Gregg2
Apr 17, 08:17 AM
Unless you're driving a BMW, Honda or Porsche, gear shifters on modern cars either are too "notchy" or overly-vague in terms of finding a gear, and the result is not very pleasant, especially in city driving.
Wow! You've driven every other kind of car as well? Or maybe that's "According to ______, (fill in name of magazine or auto guru)..."
Wow! You've driven every other kind of car as well? Or maybe that's "According to ______, (fill in name of magazine or auto guru)..."
MacRumors
Jul 13, 10:21 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Macworld has posted a roundup of recent analyst speculation (http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/07/13/blurayapple/index.php) on the possibility of Apple using Blu-ray in forthcoming products. Most analysts seem to agree that Apple will first include the technology on its professional "Mac Pro" line before transitioning it to its consumer products.
"Apple’s past practices favor bringing new optical technologies to professional systems first,” said Jupiter Research senior analyst Joe Wilcox. “DVD-RAM and DVD-R formats are excellent examples.”
The exact timing of Blu-ray's introduction into the Mac Pro is uncertain, however.
Ross Rubin, director of analysis at market-research firm NPD Group, agrees that Apple will work with the professional machines first. However, noting that Intel-based pro desktops have yet to appear, he predicts Blu-ray drives won’t wind up in Apple systems for a few more months.
“January would be good—the timing for that would work out pretty well,” Rubin said. “It comes down to the introduction cycle, but we would see it in desktops first, no doubt.”
Blu-ray is a next-generation optical disk format that can hold up to 25 GB of data per layer compared to rival HD DVD's 15 GB per layer. In April, TDK produced a 6 layer Blu-ray disk (http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/04/28/tdk_200gb_blu-ray_disc/) that could hold up to 200 GB when the single-layer maximum was pushed to 33 GB. Currently, Blu-ray players are scarce and cost over $1000 USD, and the format has seen several delays. Much of the industry is watching Sony's Playstation 3 (http://www.us.playstation.com/PS3/default.html) game console which is expected to arrive in November 2006 and should push Blu-ray prices down.
Apple joined Blu-ray's Board of Directors (http://www.macworld.com/news/2005/03/10/bluray/index.php) in March of 2005.
Digg This (http://digg.com/apple/Mac_Pro_And_Bluray_Speculation)
Macworld has posted a roundup of recent analyst speculation (http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/07/13/blurayapple/index.php) on the possibility of Apple using Blu-ray in forthcoming products. Most analysts seem to agree that Apple will first include the technology on its professional "Mac Pro" line before transitioning it to its consumer products.
"Apple’s past practices favor bringing new optical technologies to professional systems first,” said Jupiter Research senior analyst Joe Wilcox. “DVD-RAM and DVD-R formats are excellent examples.”
The exact timing of Blu-ray's introduction into the Mac Pro is uncertain, however.
Ross Rubin, director of analysis at market-research firm NPD Group, agrees that Apple will work with the professional machines first. However, noting that Intel-based pro desktops have yet to appear, he predicts Blu-ray drives won’t wind up in Apple systems for a few more months.
“January would be good—the timing for that would work out pretty well,” Rubin said. “It comes down to the introduction cycle, but we would see it in desktops first, no doubt.”
Blu-ray is a next-generation optical disk format that can hold up to 25 GB of data per layer compared to rival HD DVD's 15 GB per layer. In April, TDK produced a 6 layer Blu-ray disk (http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/04/28/tdk_200gb_blu-ray_disc/) that could hold up to 200 GB when the single-layer maximum was pushed to 33 GB. Currently, Blu-ray players are scarce and cost over $1000 USD, and the format has seen several delays. Much of the industry is watching Sony's Playstation 3 (http://www.us.playstation.com/PS3/default.html) game console which is expected to arrive in November 2006 and should push Blu-ray prices down.
Apple joined Blu-ray's Board of Directors (http://www.macworld.com/news/2005/03/10/bluray/index.php) in March of 2005.
Digg This (http://digg.com/apple/Mac_Pro_And_Bluray_Speculation)
CmdrLaForge
Nov 28, 10:05 AM
In fact - that comparison is a little early. Make the same one in 5 years.
I am wondering how the comparison for the XBox vs. Playstation vs. others looked like some days after the initial start.
I am wondering how the comparison for the XBox vs. Playstation vs. others looked like some days after the initial start.
Yebubbleman
Apr 19, 04:43 PM
Don't speak so definitively and pompously.
I work with these machines on the daily. Their service manuals are three mouse clicks and the type of my password away. My co-worker has at least two of them bare naked chips and bits exposed and all at his bench on the daily. It's hard not to stare at them as I take my morning walk to the break room to grab a cup of water. I can speak definitively because I know what I'm talking about. As for pompousness, sorry my tone offends you. Perhaps you might try ignoring it?
I work with these machines on the daily. Their service manuals are three mouse clicks and the type of my password away. My co-worker has at least two of them bare naked chips and bits exposed and all at his bench on the daily. It's hard not to stare at them as I take my morning walk to the break room to grab a cup of water. I can speak definitively because I know what I'm talking about. As for pompousness, sorry my tone offends you. Perhaps you might try ignoring it?
kdjc00
Mar 28, 01:19 PM
it will be interesting to see where apple takes that capabilities of this features to expand its gaming line. i hope it expands it to the apple tv. HD 1080p games would be great..
speakerwizard
Nov 15, 08:11 AM
well, OSX whooped xp for multicore usage then
notabadname
Apr 21, 11:54 AM
Yeah, because Google doesn't track any data on people :rolleyes:
Benguitar
Nov 23, 08:04 PM
you planning on treating them rough?
Not really, The reason I spent the money on Oakleys is because from what I've read and seen, Oakley's are tough and will last you years. But also if I travel and don't wish to wear them I want to put them somewhere where they will not be crushed, or drowned, or broken.
I'm also planning on going into the Coast Guard, So if/when I travel or etc, I want to take great care of my equipment & personal belongings.
uh...
that seems awful clunky as a container for a pair of sunglasses...
I got that size because it was the smallest water proof size, I also plan on getting another pair someday.
When I spend $200.00 on a pair of sunglasses, When they are not on my head, I want them put away.
Not really, The reason I spent the money on Oakleys is because from what I've read and seen, Oakley's are tough and will last you years. But also if I travel and don't wish to wear them I want to put them somewhere where they will not be crushed, or drowned, or broken.
I'm also planning on going into the Coast Guard, So if/when I travel or etc, I want to take great care of my equipment & personal belongings.
uh...
that seems awful clunky as a container for a pair of sunglasses...
I got that size because it was the smallest water proof size, I also plan on getting another pair someday.
When I spend $200.00 on a pair of sunglasses, When they are not on my head, I want them put away.
frankie
Sep 1, 03:42 PM
Many of the people on this thread are too new to remember the Performa fiascos of the early 90's. More than anything, Steve simplified the computer product line into 4 distinct quadrants. The only aberration to this is the Mac Mini.
Many of the people who bring up the Performa era are failing to remember that there were typically twenty or more Mac models at any given time. 20 is too many. 4 is too few. Many of us would be much happier if Apple offered 6-8 models (specifically, the xMac).
Welcome to the Final Four!
Final Four Houston Tickets.
Euroleague Final Four 2011
final four tickets 2012
ncaa final four tickets 2011
NCAA Tournament - Mens Tickets
2011 NCAA Women#39;s Final Four
final four tickets barcelona
final four tickets 2012
and 2011 NCAA Final Four
Many of the people who bring up the Performa era are failing to remember that there were typically twenty or more Mac models at any given time. 20 is too many. 4 is too few. Many of us would be much happier if Apple offered 6-8 models (specifically, the xMac).
ddrueckhammer
Sep 6, 06:34 PM
I am with the rental bandwagon. I would pay up to $4.99 to rent a movie that deleted itself after a certain period of time from the first play. Also, I could care less about how long it takes to download because if they implemented a queue ala Netflix then the next one could just download. It should still be faster and more convenient than Netflix. I would even be happy if they used Bit torrent technology to help subsidize their bandwidth costs. Until there is a model like, this I won't give up Netflix and there is no way that I want to buy movies online unless they are under $9.99 and are at least DVD quality and burnable to a disk. It just isn't worth it without physical media. As it is, there are already tons of people who rent and burn movies with impunity so distributing content electronically might be a great way to get some money from those people because they would be able to have a DRM that limits the number of burns, as well as, watermarking to stop unauthorized distribution.
jbanger
Nov 23, 07:00 PM
My shoes arrived! (:
nice!
p-rods?
nice!
p-rods?
Leoff
Nov 27, 05:43 PM
This thread is about the possible introduction of a 17" monitor to possibly complement the Mac Mini, Apple's only headless consumer desktop.
No, actually, this thread is about the possible introduction of a 17" monitor.
There is no mention of it being a compliment to the Mac mini, a smaller pro version for a ProMac, or what it is.
Of course, all this is probably a moot point because
1) It's Digitimes, so chances are it's bogus.
2) It's Apple, so no matter what they charge, people will buy it.
No, actually, this thread is about the possible introduction of a 17" monitor.
There is no mention of it being a compliment to the Mac mini, a smaller pro version for a ProMac, or what it is.
Of course, all this is probably a moot point because
1) It's Digitimes, so chances are it's bogus.
2) It's Apple, so no matter what they charge, people will buy it.
iOzzie
Mar 22, 10:06 PM
Long live the Classic.
My 160 is almost full, put me down for a refresh :)
My 160 is almost full, put me down for a refresh :)
yuyi64
Sep 24, 10:54 AM
I've been waiting so long for this case :( Does anyone know when they're gonna release it?
It's already been released. Best Buy has been selling them for more than a week now.
It's already been released. Best Buy has been selling them for more than a week now.
itcheroni
Jul 20, 04:50 AM
Switching is happening, even with the negative, false, disinformation posts on this site. The numbers will bear this our in the upcoming quarters. Apple at $54, Google @ $455, hmmm I wonder what I should invest in???
You sound paranoid. Where are the negative, false, disinformative posts? It's the exact opposite here, people are so pro-Apple they can't think straight.
And, by the way, purchasing stocks based on price isn't very smart. I don't understand why you're singleling out Google just because it has a high stock price. It actually works against your point because it's a great stock-arguably better than Apple.
You sound paranoid. Where are the negative, false, disinformative posts? It's the exact opposite here, people are so pro-Apple they can't think straight.
And, by the way, purchasing stocks based on price isn't very smart. I don't understand why you're singleling out Google just because it has a high stock price. It actually works against your point because it's a great stock-arguably better than Apple.
WildPalms
Sep 7, 11:28 AM
There has been a lot said here and elsewhere on what Apple is going to release. But let�s step back and look at the big picture for a moment and think through this process.
What we know:
1. Apple maintains the largest online movie trailer site on the internet. They have the technology to stream data in HD and they just bought a level 4 data center in March this year to storage an enormous amount of data. (I�ll get to this later)
2. HD downloads are enormous and storing them on your hard disk would fill up the disk in no time. So keeping the file for long periods of time is not an option.
3. Apple sells more laptops then desktops and laptops have a smaller hard drive with limited capacity, no one wants an external hd to carry along with their laptop, it would defeat the purpose of being portable.
4. Apple doesn�t make money on downloads, but selling the product that it runs on.
5. iPods screens are too small to watch full length movies on, and their disk space is too limited for movies (iPod nano outsells the video iPod)
6. FrontRow is made for displaying on the TV, not a computer monitor.
7. People WILL NOT PAY $9.99 or $14.99 for a download of a movie, even with a burn option. DVDs can be bought at Wal-Mart or BestBuy for the same price and you get the cover and quality you want and deserve. ( I know a few mac fans will go out and buy whatever Apple puts out, but thinking of an average person )
8. Steve Jobs said in an interview that most people only watch live action movies 1 or 2 times with the exception of animation, but music they listen to over and over again. And he hates variable pricing for content.
So what does all this mean? I think we will see on Sept 12th a streaming rental service that runs off a new media device made to hook up to your TV and runs FrontRow with Showtime as a feature on it that looks a lot like the Movie Trailer section on FrontRow today, where you see the cover designs of the movie instead of a text. (Think about when you go to Blockbuster and all you see is cover designs, and a description on the back) With this service you will be able to see the cover design, the rating, run time, the description and preview a trailer of the movie. Then if you want you can �rent� it for $2.99. After watching the movie, the content is deleted; this would work a lot like pay-per-view. For music and photos, this device will wirelessly connect to your computer to stream music from iTunes and photos from iPhoto. The device will probably sell for around $149 - $299, depending on what it can do.
But who knows� I�m probably completing wrong and Apple will release a download movie site, charge $9.99 for a movie download that around 600 MB per download and take 2 hours to download and release an airport express with video output and charge $129 for it.
Interesting take.
What we know:
1. Apple maintains the largest online movie trailer site on the internet. They have the technology to stream data in HD and they just bought a level 4 data center in March this year to storage an enormous amount of data. (I�ll get to this later)
2. HD downloads are enormous and storing them on your hard disk would fill up the disk in no time. So keeping the file for long periods of time is not an option.
3. Apple sells more laptops then desktops and laptops have a smaller hard drive with limited capacity, no one wants an external hd to carry along with their laptop, it would defeat the purpose of being portable.
4. Apple doesn�t make money on downloads, but selling the product that it runs on.
5. iPods screens are too small to watch full length movies on, and their disk space is too limited for movies (iPod nano outsells the video iPod)
6. FrontRow is made for displaying on the TV, not a computer monitor.
7. People WILL NOT PAY $9.99 or $14.99 for a download of a movie, even with a burn option. DVDs can be bought at Wal-Mart or BestBuy for the same price and you get the cover and quality you want and deserve. ( I know a few mac fans will go out and buy whatever Apple puts out, but thinking of an average person )
8. Steve Jobs said in an interview that most people only watch live action movies 1 or 2 times with the exception of animation, but music they listen to over and over again. And he hates variable pricing for content.
So what does all this mean? I think we will see on Sept 12th a streaming rental service that runs off a new media device made to hook up to your TV and runs FrontRow with Showtime as a feature on it that looks a lot like the Movie Trailer section on FrontRow today, where you see the cover designs of the movie instead of a text. (Think about when you go to Blockbuster and all you see is cover designs, and a description on the back) With this service you will be able to see the cover design, the rating, run time, the description and preview a trailer of the movie. Then if you want you can �rent� it for $2.99. After watching the movie, the content is deleted; this would work a lot like pay-per-view. For music and photos, this device will wirelessly connect to your computer to stream music from iTunes and photos from iPhoto. The device will probably sell for around $149 - $299, depending on what it can do.
But who knows� I�m probably completing wrong and Apple will release a download movie site, charge $9.99 for a movie download that around 600 MB per download and take 2 hours to download and release an airport express with video output and charge $129 for it.
Interesting take.
spookje
Jan 1, 05:55 PM
As long they don't announce a MacBook Pro update it's all fine for me. Not sure if I would be shocked when they announce 100 pixels extra screen, or better videocard. But if they are going for a higher resolution like 1920x1080px for a 15" inch edition. Then it will be troublesome for me!
kadajawi
Oct 14, 10:49 PM
@generik: You're forgetting the much bigger and FASTER HD. I've gotten curious and tried OS X on my windows box too. To be honest it simply kills the Mini. Having 1 GB RAM over 512 MB and a nice, fast HD really helps alot. The box is much snappier, eventhough it has only an Athlon 64, no dual core like the Mini has. Of course anything that requires graphics card support won't run or runs slow, but other than that it boots much quicker, reacts faster, starts programs way faster, ... So I guess the iMac will be quite a bit faster than the Mini because of its HD.
Perhaps I'll try OS X on my Windows/Linux box with 512 MB to compare.
Ps: The Mini looks much better though :D And is so silent. And small. I like it :D But it's so painfully slow... I'm running Rosetta@Home though, that eats quite a lot of RAM. Without its zippier, until I manage to fill up the RAM (which is very easy though).
Perhaps I'll try OS X on my Windows/Linux box with 512 MB to compare.
Ps: The Mini looks much better though :D And is so silent. And small. I like it :D But it's so painfully slow... I'm running Rosetta@Home though, that eats quite a lot of RAM. Without its zippier, until I manage to fill up the RAM (which is very easy though).
gspannu
Apr 1, 10:39 AM
Bingo! Now how do I remove the others? :confused:
Already posted (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=12299127&postcount=55) by another author.
---------------------------------------------------------
Yea it's a little buggy right now. You can delete apps the same as as before with some added frustration.
1. Press and hold, CMD+OPT+CTRL (so they all wiggle)
2. Next press and hold one app until they stop wiggling.
3. Now click the apps you want once to delete them.
4. Make sure you hold those 3 keys throughout all steps.
---------------------------------------------------------
Already posted (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=12299127&postcount=55) by another author.
---------------------------------------------------------
Yea it's a little buggy right now. You can delete apps the same as as before with some added frustration.
1. Press and hold, CMD+OPT+CTRL (so they all wiggle)
2. Next press and hold one app until they stop wiggling.
3. Now click the apps you want once to delete them.
4. Make sure you hold those 3 keys throughout all steps.
---------------------------------------------------------
MacMan86
Apr 26, 12:20 PM
EDIT - wrong thread - nothing to see here
jgould
Feb 22, 07:32 PM
I hardly have any cable management. I just have a few twist ties used from trash bags!
I've done that too :D Simple beats complicated...
I've done that too :D Simple beats complicated...
PBF
Apr 2, 11:20 PM
In Safari, you can now change the width of a page by moving the cursor to the scrollbar and you see the little "adjust width" icon. Drag that and the width of the page decreases/increases toward the center.
If I understood your explanation/description correctly (which was kinda confusing), then it's been there since DP1, and it's not just the right side, it's all four sides and all four corners, and lastly, it's a system-wide feature, not just Safari's.
If I understood your explanation/description correctly (which was kinda confusing), then it's been there since DP1, and it's not just the right side, it's all four sides and all four corners, and lastly, it's a system-wide feature, not just Safari's.
grahamnp
Mar 23, 12:24 AM
I don't think they need to do much but a resolution bump for the screen would be nice, it's also feeling quite sluggish next to all the newer devices.
wheezy
Nov 15, 06:37 PM
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.
What a very lovely analogy. Thank you.
For me... 8 cores for the bragging rights only... so I guess I won't get one anytime soon. I'm sure 4 would suit me fine though, I need to upgrade my 1Ghz G4!!!
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.
What a very lovely analogy. Thank you.
For me... 8 cores for the bragging rights only... so I guess I won't get one anytime soon. I'm sure 4 would suit me fine though, I need to upgrade my 1Ghz G4!!!
No comments:
Post a Comment