W1MRK
Apr 16, 05:17 PM
I can drive a 18 wheeler but I haven't tried a manual car or pickup yet. I think its different. LOL
guez
Sep 7, 03:37 PM
Actually the move to Intel has opened Apple to fast depreciation - and that isnt going away.
Many here seem to 'bitch' that Mac is now in competition with the PC in the hardware stakes and sadly that damages your resale value however the benefits are immense, I am sure Apple will be able to secure lower unit costs aswell as faster processors and newer technology. Its great for apple and for us buying, just bad if you sell hardware before it looses all value completely. It also means we will see these refreshes more often and so we will be buying more up to date hardware which as a PC user is great...
This raises an interesting question. I'm not so much interested in depreciation as obsolescence. My experience has been that if you buy the right Mac (this is key), it can last 4 years, or more, and system updates/upgrades will not seriously degrade performance (sometimes there can even be an improvement, as with Panther). This is NOT my experience with Wintel. Is this going to change with Intel? Perhaps the readership of this blog does not fall in this category, but Macs have historically appealed to those who want to spend a little more money for more value (including a longer useful life)-the same people who drive a Honda Civic into the ground rather than buying a Chevy Malibu every three years (sorry, I couldn't think of another example).
Are we entering the age of the Walmart-ifation of Macs: less value, but cheaper?
Many here seem to 'bitch' that Mac is now in competition with the PC in the hardware stakes and sadly that damages your resale value however the benefits are immense, I am sure Apple will be able to secure lower unit costs aswell as faster processors and newer technology. Its great for apple and for us buying, just bad if you sell hardware before it looses all value completely. It also means we will see these refreshes more often and so we will be buying more up to date hardware which as a PC user is great...
This raises an interesting question. I'm not so much interested in depreciation as obsolescence. My experience has been that if you buy the right Mac (this is key), it can last 4 years, or more, and system updates/upgrades will not seriously degrade performance (sometimes there can even be an improvement, as with Panther). This is NOT my experience with Wintel. Is this going to change with Intel? Perhaps the readership of this blog does not fall in this category, but Macs have historically appealed to those who want to spend a little more money for more value (including a longer useful life)-the same people who drive a Honda Civic into the ground rather than buying a Chevy Malibu every three years (sorry, I couldn't think of another example).
Are we entering the age of the Walmart-ifation of Macs: less value, but cheaper?
econgeek
Apr 12, 09:16 PM
http://twitpic.com/4k71a8
It does look like iMovie Pro.
And even though it is a ground up rewrite, 64-bit, modern, professional application, that alone is going to have people complaining about it-- I predict-- even before they've used it and found that it is - I'd bet a large sum- quite featureful in all the ways that are important to a professional.
It does look like iMovie Pro.
And even though it is a ground up rewrite, 64-bit, modern, professional application, that alone is going to have people complaining about it-- I predict-- even before they've used it and found that it is - I'd bet a large sum- quite featureful in all the ways that are important to a professional.
Built
Apr 2, 07:44 PM
what the **** are you talking about?!!!
you are getting false information, I would dare say 99% of ipad 2s have absolutely no hardware problem.
You're deluding yourself.
you are getting false information, I would dare say 99% of ipad 2s have absolutely no hardware problem.
You're deluding yourself.
KnightWRX
Apr 26, 01:42 PM
Lame
1. Pet Store was trademarked in one form or another.
2. Trying to argue that "App" was as much part of the lexicon as "pet" is ridiculous.
Objection overruled.
1. Look, the form in which it was trademarked matters. Otherwise, there would only be 1 type of mark. You can overrule it all you want, in the end you were wrong.
2. App is as much a part of the lexicon as pet. I know I've been using it for more than a decade.
1. Pet Store was trademarked in one form or another.
2. Trying to argue that "App" was as much part of the lexicon as "pet" is ridiculous.
Objection overruled.
1. Look, the form in which it was trademarked matters. Otherwise, there would only be 1 type of mark. You can overrule it all you want, in the end you were wrong.
2. App is as much a part of the lexicon as pet. I know I've been using it for more than a decade.
AidenShaw
Nov 22, 10:10 PM
This rumor seems to be only a rumor! Its Nov 21st today, when will octos come? Next year i guess... damn it!:mad:
Quad-core chips (and octo-core systems) are available now from the other top tier Intel vendors. Apple not included.
Quad-core chips (and octo-core systems) are available now from the other top tier Intel vendors. Apple not included.
ckodonnell
Sep 1, 01:40 PM
While I agree conroe would be a better choice, Merom is a Core 2 Duo chip as well.
But, how about the processors? Apple needs to have a Core 2 (Conroe not Merom) inside the imac. The imac is not a conventionally size desktop (not as much room inside as a tower) but Apple can not continue to use a laptop processor in the imac. If they do, then how will the Conroe be used in Apple's line up? In a Mac tower? I don't think so. Surely, a 23" iMac could house the Conroe suitably?
But, how about the processors? Apple needs to have a Core 2 (Conroe not Merom) inside the imac. The imac is not a conventionally size desktop (not as much room inside as a tower) but Apple can not continue to use a laptop processor in the imac. If they do, then how will the Conroe be used in Apple's line up? In a Mac tower? I don't think so. Surely, a 23" iMac could house the Conroe suitably?
iAlan
Oct 23, 07:08 AM
Well when you really think about it, at least one of these rumours has got to be true. We have MBP Merom rumours that cover every week from August til January 2007.
Actually, we have rumours that cover every week from August til January 2009!
Actually, we have rumours that cover every week from August til January 2009!
Mr-Stabby
Apr 12, 09:05 PM
As seen on one of the pics, there is also a bottle of water on the stage. A Steve Jobs trademark :) Any chance he could turn up?
mixel
Mar 25, 07:45 PM
It's funny that this machine costs an awful lot, can potentially do an awful lot, yet the games are still lacking.
In other news I recently bought a �25 game for my 6 year old (I think, a launch model) DS Lite and I've pumped more hours into that one game than all 50 or so of my iOS games combined.
I've driven to the restaurant but I'm still waiting for my meal.
So true.. I love all the bedroom coding and indie published stuff on iOS but to the big names in the industry iOS still just seems like a curiosity.. The prolonged trying to figure it all out / experimental phase is getting a little frustrating, though totally understandable. I wonder how long it'll be before we start getting more in the way of original content from the big IP holders. Original content that serves as a full game rather than a tech demo or proof of concept. They really should be savvy to the limitations of the devices by now.
In other news I recently bought a �25 game for my 6 year old (I think, a launch model) DS Lite and I've pumped more hours into that one game than all 50 or so of my iOS games combined.
I've driven to the restaurant but I'm still waiting for my meal.
So true.. I love all the bedroom coding and indie published stuff on iOS but to the big names in the industry iOS still just seems like a curiosity.. The prolonged trying to figure it all out / experimental phase is getting a little frustrating, though totally understandable. I wonder how long it'll be before we start getting more in the way of original content from the big IP holders. Original content that serves as a full game rather than a tech demo or proof of concept. They really should be savvy to the limitations of the devices by now.
solvs
Jan 2, 03:00 AM
I'm hoping they release a mini laptop. That's the only thing I really care about. Which means they probably won't.
I try not to expect too much so I'm not disappointed.
I try not to expect too much so I'm not disappointed.
Bacong
Oct 22, 12:46 PM
Not sure who mentioned the Switcheasy cases first but thank you. I ordered two color cases on Monday night, they shipped from San Francisco on Tuesday and I received them in Maryland today.
Fit is nice and the screen guard looks and feels great.
not to give myself credit...but I did :P and yes, agreed! Love the case, and the screen protector is nice!
Fit is nice and the screen guard looks and feels great.
not to give myself credit...but I did :P and yes, agreed! Love the case, and the screen protector is nice!
fr4c
Nov 23, 01:29 PM
Oh you are making me hungry...
http://www.tirerack.com/images/tires/bridgestone/bs_blizzak_lm25_ci2_l.jpg
Tires for the winter
http://www.tirerack.com/images/tires/bridgestone/bs_blizzak_lm25_ci2_l.jpg
Tires for the winter
Queso
Aug 29, 09:33 AM
No to Merom in the mini. Core Duo in both models and a significant price drop. They are supposed to be low end machines, so give them a low end price point.
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.
jsm4182
Feb 27, 02:39 PM
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5292/5482714927_dde07ab2f6.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jsm382/5482714927/)
I thought its about time I post my home setup.
Just bought the 27" Cinema Display, its connected to my 13"MBP running in clamshell,sitting on the shelf on a cooling pad.
Apple bluetooth keyboard, Magic Trackpad and Magic Mouse. Have 2 Apple battery chargers(not pictured) to power those 3.
1TB Seagate GoFlex with firewire 800 upgrade kit for backups using Carbon Copy Cloner sitting behind the lamp.
Creative Xmod that I use with my Bose OE headphones(headphones not pictured).
Also not pictured is my table at the other end of that wall with a Brother laser printer and Crosley radio, both hooked up to an Airport Express. And in a cabinet in another room I have an Airport Extreme with 2 Seagate 1TB drives for Time Machine and old file storage.
I thought its about time I post my home setup.
Just bought the 27" Cinema Display, its connected to my 13"MBP running in clamshell,sitting on the shelf on a cooling pad.
Apple bluetooth keyboard, Magic Trackpad and Magic Mouse. Have 2 Apple battery chargers(not pictured) to power those 3.
1TB Seagate GoFlex with firewire 800 upgrade kit for backups using Carbon Copy Cloner sitting behind the lamp.
Creative Xmod that I use with my Bose OE headphones(headphones not pictured).
Also not pictured is my table at the other end of that wall with a Brother laser printer and Crosley radio, both hooked up to an Airport Express. And in a cabinet in another room I have an Airport Extreme with 2 Seagate 1TB drives for Time Machine and old file storage.
1984
Aug 29, 12:30 PM
World Class CLIO Material? It's just another iPod/iTunes ad.
Killyp
Aug 7, 07:31 AM
The ability to exclude certain windows from Expose "Show all Windows". Kind of irritating when there are, ahem, certain windows up that you would prefer your parents don't see...
When your finger misses F10 and gets to F11, it can be kind of irritating...
When your finger misses F10 and gets to F11, it can be kind of irritating...
Lord Blackadder
Mar 21, 03:31 PM
I don't think there will be any conditions: at some point, effective authority will simply be seen to reside with them, rather than Daffy the Duck, and at that point, they will become the de facto recognised representatives.
That is my thinking as well. I wonder what the Arab League's stance on this will be. They certainly have little love for Gaddafi, but they dread revolutions of any kind. The Libyan opposition seem committed to a parlimentary democracy that would be popularly supported, and that is heartening. There is a real opportunity here for a reasonably good outcome from a political standpoint.
That is my thinking as well. I wonder what the Arab League's stance on this will be. They certainly have little love for Gaddafi, but they dread revolutions of any kind. The Libyan opposition seem committed to a parlimentary democracy that would be popularly supported, and that is heartening. There is a real opportunity here for a reasonably good outcome from a political standpoint.
ecoons
Jan 11, 10:15 PM
I don't know if anyone has said this yet, but after looking at http://www.ecoupled.com/
I can't help but think that Apple could come up with a user-friendly way of implementing this sort of technology. I personally think its only a matter of time before ALL chords are "cut". You set your iPod on your desk, it charges through inductive currents, your headphones do the same and communicate with your iPod through bluetooth (or some other wireless medium)...etc. And your computer, also, has no wires. Electricity is passed to it in the same sort of way. Now, wouldn't that be cool :)
"There's something in the air"
Maybe its just wishful thinking ;)
[Note: After being a long time READER of Mac Rumors, I have officially made my first post.]
I can't help but think that Apple could come up with a user-friendly way of implementing this sort of technology. I personally think its only a matter of time before ALL chords are "cut". You set your iPod on your desk, it charges through inductive currents, your headphones do the same and communicate with your iPod through bluetooth (or some other wireless medium)...etc. And your computer, also, has no wires. Electricity is passed to it in the same sort of way. Now, wouldn't that be cool :)
"There's something in the air"
Maybe its just wishful thinking ;)
[Note: After being a long time READER of Mac Rumors, I have officially made my first post.]
adroit
Nov 15, 11:25 AM
That really depends on the program, on how "parallelizable" the application is.
The simplest way to think of it is like this: Let's say you have a program that first has to calculate A. Then, when it's done that, it uses the result of A to calculate B. Then, when it's done that, uses the result of B to calculate C, then C to D, and so on. That's a *serial* problem there. The calculation of B can't begin until A is done, so it doesn't matter how many processors you have running, all computation is held up on one spot.
On the other hand, let's say you have an application that needs to calculate A, B, C and D, but those four values are not dependent on each other at all. In that case, you can use four processors at the same time, to calculate all four values at the same time.
Think of it like baking a cake. You can't start putting on the icing until the cake is done baking. And you can't start baking the cake until the ingredients are all mixed together. But you can have people simultaneously getting out and measuring the ingredients.
So that problem is partially parallelizable, but the majority of its workload is a serial process.
Some software applications, just by their very nature, will never be able to do anything useful with multiple processors.
This is true, but there are still many many ways to optimize the multi-core processor that's not currently being use.
For example, I am waiting for a program to compile right now. Although I have a dual core on my computer, the compiler only compile one file at a time and usually takes about 10 min to do a full compile . If I have an 8 core computer with a multi-threaded compiler then I can cut the total time to jsut over a min + couple of seconds for linking time.
I think the main problem with muti-threading program is that it is difficult to implement, especially for coders who only knows high-level languages. Muti-threading in low-level program such as C is not easy but at least it is straight-forward. But trying to muti-thread high-level language such as VB or C# can get you into a big headace since everything is abstracted from the programmer. To do that, you need to get into unsafe code and call a bunch of DLLs, and it's easy to get memory leaks. Basically it can start to get very complicated, very quickly.
The simplest way to think of it is like this: Let's say you have a program that first has to calculate A. Then, when it's done that, it uses the result of A to calculate B. Then, when it's done that, uses the result of B to calculate C, then C to D, and so on. That's a *serial* problem there. The calculation of B can't begin until A is done, so it doesn't matter how many processors you have running, all computation is held up on one spot.
On the other hand, let's say you have an application that needs to calculate A, B, C and D, but those four values are not dependent on each other at all. In that case, you can use four processors at the same time, to calculate all four values at the same time.
Think of it like baking a cake. You can't start putting on the icing until the cake is done baking. And you can't start baking the cake until the ingredients are all mixed together. But you can have people simultaneously getting out and measuring the ingredients.
So that problem is partially parallelizable, but the majority of its workload is a serial process.
Some software applications, just by their very nature, will never be able to do anything useful with multiple processors.
This is true, but there are still many many ways to optimize the multi-core processor that's not currently being use.
For example, I am waiting for a program to compile right now. Although I have a dual core on my computer, the compiler only compile one file at a time and usually takes about 10 min to do a full compile . If I have an 8 core computer with a multi-threaded compiler then I can cut the total time to jsut over a min + couple of seconds for linking time.
I think the main problem with muti-threading program is that it is difficult to implement, especially for coders who only knows high-level languages. Muti-threading in low-level program such as C is not easy but at least it is straight-forward. But trying to muti-thread high-level language such as VB or C# can get you into a big headace since everything is abstracted from the programmer. To do that, you need to get into unsafe code and call a bunch of DLLs, and it's easy to get memory leaks. Basically it can start to get very complicated, very quickly.
vincenz
Mar 25, 07:53 PM
You have to admit that that looks pretty impressive. I didn't expect them to be able to display anything than a mirrored display on the iPad.
wrldwzrd89
Nov 23, 01:46 PM
I am now the proud owner of a 4th gen iPod touch. :D
Photics
Mar 26, 07:43 AM
But remember that the PS3 was $600 at launch, but is $300 now. Each PS3 game is $60, while Real Racing 2 is $7. So the cost proposition after a few games is not that different.
I don't think the problem here is cost. Lots of people want an iPad, so this is like a fringe benefit. It's more about logistics. I don't think it makes sense to run two screens, and tether an iPad to the TV.
Heh, true, I use my iPhone as a Netflix player. Yet, I don't have to hold the iPhone to do it. I just set it up and enjoy the movie. An iPad is a nice tablet, but not a great controller.
I think a USB controller, going to the iPad 2 - that's connected to a TV - makes more sense. Then, it's like a real gaming console. Another possibility... the iPad 2 camera could be used for motion detection. Then, the gaming can be like the Wii or XBOX 360 Kinect.
My problem here is the cable — HDMI cables are usually short.
This is progress though.
All from the same device. The iPad does a lot things, but it actually does them well. That's pretty significant.
I'm not bashing the iPad. I think it's cool. It's clearly the leader in the tablet market. Yet, I don't think this is the direction to go for gaming. I think the Apple TV makes more sense.
Apple TV — With a Camera — and that changes things.
FaceTime, Games, Apps on the TV.
But again, the controller is the problem. Apple is not leading here. It should set the standard, not let developers create Frankenstein gaming consoles. This isn't the Pipen. Apple has a strong opportunity to enter the game console space. I don't see a reason to delay.
I don't think the problem here is cost. Lots of people want an iPad, so this is like a fringe benefit. It's more about logistics. I don't think it makes sense to run two screens, and tether an iPad to the TV.
Heh, true, I use my iPhone as a Netflix player. Yet, I don't have to hold the iPhone to do it. I just set it up and enjoy the movie. An iPad is a nice tablet, but not a great controller.
I think a USB controller, going to the iPad 2 - that's connected to a TV - makes more sense. Then, it's like a real gaming console. Another possibility... the iPad 2 camera could be used for motion detection. Then, the gaming can be like the Wii or XBOX 360 Kinect.
My problem here is the cable — HDMI cables are usually short.
This is progress though.
All from the same device. The iPad does a lot things, but it actually does them well. That's pretty significant.
I'm not bashing the iPad. I think it's cool. It's clearly the leader in the tablet market. Yet, I don't think this is the direction to go for gaming. I think the Apple TV makes more sense.
Apple TV — With a Camera — and that changes things.
FaceTime, Games, Apps on the TV.
But again, the controller is the problem. Apple is not leading here. It should set the standard, not let developers create Frankenstein gaming consoles. This isn't the Pipen. Apple has a strong opportunity to enter the game console space. I don't see a reason to delay.
No comments:
Post a Comment