Moonlight
Aug 26, 08:14 PM
I just called Apple support, I was on hold for over 20 minutes, then I was disconnected. No wonder people are unhappy :mad: :( :confused:
logandzwon
Apr 27, 08:49 AM
I miss the old Apple where they didn't care if idiots complained. Between changing the bars after the antenna issue, ( all they really did is change the bars to not show a big drop when there was a big drop in reception, as AT&T suggested,) and now nerfing location services DB they just seem to be giving in to idiocracy.
xxBURT0Nxx
Apr 7, 09:54 AM
It's not false per say, at least not 100%. Of course, graphics in such systems are usually IGPs, but before the Core iX line of processors, anyone could license and build chipsets for these processors and include a different IGP than Intel did. Intel however refused to license this for the new processors, including the SB line and thus nVidia who was making chipsets could not produce an IGP for the new platform.
So yes, essentially Intel told Apple they had to use the 3000 HD as an IGP, where before, Apple was using nVidia's tech. There was even a massive lawsuit about all of this, between Intel and nVidia which ended with nVidia stepping out of the chipset business alltogether.
So the poster you were replying to wasn't 100% wrong at all. It is in fact a testament to Intel's incompetence how all of this was handled, since an old MBA with a 320m outpaces new SB machines that have a much more powerful CPU in graphics performance.
I know about the whole nvidia/intel lawsuit, but to say that intel forced apple to use the IGP is not correct imo. Yes they may have said if you want to use integrated graphics, they must be our integrated graphics on sandy bridge, but obviously apple could still have chosen to use discrete graphics as they did in some of the macbook pros, however seeing them absent on the airs and the 13" mbp shows that apple didn't have enough space to include discrete on top of the new processors. I see what you are saying, but the op said intel made apple use their graphics in a machine that costs this much!?!? not true apple could have easily added amd graphics if they wanted to, however due to cost/design/whatever they use integrated graphics in their smaller laptops!
So yes, essentially Intel told Apple they had to use the 3000 HD as an IGP, where before, Apple was using nVidia's tech. There was even a massive lawsuit about all of this, between Intel and nVidia which ended with nVidia stepping out of the chipset business alltogether.
So the poster you were replying to wasn't 100% wrong at all. It is in fact a testament to Intel's incompetence how all of this was handled, since an old MBA with a 320m outpaces new SB machines that have a much more powerful CPU in graphics performance.
I know about the whole nvidia/intel lawsuit, but to say that intel forced apple to use the IGP is not correct imo. Yes they may have said if you want to use integrated graphics, they must be our integrated graphics on sandy bridge, but obviously apple could still have chosen to use discrete graphics as they did in some of the macbook pros, however seeing them absent on the airs and the 13" mbp shows that apple didn't have enough space to include discrete on top of the new processors. I see what you are saying, but the op said intel made apple use their graphics in a machine that costs this much!?!? not true apple could have easily added amd graphics if they wanted to, however due to cost/design/whatever they use integrated graphics in their smaller laptops!
jmgregory1
Mar 22, 03:42 PM
Everyone is trying to get a piece of what Apple created - and not suffer the same fate that all those that tried to compete with the iPod faced.
Without figuring out how to differentiate from what Apple is doing AND show the consumer how they can really USE the tablet, none of these players will do much more than get a small, very small, piece of the [Apple] pie.
Those people that want the iPad to do what a computer does or what a smartphone does, are not looking at the iPad the way it was intended - as something new and different. Why should it have to do what a laptop does or how a computer or phone does it?
I'm guessing that what Apple is really working on is a way to tie together all devices that isn't just a wired interface (think their data center).
Without figuring out how to differentiate from what Apple is doing AND show the consumer how they can really USE the tablet, none of these players will do much more than get a small, very small, piece of the [Apple] pie.
Those people that want the iPad to do what a computer does or what a smartphone does, are not looking at the iPad the way it was intended - as something new and different. Why should it have to do what a laptop does or how a computer or phone does it?
I'm guessing that what Apple is really working on is a way to tie together all devices that isn't just a wired interface (think their data center).
Lord Blackadder
Mar 22, 10:19 PM
The U.N. Security Council perhaps, but not the entire assembly. It would have been interesting to open that issue up to debate and seen how all the members would have voted.
The security council, not the general assembly, is the organ tasked with authorizing UN military action. The point of the security council is to enable the UN to make rapid strategic decisions without a general debate. It's an imperfect system to be sure, but I don't think requiring a full debate in the general assembly would be an efficient way to respond to this sort of situation.
What I always wonder is what diplomatic efforts were used to pressure Qaddafi? There were no (as far as I know) threats of economic embargoes, freezing of assets, or other less violent methods to coerce Qaddafi. We didn't need to convince him to step dow. We simply needed to convince him that he needed to tone down, defend himself against the armed insurrection, but not cast a wider and violent campaign against innocent civilians.
We could have responded simply with economic sanctions.
Based on Gaddafi's treatment of the initial protests (not to mention his tendencies over 40 years of autocratic rule), I strongly question whether economic sanctions are going to apply sufficient pressure to Gaddafi to relinquish power. Like Mubarak, he is a political strongman who is not easily cowed by threats.
I need a clearer demonstration that serious steps were taken before resorting to war. War should be used as the last resort and only when it's clear that all other options have failed.
I agree that war should be considered a last resort. I also think that the US government is generally too quick to undertake armed intervention. But in this case we took sides in a war that was already in progress. The UN's choices were either non-intervention, non-military intervention, or direct military intervention in some form.
I suppose the point at which "all other options have failed" is a debatable one, since everyone has different opinions on what constitutes a valid option. There are many questions without simple answers. How do we judge failure? Is the purpose of the intervention (military or otherwise) to aid the rebels? Or is it merely to prevent Gaddafi killing civilians? If the latter is the case, does allowing him to remain in power serve that cause? If not, what should we do about it?
At the bottom of all this though, the goal of current foreign intervention (military or otherwise) is clear to me - to remove Gaddafi from power and recognize the rebel transitional government as the legitimate government of Libya.
The security council, not the general assembly, is the organ tasked with authorizing UN military action. The point of the security council is to enable the UN to make rapid strategic decisions without a general debate. It's an imperfect system to be sure, but I don't think requiring a full debate in the general assembly would be an efficient way to respond to this sort of situation.
What I always wonder is what diplomatic efforts were used to pressure Qaddafi? There were no (as far as I know) threats of economic embargoes, freezing of assets, or other less violent methods to coerce Qaddafi. We didn't need to convince him to step dow. We simply needed to convince him that he needed to tone down, defend himself against the armed insurrection, but not cast a wider and violent campaign against innocent civilians.
We could have responded simply with economic sanctions.
Based on Gaddafi's treatment of the initial protests (not to mention his tendencies over 40 years of autocratic rule), I strongly question whether economic sanctions are going to apply sufficient pressure to Gaddafi to relinquish power. Like Mubarak, he is a political strongman who is not easily cowed by threats.
I need a clearer demonstration that serious steps were taken before resorting to war. War should be used as the last resort and only when it's clear that all other options have failed.
I agree that war should be considered a last resort. I also think that the US government is generally too quick to undertake armed intervention. But in this case we took sides in a war that was already in progress. The UN's choices were either non-intervention, non-military intervention, or direct military intervention in some form.
I suppose the point at which "all other options have failed" is a debatable one, since everyone has different opinions on what constitutes a valid option. There are many questions without simple answers. How do we judge failure? Is the purpose of the intervention (military or otherwise) to aid the rebels? Or is it merely to prevent Gaddafi killing civilians? If the latter is the case, does allowing him to remain in power serve that cause? If not, what should we do about it?
At the bottom of all this though, the goal of current foreign intervention (military or otherwise) is clear to me - to remove Gaddafi from power and recognize the rebel transitional government as the legitimate government of Libya.
dgree03
Apr 6, 03:58 PM
1. Have you seen how those apps "scale" on XOOM? That doesn't make them optimized for tablets, just fit more screen space and even that doesn't work that well.
2. Bull.
YOU apparently havent seen how apps scale first hand. Like i said ill take that over x1, x2 ANY day.
Scale?? Access to each other??
I'm beginning to wonder if you have ever used EITHER iOS or Android.
HAHA, Yes I own a XOOM and a Ipad 2(previously Ipad 1).
YOU apparently havent used either at any length.
My point still stands, I can use less apps to accomplish the same goals on a XOOM than i can on a Ipad.
If you have any other first hand usage that proves me wrong.. go for it.
2. Bull.
YOU apparently havent seen how apps scale first hand. Like i said ill take that over x1, x2 ANY day.
Scale?? Access to each other??
I'm beginning to wonder if you have ever used EITHER iOS or Android.
HAHA, Yes I own a XOOM and a Ipad 2(previously Ipad 1).
YOU apparently havent used either at any length.
My point still stands, I can use less apps to accomplish the same goals on a XOOM than i can on a Ipad.
If you have any other first hand usage that proves me wrong.. go for it.
Androidpwns
Mar 22, 02:55 PM
Sorry, completely forgot about that.
iOS rocks in apps, but it does suck *** in terms of notifications and true multitasking.
Apple should've been the ones to buy Palm.
Spot on post :D
iOS rocks in apps, but it does suck *** in terms of notifications and true multitasking.
Apple should've been the ones to buy Palm.
Spot on post :D
iansilv
Apr 25, 04:48 PM
wow, this has officially been blown out of proportion!
Yup!
The GOVERNMENT must get a warrant- that attorney is an idiot. Things like the iPhone tracking people's location is not the same thing as a federal officer getting a warrant for tracking someone.
Hey attorney- thanks for making our profession look idiotic!
Yup!
The GOVERNMENT must get a warrant- that attorney is an idiot. Things like the iPhone tracking people's location is not the same thing as a federal officer getting a warrant for tracking someone.
Hey attorney- thanks for making our profession look idiotic!
mashinhead
Aug 5, 04:36 PM
Well iSight or no, there needs to be an update anyway. The Mac Pro will have Front Row, and how will you control it by remote if you're meant to keep it under your desk? The new Cinema Displays need an IR "extender".
Besides, I still think Apple WOULD love to include an iSight in their displays.
what if you don't want to buy and apple display but still want to use front row? I think is has to be on the computer, but i think there will be new displays
Besides, I still think Apple WOULD love to include an iSight in their displays.
what if you don't want to buy and apple display but still want to use front row? I think is has to be on the computer, but i think there will be new displays
boncellis
Jul 27, 04:54 PM
Dan=='s mockup is something that I had considered before, I remember talking about it with Yvan 256 at some point as something like "the return of the Cube." I think it's a pretty good design, the guts of the Mini are so packed as it is, an expanded case would allow for a substantial upgrade in components, including the oft clamored for dedicated GPU.
Another way Apple could do it is just to elongate the Mini's case to make it just as svelte vertically, only slightly wider. Could you take a run at that one Dan==? ;)
Another way Apple could do it is just to elongate the Mini's case to make it just as svelte vertically, only slightly wider. Could you take a run at that one Dan==? ;)
mmmcheese
Sep 13, 09:23 AM
It would be nice if 10.5 would allow a more 'blind' method to utilize these cores, versus having programmers specificly program for multi-core. Now that would be extremely helpful and allow a more simultanous workflow.
Do you mean like how BeOS did things?
Do you mean like how BeOS did things?
Homy
Aug 6, 07:24 AM
MBP owners don't need to worry yet. AnandTech (http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2808&p=1)
"The biggest performance gains are associated with 3D rendering and media encoding tasks. While Core 2 Duo does look nice, as long as you've got a good notebook today you'll probably want to wait until Santa Rosa before upgrading (at the earliest). With Santa Rosa, clock speeds will go up slightly but more importantly we'll get access to a faster FSB. Unfortunately a side-effect of keeping Core 2 Duo fed with a faster FSB is that while performance may go up, battery life may go down. For Apple users this means that early adopters of the new MacBook or MacBook Pro won't be too pressured to upgrade again by the end of this year. Of course Apple has this way of making incremental changes irresistible."
"The biggest performance gains are associated with 3D rendering and media encoding tasks. While Core 2 Duo does look nice, as long as you've got a good notebook today you'll probably want to wait until Santa Rosa before upgrading (at the earliest). With Santa Rosa, clock speeds will go up slightly but more importantly we'll get access to a faster FSB. Unfortunately a side-effect of keeping Core 2 Duo fed with a faster FSB is that while performance may go up, battery life may go down. For Apple users this means that early adopters of the new MacBook or MacBook Pro won't be too pressured to upgrade again by the end of this year. Of course Apple has this way of making incremental changes irresistible."
Mattsasa
Apr 6, 03:07 PM
Not bad for a $800 dollar device, available for one carrier. I wonder what the numbers will look like after the late march wifi-only.
At least 100k people know what its like to have a really FUNCTIONAL Tablet.
please tell me! what defines a functional tablet
At least 100k people know what its like to have a really FUNCTIONAL Tablet.
please tell me! what defines a functional tablet
Tomaz
Aug 7, 04:30 PM
If you were picking on Mail.app's Stationery I'd probably agree with you.
None of the things that Time Machine have been compared to seem even close to what they are planning to do. Including my own VMS file versioning analogies. System Restore is not capable of restoring a single file, and particularly not within a running application. It seems kind of more like a system wide undo function when it comes to files...
B
I'm not comparing it to system restore but to Volume Shadow Copy from Windows Server 2003. File-by-file snapshot by MS 3 years ago!
I think Time Machine looks and probably is good, but after having seen all the pictures of the banners at WWDC mocking Vista, I expected someting REALLY NEW, not just warmed up. If they can't show the super super secret new stuff yet, then they shouldn't have used those banners. I find that arrogant...
None of the things that Time Machine have been compared to seem even close to what they are planning to do. Including my own VMS file versioning analogies. System Restore is not capable of restoring a single file, and particularly not within a running application. It seems kind of more like a system wide undo function when it comes to files...
B
I'm not comparing it to system restore but to Volume Shadow Copy from Windows Server 2003. File-by-file snapshot by MS 3 years ago!
I think Time Machine looks and probably is good, but after having seen all the pictures of the banners at WWDC mocking Vista, I expected someting REALLY NEW, not just warmed up. If they can't show the super super secret new stuff yet, then they shouldn't have used those banners. I find that arrogant...
Popeye206
Apr 19, 02:11 PM
x2
Everything is just a development of something else.
There is no absolute originality.
This is a stupid waste of time and effort.
But I guess when you get all big and high and mighty then why not throw some of the spare cash at a silly law suit if for no other reason than getting more publicity.
You obviously don't work in software or product development with statements like this.
Everything is just a development of something else.
There is no absolute originality.
This is a stupid waste of time and effort.
But I guess when you get all big and high and mighty then why not throw some of the spare cash at a silly law suit if for no other reason than getting more publicity.
You obviously don't work in software or product development with statements like this.
bryanc
Sep 19, 07:14 AM
Does it even MATTER if Apple keeps up? Do we actually WANT Apple to release a new computer every month when Intel bumps up their chips a few megahertz?
....
Is it really hurting you guys that Apple has been slow to update? Are you really doing tasks that the current computer lineup cannot do?
Actually, yes. I use my laptop as a portable desktop, and I do a lot of different things with my computer. My current PowerBook G4 is capable of some of them, but really not practical for many (scientific computing, ray-tracing molecular models, etc.). A current yonah-based MBP would certainly be faster, but it would still be a 32-bit processor, and like many other pro-users, I don't want to have to buy a new machine every year.
So I'm waiting for the merom-based MBPs like thousands of others, because I'm going to need that 64-bit CPU, and I want the extra speed (note that, even if you're not using the 64-bit CPU's capacity to address vast amounts of memory - not possible in a current laptop anyway - when in 64-bit mode, the CPU has more registers, making it significantly faster than when it runs in 32-bit mode).
I rather hoped that Apple would be first out of the gate with these new CPUs, but their delay getting to market with Intel's latest laptop chip makes me cautiously optimistic that we may see it appear in a redesigned case (with easily swappable HDDs please).
Cheers
....
Is it really hurting you guys that Apple has been slow to update? Are you really doing tasks that the current computer lineup cannot do?
Actually, yes. I use my laptop as a portable desktop, and I do a lot of different things with my computer. My current PowerBook G4 is capable of some of them, but really not practical for many (scientific computing, ray-tracing molecular models, etc.). A current yonah-based MBP would certainly be faster, but it would still be a 32-bit processor, and like many other pro-users, I don't want to have to buy a new machine every year.
So I'm waiting for the merom-based MBPs like thousands of others, because I'm going to need that 64-bit CPU, and I want the extra speed (note that, even if you're not using the 64-bit CPU's capacity to address vast amounts of memory - not possible in a current laptop anyway - when in 64-bit mode, the CPU has more registers, making it significantly faster than when it runs in 32-bit mode).
I rather hoped that Apple would be first out of the gate with these new CPUs, but their delay getting to market with Intel's latest laptop chip makes me cautiously optimistic that we may see it appear in a redesigned case (with easily swappable HDDs please).
Cheers
Dave00
Aug 7, 03:50 PM
Well, looks like Apple has figured out what to do with all that extra space most of us have on our hard drives. Even though only changes are saved, it seems like this will take up an enormous amount of space, especially for multimedia files like movies, etc. Plus, if only changes are stored, it would seem that to restore a file would entail starting with the original, and applying all the changes since then - wouldn't that take quite a long time? And saving a file would probably take longer too... smells like alot of system slowdown. Still, I'll be very impressed if this actually works without a huge number of bugs - it has to be a phenomenally complicated task to keep track of everything. And it LOOKS really cool. :)
Dave
Dave
jaydub
Sep 18, 11:09 PM
Is it happening on a tuesday, perchance? :D
liven2
Apr 6, 01:58 PM
No matter what Apple does lately or how much they sell or how good the forecasts are for sales Apple Stock continues it quick downward slide. What the HELL!! I just do not understand it ... Specially while Google stock continues to climb at an incredible pace week, after week, after week.. :confused::confused::mad:
wizard
Apr 10, 03:53 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
A bit of selective hearing on the part of MacRumors with the quotes they chose to use. At first the video sounds great, dude is hyping what he saw from Apple. But later he gets called out from another speculating Apple is making a very significant change and distancing Final Cut from the real 'pro' users, dumbing it down, etc, and the guy who has seen it gets real quiet.. He is asked if he will update his editing studio's workflow to the new Final Cut, and he basically danced around the question, pleaded the 5th, and made it pretty clear that he is holding back some reservations about how the industry will adapt to the changes.
Personally I'm very interested to see what they do, I'm sure it will have huge improvements on real time rendering and performance, sounds like the whole thing is being rewritten. But it does worry me that the program could become more for mass audience and no longer the pro application it has been for the past decade.
A hammer is a hammer, the only significant difference between pro use and amature is how you swing it. Sometimes the pros get a little full of themselves and don't realize that tools are just there to express your imagination.
A bit of selective hearing on the part of MacRumors with the quotes they chose to use. At first the video sounds great, dude is hyping what he saw from Apple. But later he gets called out from another speculating Apple is making a very significant change and distancing Final Cut from the real 'pro' users, dumbing it down, etc, and the guy who has seen it gets real quiet.. He is asked if he will update his editing studio's workflow to the new Final Cut, and he basically danced around the question, pleaded the 5th, and made it pretty clear that he is holding back some reservations about how the industry will adapt to the changes.
Personally I'm very interested to see what they do, I'm sure it will have huge improvements on real time rendering and performance, sounds like the whole thing is being rewritten. But it does worry me that the program could become more for mass audience and no longer the pro application it has been for the past decade.
A hammer is a hammer, the only significant difference between pro use and amature is how you swing it. Sometimes the pros get a little full of themselves and don't realize that tools are just there to express your imagination.
brianus
Sep 14, 10:23 PM
AnandTech is putting a lot of emphasis on this FB-DIMM issue. Their Conroe vs Xeon comparisons are poor given that they maximize the FB-DIMM latency "problem" by using a Mac Pro with only two RAM slots occupied. Seems as though they have an agenda to exaggerate the importance of this technical issue.
I have noticed this emphasis as well; not being an expert on this issue myself though, would you care to shed light on how their coverage is an exaggeration and why we shouldn't be worried about it?
The comments about separate platforms in the NT era I took to refer to NT3.x/4 vs Win9x.
Yes, this is what I was getting at. ("arse about face"? What is that, Swedish? :rolleyes: ). Noone other than a vintage Windows IT person would know there were further differences between versions of NT itself. Also when making comparisons I never mentioned Server 2003 (about which I know almost nothing); I was talking about XP and 2000 being relatively similar whereas, for example NT and 98 were not.
New micro-arch -- Nehalem is due 2008.
Really, completely new? As in, to Core 2 what the G5 was to G4? In just two years?? I guess they're really ramping things up... Core 3 Hexa Mac Pros, anyone?
I have noticed this emphasis as well; not being an expert on this issue myself though, would you care to shed light on how their coverage is an exaggeration and why we shouldn't be worried about it?
The comments about separate platforms in the NT era I took to refer to NT3.x/4 vs Win9x.
Yes, this is what I was getting at. ("arse about face"? What is that, Swedish? :rolleyes: ). Noone other than a vintage Windows IT person would know there were further differences between versions of NT itself. Also when making comparisons I never mentioned Server 2003 (about which I know almost nothing); I was talking about XP and 2000 being relatively similar whereas, for example NT and 98 were not.
New micro-arch -- Nehalem is due 2008.
Really, completely new? As in, to Core 2 what the G5 was to G4? In just two years?? I guess they're really ramping things up... Core 3 Hexa Mac Pros, anyone?
shamino
Jul 21, 10:09 AM
Not exactly. Multiple cores is as much about multitasking multiple applications or multiple instances of the same application simultaneously as it is about running one or two that use all the cores. The OS X system delegates multicore use to some extent already.
At the very least, Spotlight indexing won't kill the performance of my foreground app :cool:
At the very least, Spotlight indexing won't kill the performance of my foreground app :cool:
TangoCharlie
Jul 20, 11:40 AM
I have a question.
If Kentsfield is a relation of the Conroe part (ie. Core 2 Duo) then will it be capable of being configured in a pair to create a "octo" core machine?
Surely that will require a Xeon class processor (like a quad version of the Woodcrest)?
edit: quad version of Woodcrest is Clovertown.
Intel has for the last few years restricted the "destop" parts to single socket systems. ** If Intel continues along these lines, then Kentsfield will also be restricted to single socket systems (ie a maximum of 4 cores).
Cloverton, being the "Xeon" equivalent will support multi-socket systems, taking us to the quoted 8 cores for dual-cpu systems.
====
**The Pentium III S was the last "desktop" CPU which could be used in a dual cpu configuration. P4's were always "crippled" to work only in single-cpu systems.
If Kentsfield is a relation of the Conroe part (ie. Core 2 Duo) then will it be capable of being configured in a pair to create a "octo" core machine?
Surely that will require a Xeon class processor (like a quad version of the Woodcrest)?
edit: quad version of Woodcrest is Clovertown.
Intel has for the last few years restricted the "destop" parts to single socket systems. ** If Intel continues along these lines, then Kentsfield will also be restricted to single socket systems (ie a maximum of 4 cores).
Cloverton, being the "Xeon" equivalent will support multi-socket systems, taking us to the quoted 8 cores for dual-cpu systems.
====
**The Pentium III S was the last "desktop" CPU which could be used in a dual cpu configuration. P4's were always "crippled" to work only in single-cpu systems.
AttilaTheHun
Jun 13, 05:27 PM
congrats..but why would anyone pay 425$ for a 3GS/32 when most can get the iPhone discount for a 4G for 74$ more?..I have 3GS/32 black and Im going to keep mine for a back-up phone/iPod/maybe sell it later/ and I'm getting the $499 discount since I'm not eligible for an upgrade til 3/11...glta
You got great price, me too sold my 3GS 32G less then one year old in mint condition got only $400
You got great price, me too sold my 3GS 32G less then one year old in mint condition got only $400
No comments:
Post a Comment