cube
Mar 24, 04:15 PM
You got it wrong.
Llanos, Brazos and pretty much every Fusion platform does not compete against Sandy Bridge. No...
It competes against Intel's Atom platform. Atom CPU offerings beat the many of the offerings on the AMD side. However, on the GPU side, AMD has got Intel really well.
Anandtech did a nice little article on this. They found the whole Fusion concept and implementation as a whole beats Intel's Atom implementation overall for the HTPC. However, down to specifics, well I just discussed it.
Llano is not Atom-level hardware. That is Zacate/Ontario.
Llano is the mainstream Sandy Bridge competitor.
Llanos, Brazos and pretty much every Fusion platform does not compete against Sandy Bridge. No...
It competes against Intel's Atom platform. Atom CPU offerings beat the many of the offerings on the AMD side. However, on the GPU side, AMD has got Intel really well.
Anandtech did a nice little article on this. They found the whole Fusion concept and implementation as a whole beats Intel's Atom implementation overall for the HTPC. However, down to specifics, well I just discussed it.
Llano is not Atom-level hardware. That is Zacate/Ontario.
Llano is the mainstream Sandy Bridge competitor.
claus1225
Apr 2, 07:35 PM
this commercial makes ipad seemed like it's only for kids.
Manic Mouse
Aug 26, 05:57 AM
Oh I can be sure that a Conroe placed in an iMac will run into the volume constraints and effective heat dissipation of the heat sink when compared to a full blown BTX tower.
The original G5 and the Rev. B (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9d/IMacG5guts.png) stuck with the wonderful heat channel. The 17" models ran a lot hotter then the 20" due to the internal design and volume.
The Rev. C (http://www.xlr8yourmac.com/systems/imac_isight_internals/imac_g5_isight_inside.html) and Intel use similar internal layouts with the CPU and power supply toward the top of the machine.
Here (http://www.flickr.com/photos/inju/88928219/) is a good comparison.
Watch the WWDC keynote and note that the xserves now use Woodcrest which has a higher TDP than Conroe (95W compared to 65W). Also note what they say about Woodcrest having a better thermal environment that the G5's they were using before which were the same G5's (non-dual core) that the iMac used I believe. Conroe has better thermal characteristics than G5's, the Mac Pro and xserve prove that.
iMac will get Conroe. 2.4Ghz and 2.66Ghz. Conroe is the best value for performance processor that Intel are offering, so they need to use it SOMEWHERE in their lineup.
The original G5 and the Rev. B (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9d/IMacG5guts.png) stuck with the wonderful heat channel. The 17" models ran a lot hotter then the 20" due to the internal design and volume.
The Rev. C (http://www.xlr8yourmac.com/systems/imac_isight_internals/imac_g5_isight_inside.html) and Intel use similar internal layouts with the CPU and power supply toward the top of the machine.
Here (http://www.flickr.com/photos/inju/88928219/) is a good comparison.
Watch the WWDC keynote and note that the xserves now use Woodcrest which has a higher TDP than Conroe (95W compared to 65W). Also note what they say about Woodcrest having a better thermal environment that the G5's they were using before which were the same G5's (non-dual core) that the iMac used I believe. Conroe has better thermal characteristics than G5's, the Mac Pro and xserve prove that.
iMac will get Conroe. 2.4Ghz and 2.66Ghz. Conroe is the best value for performance processor that Intel are offering, so they need to use it SOMEWHERE in their lineup.
SwiftLives
Jun 22, 12:33 PM
Just from a pragmatic standpoint...
Fingerprints on the screen would be difficult to get around - even with Apple's "oleophobicc" display. Fingerprints still show.
Secondly - why? Is taking your hand off of a mouse to touch the safari icon on the screen somehow easier than just clicking on it with the cursor? Is there some advantage to typing by touching the screen rather than a keyboard?
Personally, I don't see much advantage to having a touch interface on any device that isn't portable.
Fingerprints on the screen would be difficult to get around - even with Apple's "oleophobicc" display. Fingerprints still show.
Secondly - why? Is taking your hand off of a mouse to touch the safari icon on the screen somehow easier than just clicking on it with the cursor? Is there some advantage to typing by touching the screen rather than a keyboard?
Personally, I don't see much advantage to having a touch interface on any device that isn't portable.
gugy
Sep 1, 12:54 PM
You can already do that. The current iMacs support dual display, just not the 30"
Really? I heard that you can connect and external monitor using a hack software for dual screen support . But it does not support the cinema displays.
I hope I am wrong.:)
Really? I heard that you can connect and external monitor using a hack software for dual screen support . But it does not support the cinema displays.
I hope I am wrong.:)
RaceTripper
Jan 10, 07:50 PM
So very sad but true. F1 fan here, and rally if I can ever find time to watch it. I might not be a F1 fan for much longer though if they keep making "the ultimate racing machine" slower and slower by limiting the technology :mad: I understand the safety reasons, but its getting to be worse than the bicycle world:eek:
I was a big F1 fan, but once the USGP got cancelled my wife and I became huge ALMS fans. Evey year we go to the 12 Hours of Sebring, Road America, and Petit Le Mans. The racing is much better than in F1, and the series is far more fan friendly. I've even started working in the hot pits doing IMSA pit notes during races, in addition to the race photography I have been doing for fun.
One point to consider about F1 rules changes. Slowing the cars down could improve the on track action. Right now they are so fast they get too spread out and it becomes a parade of cars with the action being how the gaps change. When you slow the cars down they start to bunch together again and force some wheel to wheel battles. The turbo 4-bangers coming in a few years could prove to add some excitement back to F1, even if it does cost us the terrific sound of high revving V8 engines. The rule changes aren't so much about safety as they are about trying to get a race to ensue.
I was a big F1 fan, but once the USGP got cancelled my wife and I became huge ALMS fans. Evey year we go to the 12 Hours of Sebring, Road America, and Petit Le Mans. The racing is much better than in F1, and the series is far more fan friendly. I've even started working in the hot pits doing IMSA pit notes during races, in addition to the race photography I have been doing for fun.
One point to consider about F1 rules changes. Slowing the cars down could improve the on track action. Right now they are so fast they get too spread out and it becomes a parade of cars with the action being how the gaps change. When you slow the cars down they start to bunch together again and force some wheel to wheel battles. The turbo 4-bangers coming in a few years could prove to add some excitement back to F1, even if it does cost us the terrific sound of high revving V8 engines. The rule changes aren't so much about safety as they are about trying to get a race to ensue.
Nuvi
Apr 13, 02:10 AM
PS i really think that apple is powerfully positioning themselves by selling final cut so cheap. Now you can justify paying more for a Mac box because the software is so much less than the competition. Brilliant if you ask me - make software cheap, sell more macs and cost kick your competition out of the market.
First of all we have no idea what full price of FCS (like?) suit is. Is it $300 for each app or what? Do they deliver also on physical discs and with printed manuals (we want real manuals)? If you think about upgrade pricing, the current FCS suit upgrade is around $300 so if Apple starts asking that money for each of the FCS suit app upgrades via App Store (without physical media or manuals) then upgrade to Avid MC Production Suit under $1000 is cheap option for old FCP users.
First of all we have no idea what full price of FCS (like?) suit is. Is it $300 for each app or what? Do they deliver also on physical discs and with printed manuals (we want real manuals)? If you think about upgrade pricing, the current FCS suit upgrade is around $300 so if Apple starts asking that money for each of the FCS suit app upgrades via App Store (without physical media or manuals) then upgrade to Avid MC Production Suit under $1000 is cheap option for old FCP users.
regandarcy
Apr 19, 12:20 PM
Honestly with the new Quad Core MBP lineup it makes much more sense to get a monitor and add it to your notebook than to get an iMac. (Unless you really need 16GB of ram vs 8GB).
I can see one day only having the Mac Pro for those of use that need one (video editing, digital creation etc) and the high-powered MBP for those who don't want a tower.
The current apple cinema displays don't have a thunderbolt port. And actually I think the macbooks have more to fear from the ipads than the iMacs do from the macbooks. Also, there used to be a time not long ago, that artists ALWAYS went for the Mac pros over an iMac.....but that is not the case anymore. I know filmmakers, photographers, graphic artists and the like who've chosen the maxed out iMac instead of a Mac pro.
I can see one day only having the Mac Pro for those of use that need one (video editing, digital creation etc) and the high-powered MBP for those who don't want a tower.
The current apple cinema displays don't have a thunderbolt port. And actually I think the macbooks have more to fear from the ipads than the iMacs do from the macbooks. Also, there used to be a time not long ago, that artists ALWAYS went for the Mac pros over an iMac.....but that is not the case anymore. I know filmmakers, photographers, graphic artists and the like who've chosen the maxed out iMac instead of a Mac pro.
copykris
Mar 22, 04:58 PM
Do people seriously have that many songs?!!! seriously?!!!
220gb = 50,000 songs?!!!!! That is totally not necessary.
Apple discontinue that dinosaur! It makes you look bad to just have it on your website.
this has to be the dumbest thing i've ever read on here
and i was around when that one guy kept talking about how he 'future-proofed' his mac, so
220gb = 50,000 songs?!!!!! That is totally not necessary.
Apple discontinue that dinosaur! It makes you look bad to just have it on your website.
this has to be the dumbest thing i've ever read on here
and i was around when that one guy kept talking about how he 'future-proofed' his mac, so
Irishman
Apr 20, 08:18 AM
A 6800m would be a downgrade. Keep in mind the current imac with the 5750 is actually a 5850m. 6850m is a downgrade from a 5850m, though only slightly. There are only two cards they could use that are upgrades over the current one and that's the 6950m and the 6970m.
I would also hope for the 3.4ghz i7-2600 sandy bridge processor.
Fixed!
I would also hope for the 3.4ghz i7-2600 sandy bridge processor.
Fixed!
CalBoy
Mar 21, 12:32 AM
There are homeopathic apps in the AppStore. Those won't work any better than this 'pray the gay away' app, but they still are allowed in the store.
Then I think Apple might be exposed to the same potential liabilities for homeopathic remedies too. Mind you I don't think (or know definitely) anyone has successfully maintained that companies that knowingly permit the propagation of dangerous materials should be held liable. I do, however, think that it would be a fair standard to apply if the company is going to trumpet it's own "protective" prowess.
Apple is being inconsistent with its policies on the App Store. Either any offensive or potentially dangerous app should be barred, or none of them should be. By trying to play the part of the micromanager, Apple is revealing its own limitations.
No-one could possibly be offended by homeopathy.
I disagree. The level of offense might be lower than this gay-be-gone app, but I'm sure many physicians, nurses, and skeptics are not too fond of junk science being spread.
Moreover, it isn't just about what offends; that is merely a measuring stick to figure out what Apple's priorities are. I'm sure there is an app to offend everyone in the app store (does the Auduban Society approve of Angry Birds?). The question is which of these apps represents a real problem for users? As much as I disagree with Jobs about porn in the app store, there is at least some minimal possibility of utility in leaving porn out of the app store in that parents will be better able to decide what their kids download (not that there aren't other means of doing so, or that the kids haven't already seen porn). Sure it isn't a fantastic reason, but at least there's plausibility.
I think something similar can be said for this gay-be-gone app or a homeopathic app. In these situations the dangers from app use are not only higher, but they also run contrary to what medical professionals the world over recommend. If Apple is so willing to ban something for its plausible dangers, why not ban something for its very real dangers?
I think that should be a more important metric over offense. An app that is offensive but which doesn't hurt anyone either directly on indirectly should be scrutinized much less than one that does. In this light, it becomes more clear that what Apple really wanted to do all along was keep porn out of the App Store. Not because it's offensive or dangerous, but because it would make their devices easier to sell even in the most conservative of markets.
Then I think Apple might be exposed to the same potential liabilities for homeopathic remedies too. Mind you I don't think (or know definitely) anyone has successfully maintained that companies that knowingly permit the propagation of dangerous materials should be held liable. I do, however, think that it would be a fair standard to apply if the company is going to trumpet it's own "protective" prowess.
Apple is being inconsistent with its policies on the App Store. Either any offensive or potentially dangerous app should be barred, or none of them should be. By trying to play the part of the micromanager, Apple is revealing its own limitations.
No-one could possibly be offended by homeopathy.
I disagree. The level of offense might be lower than this gay-be-gone app, but I'm sure many physicians, nurses, and skeptics are not too fond of junk science being spread.
Moreover, it isn't just about what offends; that is merely a measuring stick to figure out what Apple's priorities are. I'm sure there is an app to offend everyone in the app store (does the Auduban Society approve of Angry Birds?). The question is which of these apps represents a real problem for users? As much as I disagree with Jobs about porn in the app store, there is at least some minimal possibility of utility in leaving porn out of the app store in that parents will be better able to decide what their kids download (not that there aren't other means of doing so, or that the kids haven't already seen porn). Sure it isn't a fantastic reason, but at least there's plausibility.
I think something similar can be said for this gay-be-gone app or a homeopathic app. In these situations the dangers from app use are not only higher, but they also run contrary to what medical professionals the world over recommend. If Apple is so willing to ban something for its plausible dangers, why not ban something for its very real dangers?
I think that should be a more important metric over offense. An app that is offensive but which doesn't hurt anyone either directly on indirectly should be scrutinized much less than one that does. In this light, it becomes more clear that what Apple really wanted to do all along was keep porn out of the App Store. Not because it's offensive or dangerous, but because it would make their devices easier to sell even in the most conservative of markets.
nagromme
Sep 6, 06:12 PM
Does anyone else think that Apple really really needs a rental model for the movie store? I'm against it with music but it's not the same a movies. I don't want my harddrive full of these things. I would be nice to rent one for much less, watch it and delete it. I don't see it being very successful if it is for purchase only.
Yes. I want rentals. I almost never want to see the same movie again, so I won't want to store it.
Rentals are what I would use. At a sufficiently low price, of course. $2 for close to DVD quality would be OK. (I'm less picky about rental quality than purchase quality.)
Yes. I want rentals. I almost never want to see the same movie again, so I won't want to store it.
Rentals are what I would use. At a sufficiently low price, of course. $2 for close to DVD quality would be OK. (I'm less picky about rental quality than purchase quality.)
surroundfan
Sep 6, 07:34 AM
New Mac Minis have landed. Core Duo 1.66 and 1.83. Otherwise the same...
160GB HDD option though. Just the thing for a media centre...
160GB HDD option though. Just the thing for a media centre...
zedsdead
Apr 19, 11:00 AM
The iMac update is likely to be a spec bump, Sandy Bridge, better Graphics, etc...plus Thunderbolt. I plan to hang on to my current model for now.
I am more excited about a potential Mac Mini Update, because I need one of those.
I am more excited about a potential Mac Mini Update, because I need one of those.
m4rc
Mar 28, 11:50 AM
Maybe he will go away and stop making up senseless rubbish if we just agree with him? Yes, Apple is dieing. Maybe a month, maybe a few weeks, but not long now. Such a shame. Gonna miss them. All because they didn't make a $500 computer, which cost more than that to make and market properly. They really should have listened to Imac_Japan you know, he saw it coming. Just think, if they hadn't been wasting their energy on that stupid iPod.......
Has he gone yet?
Has he gone yet?
Evangelion
Aug 31, 07:19 AM
Grah. I hope this rumour proves incorrect. A processor that can't do x86-64 is planned obsolescence. I don't want to buy a computer that will be unable to run software in a few years!
What makes you think that it "can't run software"? Current 32bit CPU's will be usable for years to come.
What makes you think that it "can't run software"? Current 32bit CPU's will be usable for years to come.
skunk
Mar 27, 04:57 AM
Well, the US controls the AWACSThe AWACS involved are owned and operated by NATO. There may not even be US personnel on board.
nebo1ss
Mar 20, 12:56 PM
I am very uncomfortable with the intervention in Libya. When you look at what is happening in Bahrain, Syria, Yemen, Saudi Arabia etc. You have to ask the question why Libya. Perhaps its payback time for the PANAM 101.
Not sure I understand the logic of intervention in one conflict but not another. I fear this is going to hurt us in the long term.
Not sure I understand the logic of intervention in one conflict but not another. I fear this is going to hurt us in the long term.
skiltrip
Sep 23, 09:54 AM
Glad you're getting one!! It fits really well and won't slip out compared to the silicone case. I don't understand why Belkin can't make some normal colors, though. The bright colors look nice, but I would NOT want to be seen around with it under certain occasions. ;)
Do you feel the same about the Night Sky color, or is it more the Aquamarine and Fuscia and neon blinding green? The Night Sky one looks pretty cool. I have no problem with purple colors as long as they are dark, which the Night Sky seems to be from pictures.
Do you feel the same about the Night Sky color, or is it more the Aquamarine and Fuscia and neon blinding green? The Night Sky one looks pretty cool. I have no problem with purple colors as long as they are dark, which the Night Sky seems to be from pictures.
Eidorian
Jan 11, 04:53 PM
What does this mean for the regular MacBook then? Is it going to be another model or a replacement?
utgerger
Jan 12, 04:38 PM
just because they used Air in their banner doesn't mean its called MacBook Air.. Apple is not stupid.. its all about slim and light..
I'll be the one who'll tell you "I told you so" ;) .. enjoy the show!
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=4732961&postcount=94
or this..
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=4733969&postcount=100
:apple:MacBook Lite:apple:
Feb 2008
I'll be the one who'll tell you "I told you so" ;) .. enjoy the show!
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=4732961&postcount=94
or this..
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=4733969&postcount=100
:apple:MacBook Lite:apple:
Feb 2008
razzmatazz
Aug 6, 10:43 PM
Yep. And Milk. Steve Jobs will climb down your chimney, eat the cookies, and pour the milk into any PCs he finds in your house :)
Well he won't find any PCs! Our house is PC free. We have a PowerMac G5, iMac G5, Powerbook G4, and a MacBook. He would be very happy :D
Well he won't find any PCs! Our house is PC free. We have a PowerMac G5, iMac G5, Powerbook G4, and a MacBook. He would be very happy :D
MattInOz
Jun 23, 05:35 AM
The form factor of an iMac just doesn't work nicely with the general way iOS is meant to be used. As mentioned by moneyman, there seems to be a rough adaptation for it if it's used in conjunction with a touch pad, but this still doesn't seem very likely. The only platform that would benefit largely with an iOS layer would be the MacBook line, which could easily enough use a touch-screen interface directly on the existing display without worrying about tired arms. However, this brings up another issue: It would cannibalize iPad sales and blur the defining line for that "intermediate" category of devices between iPhone and Mac that Jobs just finished touting about.
So in summation, my opinion is that it's highly unlikely.
I could see Two reference designs for this idea.
One the iMac 3G
Screen on floating arm is a Standalone iOS device that is the interface to the OS X device in the dome.
But that is really a MacMini in a stand and Biggier iPad or a range of bigger iPads to work with in.This would work better with say Lightpeak for the connection.
Not sure it would be an iMac in that I can't see them jumping the iPad up to 20inch range screens or dropping the iMac back to 15inch range screens.
A new product maybe.
So reference design two would be a wedge so it could also stand up or lie sloped on the table with the thicker part of the wedge for the x86 processor and power supply.
They do need to offer a station wagon or a ute before some people are going to give up their trucks for cars.
So in summation, my opinion is that it's highly unlikely.
I could see Two reference designs for this idea.
One the iMac 3G
Screen on floating arm is a Standalone iOS device that is the interface to the OS X device in the dome.
But that is really a MacMini in a stand and Biggier iPad or a range of bigger iPads to work with in.This would work better with say Lightpeak for the connection.
Not sure it would be an iMac in that I can't see them jumping the iPad up to 20inch range screens or dropping the iMac back to 15inch range screens.
A new product maybe.
So reference design two would be a wedge so it could also stand up or lie sloped on the table with the thicker part of the wedge for the x86 processor and power supply.
They do need to offer a station wagon or a ute before some people are going to give up their trucks for cars.
hayesk
Mar 24, 02:00 PM
That's not clever at all. You'd still be stuck with the Intel GPU on the internal screen.
So what? Play your game on the external screen then. This will allow third displays on Macs that don't have slots. Imagine having three displays on your MacBook Pro. Or if you are a video editor, two displays and an SD or HDMI output.
So what? Play your game on the external screen then. This will allow third displays on Macs that don't have slots. Imagine having three displays on your MacBook Pro. Or if you are a video editor, two displays and an SD or HDMI output.
