Eidorian
May 3, 10:25 AM
Still USB 2.0
Meh.Time for a break out box! :D
Which goes against the stark minimalism Apple was going for. Wait, what?
Meh.Time for a break out box! :D
Which goes against the stark minimalism Apple was going for. Wait, what?
zero2dash
Aug 28, 02:24 PM
They're competitive with the Mac Pro. Very competitive.
Mac Pro - you get a lot for the money. More pricey than most users are willing to spend, but unquestionably, "a lot of bang for the buck".
Still, my point is that Apple isn't trying to remain competitive in regards to grabbing sales or going outside of their niche market. Apple has diehard fans that will purchase whatever they sell, no matter what. They don't need to attempt to go outside of that faction because they'll have a hard time swaying general computer users who are used to Windows already or don't want to pay the premium price. Apple gives you a lot of computer for the price, but the price is still above and beyond what anyone else will charge you. Then it boils down to asking yourself "do you want to pay for the Apple experience" and some people say 'yes' and others say 'no'. For better or worse, I don't see this changing in the near future. Apple does sell competitively priced computers (ie Mini) but they're also limiting the user in regards to upgradability; I don't think anyone can argue the upgrade capabilities of a minitower or tower @ $500 versus a small form factor for $600. Can you upgrade Macs? For the most part, yes, undoubtedly. How far can you upgrade your Mac? That depends on how much you spent upfront on it, deciding between a SFF and a $1,999 Mac Pro tower.
I still love Macs and I enjoy working in OSX, but they really need to get on the 'headless Mac' idea, stat. IMO they could (seemingly overnight) gain at least a 10%+ market share if they released a tower desktop for $600, but that throws a monkey wrench into the rest of their hardware sku lineup, and they're not going to allow that to happen. Unless they kill off the Mini and slash prices on the iMac first, we'll never see a sub-$1,000 Mac in a tower enclosure.
Mac Pro - you get a lot for the money. More pricey than most users are willing to spend, but unquestionably, "a lot of bang for the buck".
Still, my point is that Apple isn't trying to remain competitive in regards to grabbing sales or going outside of their niche market. Apple has diehard fans that will purchase whatever they sell, no matter what. They don't need to attempt to go outside of that faction because they'll have a hard time swaying general computer users who are used to Windows already or don't want to pay the premium price. Apple gives you a lot of computer for the price, but the price is still above and beyond what anyone else will charge you. Then it boils down to asking yourself "do you want to pay for the Apple experience" and some people say 'yes' and others say 'no'. For better or worse, I don't see this changing in the near future. Apple does sell competitively priced computers (ie Mini) but they're also limiting the user in regards to upgradability; I don't think anyone can argue the upgrade capabilities of a minitower or tower @ $500 versus a small form factor for $600. Can you upgrade Macs? For the most part, yes, undoubtedly. How far can you upgrade your Mac? That depends on how much you spent upfront on it, deciding between a SFF and a $1,999 Mac Pro tower.
I still love Macs and I enjoy working in OSX, but they really need to get on the 'headless Mac' idea, stat. IMO they could (seemingly overnight) gain at least a 10%+ market share if they released a tower desktop for $600, but that throws a monkey wrench into the rest of their hardware sku lineup, and they're not going to allow that to happen. Unless they kill off the Mini and slash prices on the iMac first, we'll never see a sub-$1,000 Mac in a tower enclosure.
SeattleMoose
Apr 30, 03:20 PM
for a couple more years.....
Thunderboy is still "bleeding edge" and nobody wants to go and have to buy a bunch of new peripherals (as if there were any yet....:eek:)
Thunderboy is still "bleeding edge" and nobody wants to go and have to buy a bunch of new peripherals (as if there were any yet....:eek:)
User3977
Mar 29, 11:33 AM
dont think i saw it posted but one issue i have is that the iOS is on one device, the others are on how many devices made by how many makers? RIM is the only one like apple single os on single device and they just evolved to slow to keep up i think.
Full of Win
Apr 25, 03:21 PM
Then show me a single modern GPU displaying more than 2560x1600 on a single display. I'd love to see it.
You mean this one, a single card, running FarCry at 3840 X 2160 almost two years ago. Since this was almost two years ago, I'm sure its a little dated. :)
http://gizmodo.com/#!5277116/asus-mars-gtx-295-smoothly-running-far-cry-at-3840-x-2160-pixels
You mean this one, a single card, running FarCry at 3840 X 2160 almost two years ago. Since this was almost two years ago, I'm sure its a little dated. :)
http://gizmodo.com/#!5277116/asus-mars-gtx-295-smoothly-running-far-cry-at-3840-x-2160-pixels
cfraley26
Apr 19, 07:15 AM
Here's a thought apple.... Let's stop being the big bad bully on campus, and just make your damn products! I love Apple products. but, the way this company is constantly suing other companies because of so called "infringements". Its getting really old and really stupid fast!
Do what you do best: MAKIN GREAT DEVICE"S!!! You're not good at this! You are burning bridges that you will potentially NEVER get back! And then you will lose the upper hand in the market! Be smart, stop suing every little freakin thing that comes along!!!!
Do what you do best: MAKIN GREAT DEVICE"S!!! You're not good at this! You are burning bridges that you will potentially NEVER get back! And then you will lose the upper hand in the market! Be smart, stop suing every little freakin thing that comes along!!!!
mojohojo
Apr 19, 10:10 PM
i'd probably be called an apple-fanboy from friends because having now own a macbook pro, macbook, ipods, iphones and ipads but this kind of **** apple does is probably what will make me hate apple and boycott their products if there were any other good alternatives currently on par with apple.
what i see is Samsung being a major distributor or hardware to apple, apple first finds alternatives companies for their hardware (sony, LG) and once they have find all the hardware replacements they go and sue [backstab] them?
Apple should know their products are far superior and better currently on the market, if other competitors are coming with close products, they should just improve on them rather than trying to shut everyone down and be some monopoly. everyone knows competition is what drives our development.
i can see this thought surely must have come straight from Steve Jobs from his big ego and dickhead personality; he 'would' be the type of guy to have a 2 face - pretending to be nice to Samsung for all their parts and backstabbing once he finds out they're producing similar products thats gaining market behind the iphones.
you know what, **** apple and steve jobs. no more pity for jobs and whatever illness he's suffering from, probably deserves it, karma. samsung is one of the fatest developing tech companies that will soon beat Sony and i do hope they beat Apple and job's ass.
what i see is Samsung being a major distributor or hardware to apple, apple first finds alternatives companies for their hardware (sony, LG) and once they have find all the hardware replacements they go and sue [backstab] them?
Apple should know their products are far superior and better currently on the market, if other competitors are coming with close products, they should just improve on them rather than trying to shut everyone down and be some monopoly. everyone knows competition is what drives our development.
i can see this thought surely must have come straight from Steve Jobs from his big ego and dickhead personality; he 'would' be the type of guy to have a 2 face - pretending to be nice to Samsung for all their parts and backstabbing once he finds out they're producing similar products thats gaining market behind the iphones.
you know what, **** apple and steve jobs. no more pity for jobs and whatever illness he's suffering from, probably deserves it, karma. samsung is one of the fatest developing tech companies that will soon beat Sony and i do hope they beat Apple and job's ass.
cere
Apr 14, 01:17 PM
LOL, yet here you are claiming Thunderbolt is DOA. Hilarious.
Again, for those with reading difficulties, I made no such claim. I did agree with a post that implied it might be relegated to being considered Mac only. I'll still agree that might be what happens. I hope not, but I hoped FW would be successful too.
I am pretty sure a google search will find some adult-ed courses that might be helpful for you.
Again, for those with reading difficulties, I made no such claim. I did agree with a post that implied it might be relegated to being considered Mac only. I'll still agree that might be what happens. I hope not, but I hoped FW would be successful too.
I am pretty sure a google search will find some adult-ed courses that might be helpful for you.
LagunaSol
Apr 4, 12:54 PM
I often wondered what kind of people could find a homeowner who shot an armed intruder guilty of a crime or culpable in civil court. Having read many of the comments in this thread, now I know.
The scary thing is some of these people may be sitting on the jury if this ever happens to you. :eek:
The scary thing is some of these people may be sitting on the jury if this ever happens to you. :eek:
miles01110
Mar 23, 04:17 PM
Personally I find it hard to believe that so drunk as to warrant avoiding a checkpoint will be collected enough to use the app effectively in the first place.
ksz
Jul 14, 09:40 AM
Does anyone think we should be hitting 4ghz about now?
I mean weve been stuck on 2.x for ages. Whats the deal? A 4ghz quad would be frickin awesome. :confused:
If you raised the clock speed of NetBurst-based Pentium 4s (or Pentium Ds) to 4GHz, you would still not achieve the same performance as today's Conroe at 2.13GHz. Clock speed alone is not an accurate gauge of performance.
Because of increasing problems with heat density, clock speeds haven't been rising at their historical rates. A kind of brick wall was hit when the semiconductor industry moved to 90nm. At those dimensions a series of unexpected problems plagued ramp and ushered a change away from blindly raising clock speeds towards more functionality and more optimized functionality at more manageable clock speeds.
Clock speeds will hit 4GHz and keep rising, but not at the rate we have been accustomed to. But as the Core 2 benchmarks show, Intel has intelligently redesigned the processor to achieve significant speed improvements at existing clock speeds.
I mean weve been stuck on 2.x for ages. Whats the deal? A 4ghz quad would be frickin awesome. :confused:
If you raised the clock speed of NetBurst-based Pentium 4s (or Pentium Ds) to 4GHz, you would still not achieve the same performance as today's Conroe at 2.13GHz. Clock speed alone is not an accurate gauge of performance.
Because of increasing problems with heat density, clock speeds haven't been rising at their historical rates. A kind of brick wall was hit when the semiconductor industry moved to 90nm. At those dimensions a series of unexpected problems plagued ramp and ushered a change away from blindly raising clock speeds towards more functionality and more optimized functionality at more manageable clock speeds.
Clock speeds will hit 4GHz and keep rising, but not at the rate we have been accustomed to. But as the Core 2 benchmarks show, Intel has intelligently redesigned the processor to achieve significant speed improvements at existing clock speeds.
GGJstudios
Mar 18, 03:50 PM
It doesn't need to be a virus. They're relatively rare issues these days even on Windows. Malware is about stealing identities (big money) not hackers playing games with machines
Identity theft is not malware and it's not targeted at just Mac or Windows. It can be done without using computers at all. There is no antivirus software that can protect a computer from the user's own stupidity or gullibility.
Identity theft is not malware and it's not targeted at just Mac or Windows. It can be done without using computers at all. There is no antivirus software that can protect a computer from the user's own stupidity or gullibility.
Jswoosh
May 1, 03:53 AM
Well here it is Sunday, still no official word from Apple or any other credible source confirming tuesdays launch. I just hope that this is NOT going to be a huge let down.
And hopefully when we do see this launch tuesday most people say Wow.
I hear ya. I really hope it comes out tuesday
And hopefully when we do see this launch tuesday most people say Wow.
I hear ya. I really hope it comes out tuesday
cdallen
Mar 29, 11:25 AM
I'm surprised they even opened this up for conversation in a mac forum
epitaphic
Sep 9, 08:56 AM
This is interesting. So the frequency difference of 2.16 to 2.66 is 23% yet the MacPro is only 20-30% faster? So clock for clock, the iMac would be between 7% slower and 3% FASTER than the MacPro!
There is no chance in hell there'll be a Conroe system for some time. This is also the reason the Mac Pros are all quads, a duo would be just as fast for all but the 0.001% of people that do stuff that fully utilizes the quad.
There is no chance in hell there'll be a Conroe system for some time. This is also the reason the Mac Pros are all quads, a duo would be just as fast for all but the 0.001% of people that do stuff that fully utilizes the quad.
miazma
May 3, 07:25 PM
what I'm waiting for now:
apple cinema display with thunderbolt port and ability to plug mouse/keyboard and use it as an extension for macbooks with thunderbolt.
that would be something like a great docking station. just plug it in and go for it.
apple cinema display with thunderbolt port and ability to plug mouse/keyboard and use it as an extension for macbooks with thunderbolt.
that would be something like a great docking station. just plug it in and go for it.
citizenzen
Apr 21, 09:21 PM
Dear government, at somepoint sinss the 18th centory, we've become completely incapable of taking care of owwselves.
There's actually a good reason for that. Chick it out (http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/blfarm4.htm) ...
1850
Total population: 23,191,786
Farm population: 11,680,000 (estimated)
Farmers made up 64% of labor force
Number of farms: 1,449,000
Average acres: 203
1860 Farmers made up 53% of labor force
1870 Farmers made up 49% of labor force
1880 Farmers made up 49% of labor force
1890 Farmers made up 43% of labor force
1890 Farmers made up 43% of labor force
1900 Farmers made up 38% of labor force
1910 Farmers made up 31% of labor force
1920 Farmers made up 27% of labor force
1930 Farmers made up 21% of labor force
1940 Farmers made up 18% of labor force
1950 Farmers made up 12% of labor force
1960 Farmers made up 8.3% of labor force
1970 Farmers made up 4.6% of labor force
1980 Farmers made up 3.4% of labor force
1990 Farmers made up 2.6% of labor force
That trend might explain a few things.
There's actually a good reason for that. Chick it out (http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/blfarm4.htm) ...
1850
Total population: 23,191,786
Farm population: 11,680,000 (estimated)
Farmers made up 64% of labor force
Number of farms: 1,449,000
Average acres: 203
1860 Farmers made up 53% of labor force
1870 Farmers made up 49% of labor force
1880 Farmers made up 49% of labor force
1890 Farmers made up 43% of labor force
1890 Farmers made up 43% of labor force
1900 Farmers made up 38% of labor force
1910 Farmers made up 31% of labor force
1920 Farmers made up 27% of labor force
1930 Farmers made up 21% of labor force
1940 Farmers made up 18% of labor force
1950 Farmers made up 12% of labor force
1960 Farmers made up 8.3% of labor force
1970 Farmers made up 4.6% of labor force
1980 Farmers made up 3.4% of labor force
1990 Farmers made up 2.6% of labor force
That trend might explain a few things.
EagerDragon
Sep 9, 03:30 PM
I like to see some benchmarks against G4 machines and see if they make me pull the credit card out.
massiv
Sep 10, 09:28 PM
I think we all are getting caught up in the "core" crazy a little too much. I understand at a professional level the more cores the better. But Apple has delivered this target market its machine, the Mac Pro. I think the Mac Pro will see even more options in its configurations as time goes on, but I don't see them putting the next biggest and best chip in every product. After all, 90% of home computer users are using thier computers for basic functions and not heavy video or audio work, which means they don't need 4 cores. Apple is focusing on the digital lifestyle and this means they want to sell a customer hardware that will take care of this emerging market, like live streaming video rentals to their large screened LCD TV. I think the Mac Pro is the ever-expanding machine but look for huge price differences in its configs. An $800 difference in 2.66 to 3.0 GHz Xeon? All we do know is that Apple wants to rule the digital livingroom and probably is not concerned with bragging rights. But the obvious is true, there are some big steps ahead in processing power.
donlphi
Sep 16, 12:58 PM
I have to disagree on the price point.
For $1000 you can get a low level 17" iMac. Why would I want to pay that for a frikking phone?
$600 buys you a nice Mini with a dual core. Why pay that much for a phone?
The phone sweet spot is $299, with bluetooth, camera (optional), full pda capabilities, nice screen, voice command, 256 meg internal mem, 2-4 gig flash, new antenna design to pull in weak signals, open so that you can move it from carrier to carrier.
Something like that would sell like hot cakes. Not only that but it would beat a lot of the phones out there in price, usability, and coolness.
If you can connect a small but full sized bluetooth keyboard to it, I wouldn't mind haviing something that is ultra portable. It could even act like a phone, but I would like to see a smaller macbook available.
I know your dealing with screen real estate issues, but I wouldn't be using it to create movies for disney pixar.
For $1000 you can get a low level 17" iMac. Why would I want to pay that for a frikking phone?
$600 buys you a nice Mini with a dual core. Why pay that much for a phone?
The phone sweet spot is $299, with bluetooth, camera (optional), full pda capabilities, nice screen, voice command, 256 meg internal mem, 2-4 gig flash, new antenna design to pull in weak signals, open so that you can move it from carrier to carrier.
Something like that would sell like hot cakes. Not only that but it would beat a lot of the phones out there in price, usability, and coolness.
If you can connect a small but full sized bluetooth keyboard to it, I wouldn't mind haviing something that is ultra portable. It could even act like a phone, but I would like to see a smaller macbook available.
I know your dealing with screen real estate issues, but I wouldn't be using it to create movies for disney pixar.
paradox00
Apr 14, 04:53 PM
Very true, but in the end, USB2 won out.
Cere, on page one, you DID state that TB would (a) be mac only and (b) die and you've been backtracking terribly ever since.
When you make a statement such as "unfortunately, also bingo" you are giving your full endorsement to that statement and you have accepted that as your own opinion with no ifs, ands or buts. In case you've forgotten, you gave your full endorsement to this quote:
USB3=native to all platforms
TB=Mac Only
Sounds like TB just died.
Since then, you've argued that what you really meant was that PC manufacturers wont support it (without proof to back up your claims) and made poor comparisons to Firewire.
Let's compare the two for a second:
FW was pushed by Apple
TB is being pushed by Apple, but more importantly Intel (whose chips power most PCs)
FW had a high per port licensing cost
TB uses a royalty free port and support will be built into future Intel chipsets (making PC implementation virtually inevitable)
FW was slower than USB on paper, but faster in reality
TB blows USB 3.0 out of the water, both on paper and in reality
Why do you keep insisting they are the same and will share the same fate? On top of that, as I mentioned earlier (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=12392173&postcount=63) (and no one, including yourself has attempted to refute) TB isn't even a direct competitor with USB, it's more of a complimentary technology. You've done nothing in this thread but blow hot air.
Cere, on page one, you DID state that TB would (a) be mac only and (b) die and you've been backtracking terribly ever since.
When you make a statement such as "unfortunately, also bingo" you are giving your full endorsement to that statement and you have accepted that as your own opinion with no ifs, ands or buts. In case you've forgotten, you gave your full endorsement to this quote:
USB3=native to all platforms
TB=Mac Only
Sounds like TB just died.
Since then, you've argued that what you really meant was that PC manufacturers wont support it (without proof to back up your claims) and made poor comparisons to Firewire.
Let's compare the two for a second:
FW was pushed by Apple
TB is being pushed by Apple, but more importantly Intel (whose chips power most PCs)
FW had a high per port licensing cost
TB uses a royalty free port and support will be built into future Intel chipsets (making PC implementation virtually inevitable)
FW was slower than USB on paper, but faster in reality
TB blows USB 3.0 out of the water, both on paper and in reality
Why do you keep insisting they are the same and will share the same fate? On top of that, as I mentioned earlier (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=12392173&postcount=63) (and no one, including yourself has attempted to refute) TB isn't even a direct competitor with USB, it's more of a complimentary technology. You've done nothing in this thread but blow hot air.
JobsRules
Oct 27, 10:04 AM
If you actually look at Greenpeace's spoof Apple site, it's actually quite friendly to the corporation like, 'You're a great stylish brand but you could do better'.
Among 'activist types' Mac usage is far, far higher than amoung the general population. Greenpeace members are probably avid Mac users.
Among 'activist types' Mac usage is far, far higher than amoung the general population. Greenpeace members are probably avid Mac users.
GGJstudios
Mar 16, 04:59 PM
It this utter ignorance and false sense of security in the Mac user base that I would use to my advantage if I were a cyber-criminal.
It's neither ignorance nor a false sense of security. It's an awareness that virus threats don't exist and no antivirus can protect against something that doesn't exist.
I've seen more than enough evidence over the past few years to tell me that it's far from safe.
No OS is immune to malware, but it's impossible to protect yourself from something that does not yet exist.
The latest Safari/Webkit hacking contest result alone should be enough to cause any reasonable person to take notice.
Hacking a browser and creating a virus that can infect Mac OS X are two different animals.
I think a few people will be changing their tunes the day the crap finally hits the fan.
The day it "hits the fan", news sites and forums will be buzzing about the threat, making most Mac users aware. At that time a protection to the threat will be introduced. Only an extremely minute percentage of Mac users are likely to ever be infected, should that ever happen. Any antivirus apps installed today will be completely useless in defending against a newly-introduced virus, because they simply don't know what to look for.
It's neither ignorance nor a false sense of security. It's an awareness that virus threats don't exist and no antivirus can protect against something that doesn't exist.
I've seen more than enough evidence over the past few years to tell me that it's far from safe.
No OS is immune to malware, but it's impossible to protect yourself from something that does not yet exist.
The latest Safari/Webkit hacking contest result alone should be enough to cause any reasonable person to take notice.
Hacking a browser and creating a virus that can infect Mac OS X are two different animals.
I think a few people will be changing their tunes the day the crap finally hits the fan.
The day it "hits the fan", news sites and forums will be buzzing about the threat, making most Mac users aware. At that time a protection to the threat will be introduced. Only an extremely minute percentage of Mac users are likely to ever be infected, should that ever happen. Any antivirus apps installed today will be completely useless in defending against a newly-introduced virus, because they simply don't know what to look for.
Senbei
Sep 10, 05:48 AM
Clovertown (~November 2006) might be a build to order high end option for Mac Pro as opposed to taking the entire line to 8 cores since there are limitations with that approach including higher power consumption and higher heat output.
Tigerton (Q3 2007 ~summer 2007) is slated to be a true multi-core (quad cores in a single multi-chip module) followup to Woodcrest/Clovertown. It will also use a new platform (Caneland platform comprised of Tigerton/Dunnington and the Clarksboro chipset) which includes a higher performance dedicated high-speed interconnect that gives each processor a direct pathway to the chipset and is supposed to be much faster than the current front-side bus technology. The timing (WWDC 2007) sounds more likely for a major Mac Pro refresh where it does 8 core across the line (and Leopard will probably have a lot more optimization for that many cores).
Tigerton (Q3 2007 ~summer 2007) is slated to be a true multi-core (quad cores in a single multi-chip module) followup to Woodcrest/Clovertown. It will also use a new platform (Caneland platform comprised of Tigerton/Dunnington and the Clarksboro chipset) which includes a higher performance dedicated high-speed interconnect that gives each processor a direct pathway to the chipset and is supposed to be much faster than the current front-side bus technology. The timing (WWDC 2007) sounds more likely for a major Mac Pro refresh where it does 8 core across the line (and Leopard will probably have a lot more optimization for that many cores).
