HecubusPro
Sep 1, 11:38 AM
The way I see it is why buy a product when it is being improved (no matter how little or much) and should be the same price or lower... most likely within the next few weeks?
Unless Apple adds a Blu-ray drive in their MBP's (not gonna happen, at least at this point) I doubt we'll see a price increase in those systems when they get teh C2D upgrade. As far as other computers are concerned, I'm not sure--doubt macbooks will increase either since their price tag is so attractive to consumers and competitve with other brands. It seems that the mini has had the most fluid pricing structure, but I could be wrong.
Unless Apple adds a Blu-ray drive in their MBP's (not gonna happen, at least at this point) I doubt we'll see a price increase in those systems when they get teh C2D upgrade. As far as other computers are concerned, I'm not sure--doubt macbooks will increase either since their price tag is so attractive to consumers and competitve with other brands. It seems that the mini has had the most fluid pricing structure, but I could be wrong.
Starship77
Apr 28, 04:50 PM
Oh I see, you're a smart ass. Oh how cute!!!
Tell ya what little boy, Besides a business degree I also hold CCE and CFCC from the AACE as well as a PMP from the PMI. On top of all that, I have worked in the industry for over 35 years. I forgot more about business that your sarcastic smart ass will ever know.
And trust me, my degree and certs have little to do with it. A grade school kid knows that a company that just posted a quarter with revenues of $16.43 billion (which is an increase of 13% from the same period in 2010), and profit of $5.23 billion isn't "DEAD"...
Obviously you don't understand that, in which case, you wouldn't even be a good clerk. Judging from you childish post, I do think I've met before. Haven't I heard you say "Would you like fries with that Sir"????
Please don't fight gentleman...
I really thought all the CCE CFCC AACE PMP PMI ZGFHABZZZ letters where a joke... What does it all meeeeeeannn?? :eek: :eek:
Tell ya what little boy, Besides a business degree I also hold CCE and CFCC from the AACE as well as a PMP from the PMI. On top of all that, I have worked in the industry for over 35 years. I forgot more about business that your sarcastic smart ass will ever know.
And trust me, my degree and certs have little to do with it. A grade school kid knows that a company that just posted a quarter with revenues of $16.43 billion (which is an increase of 13% from the same period in 2010), and profit of $5.23 billion isn't "DEAD"...
Obviously you don't understand that, in which case, you wouldn't even be a good clerk. Judging from you childish post, I do think I've met before. Haven't I heard you say "Would you like fries with that Sir"????
Please don't fight gentleman...
I really thought all the CCE CFCC AACE PMP PMI ZGFHABZZZ letters where a joke... What does it all meeeeeeannn?? :eek: :eek:
Veldek
Sep 14, 02:14 AM
screen is scaled 16x10 format (don't know if that's right or not) - key shape/layout is unknown.
again, these are renditions, not the product itself. Although, I'd buy one...I think the buttons would be way too small to use them. But the overall looks would be quite nice.
again, these are renditions, not the product itself. Although, I'd buy one...I think the buttons would be way too small to use them. But the overall looks would be quite nice.
IJ Reilly
Aug 23, 11:09 PM
Apple could blow a hundred million in legal expenses. It's less of an instance of throwing in the towel, and more of an instance of, "You know, the way idiot judges/juries hand out settlements these days, let's just give them a paltry sum, let them think they've won, and still destroy them in the MP3 market."
Not in 20 years, they couldn't. And no matter how often it's said to the contrary, $100 million is still very serious money.
Reminds me of 1997, when Microsoft was forced to invest $150 million in Apple as part of a settlement of a patent lawsuit, a lot of people couldn't wrap their minds around the idea that Microsoft had actually lost. They did then. Apple did today.
Not in 20 years, they couldn't. And no matter how often it's said to the contrary, $100 million is still very serious money.
Reminds me of 1997, when Microsoft was forced to invest $150 million in Apple as part of a settlement of a patent lawsuit, a lot of people couldn't wrap their minds around the idea that Microsoft had actually lost. They did then. Apple did today.
AaronEdwards
Apr 20, 12:13 PM
time to do research?
if you are not doing anything wrong, what is there to worry about?
I totally agree. We should just let any corporation or government track anything we do. If they want to turn our phones into constant listening devices, why would anyone oppose that, other than those who are doing wrong....
Sheeple.
if you are not doing anything wrong, what is there to worry about?
I totally agree. We should just let any corporation or government track anything we do. If they want to turn our phones into constant listening devices, why would anyone oppose that, other than those who are doing wrong....
Sheeple.
Multimedia
Sep 9, 02:16 PM
Heh, that's pretty funny. I have quite a few applications that'll hit one core at 100%. (Q emulator is the best example) Luckily, even though it's not multi-threaded a have another core free to do my work while Q eats up 100% of one.
I run Windows 98 in Q for laughs. I liked Windows 98...Exactly. A perfect example where one application topping out on only one core leaves the entire other one for other stuff. Probably a good thing to have that limit.
In fact, in future, I could see where application developers let the user in preferences tell the application how many cores to be allowed to use. Give the user a choice of how many cores he/she wants a particular process to use. That would be a way cool improvement in all application preferences. Would prevent any one applicaiton from hosing the computer due to core hogging.
I run Windows 98 in Q for laughs. I liked Windows 98...Exactly. A perfect example where one application topping out on only one core leaves the entire other one for other stuff. Probably a good thing to have that limit.
In fact, in future, I could see where application developers let the user in preferences tell the application how many cores to be allowed to use. Give the user a choice of how many cores he/she wants a particular process to use. That would be a way cool improvement in all application preferences. Would prevent any one applicaiton from hosing the computer due to core hogging.
rmhop81
Apr 22, 08:43 AM
This is exciting, since my music library already tops 16 GB and isn't shrinking any time soon. Now, I saw a little bit about it in the article, but does anyone else know if the general consensus is that ALL of ones music could be stored? As opposed to just iTunes-purchased songs. That's crucial.
knowing how apple is.....probably itunes purchases only.
knowing how apple is.....probably itunes purchases only.
technicolor
Oct 12, 12:41 PM
They might as well add a Core 2 Duo Mac Book Pro too.
Please CAN IT!
CAN IT!
My god we cant talk about anything on this board without the core 2 duo macbook/pro crew coming to mess up a thread THAT HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH LAPTOP UPDATES
CAN IT!
:mad:
Please CAN IT!
CAN IT!
My god we cant talk about anything on this board without the core 2 duo macbook/pro crew coming to mess up a thread THAT HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH LAPTOP UPDATES
CAN IT!
:mad:
Multimedia
Jul 20, 11:27 PM
You don't think Apple would get raked over the coals if they released towers that were slower than the last generation? Conroe is fast, but no way it beats a quad G5. And I don't think a promise of a quad machine later on helps public relations any.
Also, doesn't the kentsfield have the same limitation as conroe? That you can only use it in single processor configs? A woodcrest chipset would have a longer life since you'd use the same one for multiple cloverton configs.
Next gen, conroe gets you 2 cores, woodcrest gives you 2 chips for 4 cores.
Gen after that, kentsfield gets you 4 cores, cloverton gets you 2 chips for 8 cores. There's room for both chipsets for at least the next two generations, and I wouldn't be surprised if it continues beyond that.Maybe I misunderstood your post, I thought you meant releasing conroe machines and not shipping quads until months later. If that were the case, people would inevitably compare the new towers to the G5 quads, regardless if they were intended to replace those models.
I think the reason they haven't announced woodcrest towers is because they want to wait for WWDC, and because the line will be split between woodcrest and conroe. It wouldn't make sense to announce half the tower lineup, people would assume that was it and react accordingly.I believe this is the correct analysis. I am in full agreement with Milo. Good job M. :)
Also, doesn't the kentsfield have the same limitation as conroe? That you can only use it in single processor configs? A woodcrest chipset would have a longer life since you'd use the same one for multiple cloverton configs.
Next gen, conroe gets you 2 cores, woodcrest gives you 2 chips for 4 cores.
Gen after that, kentsfield gets you 4 cores, cloverton gets you 2 chips for 8 cores. There's room for both chipsets for at least the next two generations, and I wouldn't be surprised if it continues beyond that.Maybe I misunderstood your post, I thought you meant releasing conroe machines and not shipping quads until months later. If that were the case, people would inevitably compare the new towers to the G5 quads, regardless if they were intended to replace those models.
I think the reason they haven't announced woodcrest towers is because they want to wait for WWDC, and because the line will be split between woodcrest and conroe. It wouldn't make sense to announce half the tower lineup, people would assume that was it and react accordingly.I believe this is the correct analysis. I am in full agreement with Milo. Good job M. :)
prady16
Sep 5, 08:48 AM
Probably just a minor update.....Don't expect a biiiig update without any formal announcement or a press conference!
old-school
Mar 23, 06:06 PM
It's (supposed to be) a free country....
luminosity
Sep 1, 11:37 AM
wow. would that be the biggest mainstream desktop around?
AidenShaw
Sep 9, 10:19 AM
Unless Leopard is designed to make full use of the extra threads/cores available on the quad-core Mac Pro.
The real problem isn't the OS as much as it is in applications.
A well-threaded O/S won't help make Photoshop or Avid run much faster, unless the application code is also able to use all of the cores that are present.
Some applications are inherently serial - you have to do step A, then step B (because step B depends on step A). It's not a matter of poor programming, it's that the task is serial. (Note that many Photoshop benchmarks quote "MP-aware" filters separately from actions that don't scale.)
For these "not well-threaded" applications, multiple cores will still be beneficial so that you can run multiple applications simultaneously - all at full speed.
There are some server-type applications (web or database) that run many (hundreds or thousands) threads simultaneously. (For a web server - each browser session is a natural thread.) For these applications, operating system efficiency is important. The reports that OSX is poor at threading (such as Mac OS X limits server performance (http://www.macnn.com/articles/05/06/15/os.x.server.review/)) aren't really that important for desktop apps that want to use all 4 cores (or soon 8).
http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2436
The server performance of the Apple platform is, however, catastrophic.
...
Workstation apps will hardly mind, but the performance of server applications depends greatly on the threading, signalling and locking engine.
The real problem isn't the OS as much as it is in applications.
A well-threaded O/S won't help make Photoshop or Avid run much faster, unless the application code is also able to use all of the cores that are present.
Some applications are inherently serial - you have to do step A, then step B (because step B depends on step A). It's not a matter of poor programming, it's that the task is serial. (Note that many Photoshop benchmarks quote "MP-aware" filters separately from actions that don't scale.)
For these "not well-threaded" applications, multiple cores will still be beneficial so that you can run multiple applications simultaneously - all at full speed.
There are some server-type applications (web or database) that run many (hundreds or thousands) threads simultaneously. (For a web server - each browser session is a natural thread.) For these applications, operating system efficiency is important. The reports that OSX is poor at threading (such as Mac OS X limits server performance (http://www.macnn.com/articles/05/06/15/os.x.server.review/)) aren't really that important for desktop apps that want to use all 4 cores (or soon 8).
http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2436
The server performance of the Apple platform is, however, catastrophic.
...
Workstation apps will hardly mind, but the performance of server applications depends greatly on the threading, signalling and locking engine.
Popeye206
Mar 29, 12:02 PM
What I don't get is....
Nokia = looser in smart phone market.
Microsoft = looser in smart phone OS market.
So... Looser + Looser = Winner?
I know Nokia has a huge installed base of feature phones, but they're going to have to really step it up to catch up in the smart phone market. Even the old #1 guys (RIM) can't keep up with iOS and Android.
Nokia = looser in smart phone market.
Microsoft = looser in smart phone OS market.
So... Looser + Looser = Winner?
I know Nokia has a huge installed base of feature phones, but they're going to have to really step it up to catch up in the smart phone market. Even the old #1 guys (RIM) can't keep up with iOS and Android.
Bubbasteve
Sep 26, 08:26 AM
I wonder when it will be released? I really hope Apple sells them in there stores and I don't have to go through cingular and get it...but whatever I must do what I must do
DaveK
Sep 13, 09:38 PM
There are a lot of sound business reasons for Apple to release an iPhone. But the biggest reason is that Steve must have a cell phone and you know he probably hates the industrial design and functionality.
I think that they were supposed to announce this in one of the "one more things" on the 12th and something happened at the last minute. Two items lead me to this conclusion.
1. They never used a satellite link of the keynote to London(think Vodafone), which they mentioned before the keynote. Maybe it was just so London could watch. But then why not the folks at the Apple Expo in Paris.
2. Is it just me, or did the "pre-announcement" of a product that has an "internal" name of iTV, which may or may not be the products real name, strike anyone else as very un-Apple like.
I think that they were supposed to announce this in one of the "one more things" on the 12th and something happened at the last minute. Two items lead me to this conclusion.
1. They never used a satellite link of the keynote to London(think Vodafone), which they mentioned before the keynote. Maybe it was just so London could watch. But then why not the folks at the Apple Expo in Paris.
2. Is it just me, or did the "pre-announcement" of a product that has an "internal" name of iTV, which may or may not be the products real name, strike anyone else as very un-Apple like.
JackieTreehorn
Mar 22, 01:21 PM
Still lovin' my 2009 iMac.... best machine I've ever owned.
kerryb
Apr 22, 07:50 AM
the music labels are a greedy bunch and I can only see them agreeing to a cloud service if it gives them back a lot of the control they lost when music went digital. will it not be too long until all music is purchased in digital format and only accessible via a cloud service. this means thats actually having a copy of a song (to share) will be a thing of the past. You pay your $9.99 for an album and happily listen to it for a couple of years, then the labels decided that album is more valuable than the original price and ask you for another $2 if you wish to access it again from the cloud. This model even though the details have not been unveiled reminds me of Adobe's master plan to rent Photoshop on a per month basis. It is a way to keep the "pirates at bay" and control pricing and their customers. This could be a big step backwards for consumers who will most likely be blinded by the 24/7 convenience of the service without stopping to think what they might be loosing.
nehunte
Nov 14, 07:45 AM
I think this thread has moved too far into the law and needs to move back into the 'common sense' arena. Rogue was using images supplied to him by MAC OSX. Strangely enough, Apple denied the app. Whatever, that's fine. BUT IT TOOK THREE AND A HALF MONTHS TO SORT THE SITUATION OUT!!!!
That's the problem. It takes forever to straighten out crap with them. This is why the Facebook developer is done with Apple. He would see a bug in his app, and it would take Apple two weeks or more to approve the bug fix while everybody is experiencing the bug problems. It's completely asinine. Apple clearly had no idea how popular the App Store was going to be and still doesn't have the proper resources to handle it. Sure, the App Store has over 100,000 apps. How many of those are quality apps? Hard to tell, but I can tell you it's filled with a bunch of worthless apps that shouldn't be on there in the first place.
With the recent news around the App Store, I'm afraid you're going to start seeing a lot less quality apps and far more stupid worthless apps hit since all the good developers are leaving. It just blows my mind that Apple is having this kind of mentality while Android is starting to pick up steam. I guess I'll just have to see where this situation stands when my contract runs up. Hopefully Apple pulls their head our of their rear by then.
That's the problem. It takes forever to straighten out crap with them. This is why the Facebook developer is done with Apple. He would see a bug in his app, and it would take Apple two weeks or more to approve the bug fix while everybody is experiencing the bug problems. It's completely asinine. Apple clearly had no idea how popular the App Store was going to be and still doesn't have the proper resources to handle it. Sure, the App Store has over 100,000 apps. How many of those are quality apps? Hard to tell, but I can tell you it's filled with a bunch of worthless apps that shouldn't be on there in the first place.
With the recent news around the App Store, I'm afraid you're going to start seeing a lot less quality apps and far more stupid worthless apps hit since all the good developers are leaving. It just blows my mind that Apple is having this kind of mentality while Android is starting to pick up steam. I guess I'll just have to see where this situation stands when my contract runs up. Hopefully Apple pulls their head our of their rear by then.
Popeye206
Apr 22, 05:01 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
I could care less about cloud based streaming.... I'm far more interested in cloud sync'ing.
Also just because Amazon requires users upload files doesn't mean they can't do deduplication across accounts similar to DropBox and others. It's still just a file storage service and I can see no reason they'd need licenses from industry.
The problem is, without an Application like iTunes and a DRM, Amazon has no way to manage licensed materials. So if they want to do something similar to Apple, they really can't. Yes, what you upload is assumed to be yours, but music you buy from Amazon is not managed at the user level by Amazon. So unless they reconcile your purchase history, they don't know what's what, so it would be open season on the Amazon side and I think that's not what the Labels like.
In this case, the Apple "closed system" has the advantage of knowing what's what and it seems like Apple is doing it right by getting the record companies on board with the concept before launching.
I could care less about cloud based streaming.... I'm far more interested in cloud sync'ing.
Also just because Amazon requires users upload files doesn't mean they can't do deduplication across accounts similar to DropBox and others. It's still just a file storage service and I can see no reason they'd need licenses from industry.
The problem is, without an Application like iTunes and a DRM, Amazon has no way to manage licensed materials. So if they want to do something similar to Apple, they really can't. Yes, what you upload is assumed to be yours, but music you buy from Amazon is not managed at the user level by Amazon. So unless they reconcile your purchase history, they don't know what's what, so it would be open season on the Amazon side and I think that's not what the Labels like.
In this case, the Apple "closed system" has the advantage of knowing what's what and it seems like Apple is doing it right by getting the record companies on board with the concept before launching.
roadbloc
Mar 29, 11:21 AM
The Nokia/Microsoft partnership will guarantee this. It is no joke. I'm already seeing them rise in popularity, plenty shops sell them now.
And just for them who say Windows Phones are rubbish, they aren't. They are pretty damn good, although I do prefer my iPhone.
And just for them who say Windows Phones are rubbish, they aren't. They are pretty damn good, although I do prefer my iPhone.
dethmaShine
Apr 20, 10:12 AM
I bet it's somewhere in the ToC that none of us read.
Are you sure? Cause people are claiming that its not in the ToS/ToC.
Are you sure? Cause people are claiming that its not in the ToS/ToC.
teme
Oct 13, 02:47 AM
I think the red color is so much better than the other current Nano colors (pink, blue, green). It looks great... if they release a red MacBook, I might buy it. I don't need a red Nano right now.
Josias
Aug 28, 12:26 PM
God I want a 15" Merom MBP, but I need to get rid of my MB first, and I want iLife '07 in them. I can't wait for Leopard. Please Steve, read it...:D
No comments:
Post a Comment