thing. How are you going to claim consumer confusion?
David :cool:
Apple has actually filed for the trademark "Mac Pro" _before_ this guy filed.
shawnce
Sep 13, 11:48 AM
Yes, that's true.
It's also true that most of the time, most people aren't even maxing out ONE core never mind eight.
And when they do, their program won't get any faster unless it's multithreaded and able to run on multiple cores at once.
Lets not forget things like Spotlight that can now run more rigorously without affecting CPU resource much. You will get more intelligent software that can prepare for what you want to do so that when you go to do it it will be much more responsive. In other words just because some tasks cannot be easily broken up to leverage multiple cores doesn't mean that tasks such as those cannot be speculative run by software on idle cores in preparation for you doing the task.
It's also true that most of the time, most people aren't even maxing out ONE core never mind eight.
And when they do, their program won't get any faster unless it's multithreaded and able to run on multiple cores at once.
Lets not forget things like Spotlight that can now run more rigorously without affecting CPU resource much. You will get more intelligent software that can prepare for what you want to do so that when you go to do it it will be much more responsive. In other words just because some tasks cannot be easily broken up to leverage multiple cores doesn't mean that tasks such as those cannot be speculative run by software on idle cores in preparation for you doing the task.
Benjamins
Mar 31, 07:11 PM
That, right there, is one of the reasons why the Apple community is widely mocked. You should be ashamed of yourself. A complete lack of understanding on the most basic principles of technology.
And Google fanboys still can't tell the difference between "Open", "Standard", "Free", "Open source" and "Proprietary". So I'd say those who do the mocking are not exactly all the bright either.
And Google fanboys still can't tell the difference between "Open", "Standard", "Free", "Open source" and "Proprietary". So I'd say those who do the mocking are not exactly all the bright either.
emotion
Jul 20, 09:13 AM
I wonder just how Apple would react to news that the next processor update is ahead of schedule. Presumably their plans are carefully laid out, and if a PC competitor can jump on Intel updates faster than they can without having to conform to a similar timeline, then Apple might get burned, if only slightly.
Remember Apple will be privvy to a lot more information that we as consumers are. They are probably on a level playing field at least with Intel compared with other PC vendors. They may even have a special relationship with Intel to get stuff slightly before people like Lenovo and Dell.
Remember Apple will be privvy to a lot more information that we as consumers are. They are probably on a level playing field at least with Intel compared with other PC vendors. They may even have a special relationship with Intel to get stuff slightly before people like Lenovo and Dell.
arkitect
Apr 28, 06:13 AM
I am not going to read 7 pages to see if someone already said this because I am sure they did.
It's clearly a forgery.
And you base that on what evidence exactly? :confused:
Not liking Obama does not mean you are racist.
Well judging by your signature I'd take that comment with a large pinch of salt.
It's clearly a forgery.
And you base that on what evidence exactly? :confused:
Not liking Obama does not mean you are racist.
Well judging by your signature I'd take that comment with a large pinch of salt.
Mr_Ed
Jul 20, 08:39 AM
I wonder what they're going to call them, Quad sounds cool but "Octa or Octo" just sounds a bit silly.
MacPro8?
The Mactopus??
I got it!
The Macintosh Quadra!
No, wait . . . .
;)
MacPro8?
The Mactopus??
I got it!
The Macintosh Quadra!
No, wait . . . .
;)
No comments:
Post a Comment