Foxglove9
Jul 14, 09:22 PM
I think the current case is getting a little old looking and needs a change. It still holds up to pc cases and is beautiful inside. My compaints are how heavy it is and how the handles cut through my hands when I try to lift it. I'd really like to see them change that a little.
I personally would like to see something like the macbooks, in white or black.
I really don't see the need for any case changes for the towers (other than adding at least one more 5 inch bay, which I am all for) instead of redeigning the case for the sake of it, why not pocket the saving in design, and tooling, and pass some along to the consumer. I don't recall any big case changes to the mini, or imac in the G5 - intel change over.
I personally would like to see something like the macbooks, in white or black.
I really don't see the need for any case changes for the towers (other than adding at least one more 5 inch bay, which I am all for) instead of redeigning the case for the sake of it, why not pocket the saving in design, and tooling, and pass some along to the consumer. I don't recall any big case changes to the mini, or imac in the G5 - intel change over.
Amazing Iceman
Mar 22, 04:50 PM
I can assure that doubling the 256MB of the first iPad is not enough for people that need a lot of multitask, like me.
I don't need to own an iPad 2.
The competitors have 1GB RAM, iPad 2 has 512MB.
It's simple: Apple is always behind hardware-wise because they like to priorize esthetics and appearance (besides the "so wonderful OS" ad). It's been this way for Macs, it seems to be the same way for iPads.
Android phones are selling more than iPhone.
iPhone has started a market, competitors are improving it.
iPad has started a market, competitors are improving it.
If you just can't recognize how multitask works better with 1GB RAM and true background apps (QNX, Honeycomb), then you deserve to use a limited thing like an iPad.
I've only bought the first iPad because there were no competitors at that time (and I hate netbooks), but now things are different. To be honest, A LOT different.
People said that the iPhone was going to be the best phone out there, but the market is showing something different.
People say the iPad is the best tablet out there, but it seems that the market is going to show something different.
There are 2 sides: Apple fanboys and realistic people.
I like products, not brands.
The problem with having too much memory and resources available to spare, is that many programmers tend to become sloppy and careless about optimizing their code. This is one reason why Microsoft Office requires more and more RAM and CPU every time a new version is released.
I don't need to own an iPad 2.
The competitors have 1GB RAM, iPad 2 has 512MB.
It's simple: Apple is always behind hardware-wise because they like to priorize esthetics and appearance (besides the "so wonderful OS" ad). It's been this way for Macs, it seems to be the same way for iPads.
Android phones are selling more than iPhone.
iPhone has started a market, competitors are improving it.
iPad has started a market, competitors are improving it.
If you just can't recognize how multitask works better with 1GB RAM and true background apps (QNX, Honeycomb), then you deserve to use a limited thing like an iPad.
I've only bought the first iPad because there were no competitors at that time (and I hate netbooks), but now things are different. To be honest, A LOT different.
People said that the iPhone was going to be the best phone out there, but the market is showing something different.
People say the iPad is the best tablet out there, but it seems that the market is going to show something different.
There are 2 sides: Apple fanboys and realistic people.
I like products, not brands.
The problem with having too much memory and resources available to spare, is that many programmers tend to become sloppy and careless about optimizing their code. This is one reason why Microsoft Office requires more and more RAM and CPU every time a new version is released.
ergle2
Sep 20, 01:50 PM
No, one that just ignores you and your inquiries because it was already clear where you were coming from..thus I feel no obligation to engage you in my thought process and your self important questioning. Has nothing to do with my maturity, and everything to do with my lack of caring about you or your opinion.
Ah, a response that is pompous, imperious, petulant, inconsistent AND incorrect -- you didn't ignore me, after all, you were simply obnoxious and evasive with a serious of ridiculous replies.
Nice projection with the "self-important", though.
Where I was coming from was purely from a sense of curiosity as to why someone would apparently feel that technology can advance too quickly. It's not unobvious, I grant you, but a rather unobjectionable query to my mind.
Interestingly, it would appear you do care enough about my opinion - or perhaps that of other forum denizens? - to respond in a way you apparently consider to be "clever". Feel free to ignore me -- really, I can take it! I mean, I'm sure I'll probably suffer a couple of seconds of heartbreak sometime around, say, 2020, but I'll survive.
Oh and "thought process" - ROTFL - lovely!
Ah, a response that is pompous, imperious, petulant, inconsistent AND incorrect -- you didn't ignore me, after all, you were simply obnoxious and evasive with a serious of ridiculous replies.
Nice projection with the "self-important", though.
Where I was coming from was purely from a sense of curiosity as to why someone would apparently feel that technology can advance too quickly. It's not unobvious, I grant you, but a rather unobjectionable query to my mind.
Interestingly, it would appear you do care enough about my opinion - or perhaps that of other forum denizens? - to respond in a way you apparently consider to be "clever". Feel free to ignore me -- really, I can take it! I mean, I'm sure I'll probably suffer a couple of seconds of heartbreak sometime around, say, 2020, but I'll survive.
Oh and "thought process" - ROTFL - lovely!
Lord Blackadder
Mar 23, 02:26 PM
That is totally reasonable and understandable, although I do disagree. I can't with good heart support sending my neighbors son/daughter overseas to fight for another people.
Well, we have allies, don't we? I simply consider the UN an attempt to permanently ally the world's nations to the extent that these sort of situations can be dealt with based on broader consensus. We are far from the ideal, but we must keep working towards it and an imperfect UN is better than no UN at all.
I just find it pretty disgusting when we have the VP going on the record talking out his arse about "Unless we are attacked or unless there is proof we are about to be attacked", then a couple years later nary a peep when we start bombing a foreign country that is not even close to a threat to us. Did Biden qualify it with a " we should be able to intervene in a nation's affairs if it is thought necessary to either 1) protect other nations from harm or 2) protect a nation's own people from its government, or in the case of a civil war, one or more factions." NOPE!
I'm not going to defend Biden, he puts his foot in his mouth quite a bit - though he is FAR from the only politician in Washingotn with that problem. Besides, unlike Cheney, he is very much playing second fiddle in the administration (actually he's so far down the pecking order only fiddles when someone lends him one, if I can stretch that saying to the breaking point).
It is worth remembering that the Bush Administration sent that clown Bolton as our representative to the UN - a man who opposes that organization's very existence. Incredibly counterproductive. No, I expect hypocrisy from both Democrats and Republicans.
I think it all boils down to whether you buy into the notion that the UN is a global representative body. If you do, then sending troops to enforce UN resolutions is not just fighting for "other people" but fighting for ouselves. If member nations took the concept of the UN more seriously, UN resolutions alone might be enough to stabilize situations like this without the need for major military intervention.
Well, we have allies, don't we? I simply consider the UN an attempt to permanently ally the world's nations to the extent that these sort of situations can be dealt with based on broader consensus. We are far from the ideal, but we must keep working towards it and an imperfect UN is better than no UN at all.
I just find it pretty disgusting when we have the VP going on the record talking out his arse about "Unless we are attacked or unless there is proof we are about to be attacked", then a couple years later nary a peep when we start bombing a foreign country that is not even close to a threat to us. Did Biden qualify it with a " we should be able to intervene in a nation's affairs if it is thought necessary to either 1) protect other nations from harm or 2) protect a nation's own people from its government, or in the case of a civil war, one or more factions." NOPE!
I'm not going to defend Biden, he puts his foot in his mouth quite a bit - though he is FAR from the only politician in Washingotn with that problem. Besides, unlike Cheney, he is very much playing second fiddle in the administration (actually he's so far down the pecking order only fiddles when someone lends him one, if I can stretch that saying to the breaking point).
It is worth remembering that the Bush Administration sent that clown Bolton as our representative to the UN - a man who opposes that organization's very existence. Incredibly counterproductive. No, I expect hypocrisy from both Democrats and Republicans.
I think it all boils down to whether you buy into the notion that the UN is a global representative body. If you do, then sending troops to enforce UN resolutions is not just fighting for "other people" but fighting for ouselves. If member nations took the concept of the UN more seriously, UN resolutions alone might be enough to stabilize situations like this without the need for major military intervention.
skunk
Apr 27, 04:51 PM
The bigger deal here is the tendency of some fathers to name their kids the EXACT same name they have and add a "2nd". I've always thought that practice couldn't be stupidier. :PIt's just like kings, innit?
mdlooker
Apr 8, 05:56 AM
Well I wonder what lesson will be taught here? I don't think Apple will trust them ever again with blockbuster items. I wonder if companies hold grudges?
Reach9
Apr 11, 04:11 PM
Perhaps solely in the phone part of the equation. Here's the newsflash: the "smart" part of "smartphone" encompasses much more than a voice-driven contact list and actual phone calls.
The iOS ecosystem completely destroys Android, no matter how many widgets you're able to install.
You're right, but here's where i think is the difference. Browsing the Internet, Calendar, Checking Mail, Listening to songs, Texting, Multitasking, Notifications, Cut-Copy-Paste, ability to open and use Office files, Navigation system, basic tools like Currency converters, To-Do lists etc. These are what i believe encompasses in a "smartphone", and here's the newsflash: Android OS meets them perfectly.
I'm not talking about widgets, customization, dynamic wallapers etc
The iPhone was late on MMS, Multitasking, Cut-Copy-Paste, and now it's going to be a notification system. Plus, browsing the internet, checking mail and practically everything is much better on a bigger screen.
I feel the App Store is just an added feature, and that's why i'd get an iPod Touch for.
Imagine your iPhone without the App store and all the apps you downloaded from it. Now imagine the HTC EVO without the Android app store. Which is the better smartphone? It's pretty obvious if you ask me.
Android OS already has the "smartphone" features down, and they're just working on the bonus features such as the Android App Store.
iOS on the other hand is catching up to these "smartphone" features. My old Nokia E63 had a better notification system than the iPhone, and that's pathetic.
The iOS ecosystem completely destroys Android, no matter how many widgets you're able to install.
You're right, but here's where i think is the difference. Browsing the Internet, Calendar, Checking Mail, Listening to songs, Texting, Multitasking, Notifications, Cut-Copy-Paste, ability to open and use Office files, Navigation system, basic tools like Currency converters, To-Do lists etc. These are what i believe encompasses in a "smartphone", and here's the newsflash: Android OS meets them perfectly.
I'm not talking about widgets, customization, dynamic wallapers etc
The iPhone was late on MMS, Multitasking, Cut-Copy-Paste, and now it's going to be a notification system. Plus, browsing the internet, checking mail and practically everything is much better on a bigger screen.
I feel the App Store is just an added feature, and that's why i'd get an iPod Touch for.
Imagine your iPhone without the App store and all the apps you downloaded from it. Now imagine the HTC EVO without the Android app store. Which is the better smartphone? It's pretty obvious if you ask me.
Android OS already has the "smartphone" features down, and they're just working on the bonus features such as the Android App Store.
iOS on the other hand is catching up to these "smartphone" features. My old Nokia E63 had a better notification system than the iPhone, and that's pathetic.
mac1984user
Apr 27, 08:33 AM
Apple's solution is fine by me. They wouldn't have done anything if there wasn't so much press about it, but I guess that's a good reason (one of the only ones) for the press to exist. Still, they all managed to get it a bit wrong, though. I noticed (like so many others out there), that the map wasn't recording my EXACT location, but just cell towers and wifi spots I may have accessed. The info didn't really bother me. It wasn't like it had me pegged at my local pub - or did it?!?! =)
QuarterSwede
Apr 25, 01:45 PM
Ah, the perfect storm! A (probable) bug that does not clip the data the way Google does it, a story that gets reported months ago and then it forgotten, a new story that appears and blows it way out of proportion, news articles that imply Apple is SPYING ON YOU (even though Apple does not get this information), and lots of ignorance spewed all over the Web.
Natually this leads to stupid lawsuits. This is America, dammit!
*sigh* This is turning into another Antennagate, misinformation and all. Steve is going to have to do more than that email to get people to shut up about what is a very small issue that is being exploded into a very large misinformation campaign.
Pretty well said.
Natually this leads to stupid lawsuits. This is America, dammit!
*sigh* This is turning into another Antennagate, misinformation and all. Steve is going to have to do more than that email to get people to shut up about what is a very small issue that is being exploded into a very large misinformation campaign.
Pretty well said.
Eduard
Apr 9, 04:22 PM
I would rather keep my 330m than an integrated Intel GPU :(
Multimedia
Aug 17, 01:59 PM
The interesting thing to note from the Anandtech review is that to saturate a 2 core setup, all you need is one program. To saturate a quad, you need to be doing a bit more at the same time. To saturate an octo, you need to be doing a hell of a lot of things at the same time.Not so. I can only run one compression process at a time on the Quad G5 unless I want the speed of that process and others I want to run at the same time to be compromized. Both Toast and Handbrake can use 4 cores EACH.Now I don't know bout you lot, but there's only so much I can do at the same time.This is the place where you are misunderstanding how LITTLE one can do with only 4 cores. Sure it helps to be able to run anything I like and still use FCP with no performance hit. So I think a quad is perfect for that. But when it comes to 8+ cores, your actual workflow won't improve in the slightest unless it doesn't involve you having to do anything (eg run 4 instances of handbrake). I'm sure everyone once in a while has some work that can just be delegated to the CPU and it does its thing, but for the most part, where your attention and brain is needed, an 8 core will sit at least 50% idle.Not from where I'm sitting. The opposite is true for me.Considering Clovertowns will have a slower, twice saturated FSB and lower clock speeds, most people will be better off (financially and productively) with Woodcrests. I'm just hoping that when octos are announced, the quads will drop in price.But speed is not our problem. Apps already capable of saturating 4 cores need more cores to run simultaneously without compromising speed.Now if they start to optimise apps to take full advantage of more than 2 cores, that's a whole different ballgame ;)That is what has already happened. You were unaware of that fact. So yes, it is a whole different ballgame already. :eek:
BWhaler
Aug 26, 07:11 PM
Note: I believe I accidentally merged someone's (possibly a couple of people's) posts into BWhaler's post (3 above this post). Sorry. :o
jsw, thanks for merging my postings.
Didn't mean to spam the thread. (Just wasn't thinking...)
jsw, thanks for merging my postings.
Didn't mean to spam the thread. (Just wasn't thinking...)
Bilbo63
Apr 19, 06:03 PM
According to Wikipedia It was released in Feb before the iPhone was released..
The iPhone was revealed on January 9th 2007. It didn't ship until June due to regulatory approval.
The iPhone was revealed on January 9th 2007. It didn't ship until June due to regulatory approval.
2ndPath
Aug 6, 12:04 PM
To me the answer to the whole IR/Mac Pro/Front Row thing is obvious - put an integrated IR receiver into the keyboard. The keyboard would come with the Mac Pro (unlike the display) and is rarely under the desk. :)
Plus they could sell the keyboard for any Mac (including ones that don't have Front Row - they could include the app with it).
Why sell a new keyboard for front row, if you can sell a new Mac to the same person? Including the sensor in the Cinema Displays would enable Apple to sell more of their display, on which they probably have a very good profit margin (when you compare to other manufacturers).
They could also just put it into the tower. Even if that is under the desk, it might not be that much of a problem. In my experience the sensor responds very nicely to the remote even if the line of sight between them is somewhat obstructed.
However the best solution I think, was suggested by someone on these forums. I don't know, whether it has been quoted here already, because I did not go through all the messages. This poster suggested to combine the sensor with an external iSight. That could be connected to any monitor and would probably have a good IR reception because of beeing on top of the monitor and thus very exposed.
Plus they could sell the keyboard for any Mac (including ones that don't have Front Row - they could include the app with it).
Why sell a new keyboard for front row, if you can sell a new Mac to the same person? Including the sensor in the Cinema Displays would enable Apple to sell more of their display, on which they probably have a very good profit margin (when you compare to other manufacturers).
They could also just put it into the tower. Even if that is under the desk, it might not be that much of a problem. In my experience the sensor responds very nicely to the remote even if the line of sight between them is somewhat obstructed.
However the best solution I think, was suggested by someone on these forums. I don't know, whether it has been quoted here already, because I did not go through all the messages. This poster suggested to combine the sensor with an external iSight. That could be connected to any monitor and would probably have a good IR reception because of beeing on top of the monitor and thus very exposed.
centauratlas
Apr 6, 02:19 PM
I read it somewhere, where was it, oh yeah, HERE ( http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/06/apples-suppliers-ship-roughly-2-5-million-ipad-2s-in-march/) that Apple sold around 2.5 million iPad 2s in March (plus a lot of older iPad 1 stock). And that was about 3 weeks from launch day.
And they expect around 12 million per quarter according to the article here earlier today. Talk about a huge difference....nearly 110,000 iPad 2s per day! Plus a lot of original iPads.
And they expect around 12 million per quarter according to the article here earlier today. Talk about a huge difference....nearly 110,000 iPad 2s per day! Plus a lot of original iPads.
tipt
Apr 10, 06:47 PM
This is simple, folks. I predict the introduction of AirEdit, to go with AirPlay and AirPrint.
What do we currently have in place?
Q Master
Logic Nodes
AirPlay
OS X server (now bundled in lion)
iPad multitouch UI tablet with the power to stream A/V over a network
AppleTV to stream media over a mac network to an HDTV
iTunes as a hub for media
Now, how could FCP utilize all of that? How could all these little pieces add up to one large, powerful network for editing and distributing media throughout a home or office?
I'll bet the iPad will be able to control the FCP UI and take advantage of a cluster of Mac Pro's (or a single mac) to do a lot of the editing, compressing, etc, and then use the iPad to stream that footage to any HDTV with an AppleTV or mac connected to it.
I'm sure there will be a new UI and we can always sit at the workstation if we please, but imagine being able to make edits, compress, and stream rough drafts across the country/world. You can be editing on your xserve cluster from the airport while your waiting for your flight. With in air wifi, you could probably even work from the plane...without the bulk of a laptop.
The guy in the video mentioned thunderbolt and that Apple knew what the competition was up to. Something to that effect. Must be a reason for point that out specifically.
What do we currently have in place?
Q Master
Logic Nodes
AirPlay
OS X server (now bundled in lion)
iPad multitouch UI tablet with the power to stream A/V over a network
AppleTV to stream media over a mac network to an HDTV
iTunes as a hub for media
Now, how could FCP utilize all of that? How could all these little pieces add up to one large, powerful network for editing and distributing media throughout a home or office?
I'll bet the iPad will be able to control the FCP UI and take advantage of a cluster of Mac Pro's (or a single mac) to do a lot of the editing, compressing, etc, and then use the iPad to stream that footage to any HDTV with an AppleTV or mac connected to it.
I'm sure there will be a new UI and we can always sit at the workstation if we please, but imagine being able to make edits, compress, and stream rough drafts across the country/world. You can be editing on your xserve cluster from the airport while your waiting for your flight. With in air wifi, you could probably even work from the plane...without the bulk of a laptop.
The guy in the video mentioned thunderbolt and that Apple knew what the competition was up to. Something to that effect. Must be a reason for point that out specifically.
Kevin Monahan
Apr 6, 02:20 PM
Unless you have an extreme PC...Adobe makes no sense (unless you are using the Quadro nVidia cards in a Mac Pro). Sure, the Merc engine increases performance for a few transitions and filters....but rendering is still necessary in MOST cases!
Premiere Pro makes sense in a lot of cases for Mac users. It makes the most sense for After Effects artists, like yourself, as you can dynamic link directly to After Effects from the Premiere Pro timeline. As you pointed out, Macs work great with Premiere Pro and the NVIDIA Quadro 4000 card. More and more cards are being supported as time moves forward. Want a certain card to add Mercury Playback engine hardware acceleration? Make a request here: http://www.adobe.com/go/wish
Not sure what you mean by "unless you have an extreme PC, Adobe makes no sense?" Yes, you need more RAM and a decent NVIDIA card to make Premiere Pro really fly on a PC-it's a 64 bit application-but even modest PCs do just fine with Premiere Pro. If Apple puts out a 64 bit application, you can bet that you should be looking at upgrading your Mac with a lot more RAM, more cores on the GPU, etc., as well. Need more info on tuning your system with Premiere Pro? Watch this: http://tv.adobe.com/watch/learn-premiere-pro-cs5/optimize-a-computer-for-mercury-playback-engine/
You wrote that rendering is still necessary in most cases. Really? What kind of system are you on? I've never had to render, even on my '09 MacBook Pro with no NVIDIA card and the Mercury Playback Engine in software mode.
You say that CUDA accelerates only a "few" video filters and transitions? There are a lot more than that! Upgrade to Premiere Pro 5.0.3 and you'll see the following GPU accelerated effects:
- Alpha Adjust
- Basic 3D
- Black & White
- Brightness & Contrast
- Color Balance (RGB)
- Color Pass
- Color Replace
- Crop
- Drop Shadow
- Extract
- Fast Color Corrector
- Feather Edges
- Gamma Correction
- Garbage Matte (4, 8, 16)
- Gaussian Blur
- Horizontal Flip
- Levels
- Luma Corrector
- Luma Curve
- Noise
- Proc Amp
- RGB Curves
- RGB Color Corrector
- Sharpen
- Three-way Color Corrector
- Timecode
- Tint
- Track Matte
- Ultra Keyer
- Video Limiter
- Vertical Flip
uk bank holidays 2011 calendar
2011 calendar uk bank
Premiere Pro makes sense in a lot of cases for Mac users. It makes the most sense for After Effects artists, like yourself, as you can dynamic link directly to After Effects from the Premiere Pro timeline. As you pointed out, Macs work great with Premiere Pro and the NVIDIA Quadro 4000 card. More and more cards are being supported as time moves forward. Want a certain card to add Mercury Playback engine hardware acceleration? Make a request here: http://www.adobe.com/go/wish
Not sure what you mean by "unless you have an extreme PC, Adobe makes no sense?" Yes, you need more RAM and a decent NVIDIA card to make Premiere Pro really fly on a PC-it's a 64 bit application-but even modest PCs do just fine with Premiere Pro. If Apple puts out a 64 bit application, you can bet that you should be looking at upgrading your Mac with a lot more RAM, more cores on the GPU, etc., as well. Need more info on tuning your system with Premiere Pro? Watch this: http://tv.adobe.com/watch/learn-premiere-pro-cs5/optimize-a-computer-for-mercury-playback-engine/
You wrote that rendering is still necessary in most cases. Really? What kind of system are you on? I've never had to render, even on my '09 MacBook Pro with no NVIDIA card and the Mercury Playback Engine in software mode.
You say that CUDA accelerates only a "few" video filters and transitions? There are a lot more than that! Upgrade to Premiere Pro 5.0.3 and you'll see the following GPU accelerated effects:
- Alpha Adjust
- Basic 3D
- Black & White
- Brightness & Contrast
- Color Balance (RGB)
- Color Pass
- Color Replace
- Crop
- Drop Shadow
- Extract
- Fast Color Corrector
- Feather Edges
- Gamma Correction
- Garbage Matte (4, 8, 16)
- Gaussian Blur
- Horizontal Flip
- Levels
- Luma Corrector
- Luma Curve
- Noise
- Proc Amp
- RGB Curves
- RGB Color Corrector
- Sharpen
- Three-way Color Corrector
- Timecode
- Tint
- Track Matte
- Ultra Keyer
- Video Limiter
- Vertical Flip
err404
Apr 25, 02:31 PM
Obviously this IS an issue; just not a very big one. Considering the low quality of the data and the nature if what is stored, it is not well suited for tracking user whereabouts with any level of confidence.
Apple does need to address this, but I don't see any malicious intent. The data serves a valuable function for the user and is not collected by Apple.
Apple does need to address this, but I don't see any malicious intent. The data serves a valuable function for the user and is not collected by Apple.
Eraserhead
Mar 23, 01:50 AM
These things don't travel very fast.
I was having a look on Google and a container ship only takes 20 days or so to get from China to Europe, and a military ship would be faster - so you don't need that much time to get ships into place.
And China to Europe by ship is a long way (http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=hkg-sin-trv-dxb-cai-gib-sou&MS=wls&DU=km).
I was having a look on Google and a container ship only takes 20 days or so to get from China to Europe, and a military ship would be faster - so you don't need that much time to get ships into place.
And China to Europe by ship is a long way (http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=hkg-sin-trv-dxb-cai-gib-sou&MS=wls&DU=km).
NoSmokingBandit
Aug 19, 02:25 PM
All that I get from that quote is that they are using older models, but that they will, obviously, be rendered in the new GT5 engine. So, the marketing team can say all they want, but actual screen shots of Standard™ cars do not show much improvement, if any at all, resolution increase notwithstanding.
Based on what, old gameplay footage? Game are often tested with old resources while the new models are being built. God of War used a stick man with a sword until they got Kratos done.
Look at this pic:
http://us.gran-turismo.com/c/binary/images/5294/gamescom2010_029a.jpg
That rx-7 looks tons better than anything GT4 ever had, but its still not as nice as the "premium" cars. I am assuming of course that this is live-rendered, and i believe it is due to the jaggies on the rear of the rx-7, which i can't imagine they would let slide on a pre-rendered shot.
Time will tell, of course, but i'm certain they didnt just import models from GT4. What the hell would they have been doing for the past 5 years?
Based on what, old gameplay footage? Game are often tested with old resources while the new models are being built. God of War used a stick man with a sword until they got Kratos done.
Look at this pic:
http://us.gran-turismo.com/c/binary/images/5294/gamescom2010_029a.jpg
That rx-7 looks tons better than anything GT4 ever had, but its still not as nice as the "premium" cars. I am assuming of course that this is live-rendered, and i believe it is due to the jaggies on the rear of the rx-7, which i can't imagine they would let slide on a pre-rendered shot.
Time will tell, of course, but i'm certain they didnt just import models from GT4. What the hell would they have been doing for the past 5 years?
Hellhammer
Apr 8, 09:01 AM
The trouble is .. I find the TDP numbers for Sandy Bridge very misleading. For example the previous i7 2.66Ghz dual core had a TDP of 35W and the current i7 2.2Ghz quad core has a TDP of 45W. Theoretically, it should only use 10W more when doing CPU intensive task, but according to anandtech who measured the task, the i7 Sandy Bridge Quad core was using almost 40W more when running cinebench.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4205/the-macbook-pro-review-13-and-15-inch-2011-brings-sandy-bridge/14
It just doesn't make any sense. Going by those figures, if the i7 dual core was 35W, the i7 Sandy Bridge quad core would be around 70W.
Not sure how this relates to potential MacBook Air Sandy Bridge processors, but keep in mind.. there must be a reason why Samsung went for the ULV processor in their 13" laptop instead of the LV one.
CPU isn't the only thing that changed. AMD 6750M (~30W) has higher TDP than NVidia GT 330M (~23W). I had to put ~ because their TDPs are not officially stated by AMD or NVidia so it's just based on previous GPUs and their TDPs. The point is that AMD 6750M has higher TDP.
There is also another thing. TDP is not the maximum power draw. Maximum power dissipation is usually 20-30% more than the actual TDP. While MPD is rarely achieved as it requires maximum voltage and temperature, it can (nearly) be achieved with heavy benchmarking applications.
For example, the combined TDP from quad core SB and AMD 6750M is 75W. If we use 20% extra as the MPD, that is 90W, just from the CPU and GPU! Of course those parts are not using 90W in that test because things like screen, HD, RAM etc need power too. As the MPD is usually in percents, it can explain why the difference is so big in watts.
40W sounds a bit too much to explain with MPD though. IIRC the GT 330M is underclocked but I'm not 100% sure. You have a valid point that the SBs may be using more power than their predecessors. To make this more accurate, we should compare them with C2Ds though ;)
I guess we will have to wait and see, but an ULV in 13" would be more than a disappointment.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4205/the-macbook-pro-review-13-and-15-inch-2011-brings-sandy-bridge/14
It just doesn't make any sense. Going by those figures, if the i7 dual core was 35W, the i7 Sandy Bridge quad core would be around 70W.
Not sure how this relates to potential MacBook Air Sandy Bridge processors, but keep in mind.. there must be a reason why Samsung went for the ULV processor in their 13" laptop instead of the LV one.
CPU isn't the only thing that changed. AMD 6750M (~30W) has higher TDP than NVidia GT 330M (~23W). I had to put ~ because their TDPs are not officially stated by AMD or NVidia so it's just based on previous GPUs and their TDPs. The point is that AMD 6750M has higher TDP.
There is also another thing. TDP is not the maximum power draw. Maximum power dissipation is usually 20-30% more than the actual TDP. While MPD is rarely achieved as it requires maximum voltage and temperature, it can (nearly) be achieved with heavy benchmarking applications.
For example, the combined TDP from quad core SB and AMD 6750M is 75W. If we use 20% extra as the MPD, that is 90W, just from the CPU and GPU! Of course those parts are not using 90W in that test because things like screen, HD, RAM etc need power too. As the MPD is usually in percents, it can explain why the difference is so big in watts.
40W sounds a bit too much to explain with MPD though. IIRC the GT 330M is underclocked but I'm not 100% sure. You have a valid point that the SBs may be using more power than their predecessors. To make this more accurate, we should compare them with C2Ds though ;)
I guess we will have to wait and see, but an ULV in 13" would be more than a disappointment.
Super Dave
Aug 8, 12:50 AM
Also a very good point, so I need a bigger main HD for my MacBookPro (the new Seagate 160GB becomes interesting) for Time Machine, but i still need to back the hole thing up to an external HD in case of a HD crash (I had 2 in the last 8 months!). So Tine Machine doesn't make Backups obsolete, I didn't even think of that up to now. Hmmm..
Time Machine is backup, it's not for on the same drive (or nothing implied it was).
David :cool:
Time Machine is backup, it's not for on the same drive (or nothing implied it was).
David :cool:
aaronb
Sep 19, 10:51 AM
So the Apple crew is simply waiting on marketing until they release these new laptops? Exactly how much marketing needs to go into a slight update? I understand that these are 64-bit processors but the average consumer has no clue what that means to begin with. Waiting for the marketing crew seems really strange to me, should they have not already been ready for this transition by now? Just make a box on the front page that has a picture of a MBP and let it say "the fastest just got faster" or something.
kered22
Jul 14, 10:38 PM
Another possible reason for moving the power supply to the top, there are a fair number of the current G5s blowing their power supplies. To replace those, the entire G5 has to be disassembled. I sure hope Apple will put some beefier power supplies in so we won't have to deal with so many blowing, but just in case, I can imagine them wanting to do this.
For those considering the 750GB Seagate perpendicular recording drives, you may want to run by this barefeats page and read the caution notes:
http://www.barefeats.com/hard78.html
Being an early adopter can be fun, but you get exposed to some risks.
For those considering the 750GB Seagate perpendicular recording drives, you may want to run by this barefeats page and read the caution notes:
http://www.barefeats.com/hard78.html
Being an early adopter can be fun, but you get exposed to some risks.
No comments:
Post a Comment