bimmzy
Apr 6, 04:33 AM
I don't find it frustrating, in fact, it runs circles around FCP and I worked at Apple on 2 versions of the software, wrote a book and founded the first FCPUG.
As for strange bugs, please let me know what they are. Our users aren't complaining about anything strange.
If you do find something, please report it: Submit bugs to http://www.adobe.com/go/wish . More on how to give feedback: http://bit.ly/93d6NF
Best,
Kevin
Of course your not taking in to account all the fragmentation issues relating to "cross-platform" applications.
All software has bugs, especially programs ported to different operating systems and machines. The the bottom line is that FCP is popular with the editors.
BBC Broadcast Engineer.... living in the real world of media production!
As for strange bugs, please let me know what they are. Our users aren't complaining about anything strange.
If you do find something, please report it: Submit bugs to http://www.adobe.com/go/wish . More on how to give feedback: http://bit.ly/93d6NF
Best,
Kevin
Of course your not taking in to account all the fragmentation issues relating to "cross-platform" applications.
All software has bugs, especially programs ported to different operating systems and machines. The the bottom line is that FCP is popular with the editors.
BBC Broadcast Engineer.... living in the real world of media production!
akac
Mar 26, 09:40 PM
Details found here :
http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Apple-removes-Samba-from-Mac-OS-X-10-7-Server-1215179.html
Gist of it :
- less features than Samba
- no more Active Directory Services
- Just file sharing now.
Samba developers have also noted that the true motive behind this move might not be the GPLv3 per say, but a more global move away from the GPL. Is Apple moving to close the source on more and more of OS X ?
Anyway, Samba v4 could have given them all the "features" they implemented and much more. Their own in-house version won't necessarily be better just because it's written by Apple. The Samba team does a great job with what Microsoft puts out as documentation (if you can even call it that).
Note that from the article, this change only impacts OS X Server. The client was already an in-house solution.
Although from my understanding from people using this today, the Apple implementation is dramatically faster than the Samba implementation. Just like WebKit started from KHTML and had fewer features than Mozilla, its ended up being the best browser engine out there. Leaner. Meaner. Faster. But it took time. Apple's SMB/CIFS implementation is going the same route. Now I've read elsewhere that it DOES support Active Directory. And elsewhere that it doesn't. The Preview version of Lion was 2 months old by the time devs got it, so its also possible that those reports are all just wrong in as far as what works and what is supposed to work (i.e. it may support AD, but bugs cause it not to work well or at all on some installs).
You will be foolish to wait around unless you want to get buried in the on-slaught of new and improved apps to take advantage of Lion from day one.
Exactly. I know of at least one major app right now that is going to go Lion only...
Windows manages to run legacy apps still. Even if you do have to resort to using the virtual machine they've called 'XP Mode.'
Fortunately, my one and only PPC program does indeed have an intel version that I wasn't aware of, so I'm fine.
You just gave the perfect answer. Using a VM. Run SL in a VM for Rosetta apps :)
It's needed for me.
Look, Rosetta isn't a part of OS X by default. If it is installed, then it is needed by the user, and thus isn't "crap." If the user doesn't need it, it won't be installed. For most users, it will be "cut out." I don't see why having the option there for people who need it stifles progress.
Actually its not a small piece. Its a big piece. EVERY OS X Library has to be provided in PowerPC code as well as x86. So Rosetta itself, by itself is tiny. But all the extra libraries that make up OS X is huge. And that's why its cut out.
In SL, it shipped with all the libraries, but not the Rosetta piece. So it was a simple install of just the Rosetta piece.
http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Apple-removes-Samba-from-Mac-OS-X-10-7-Server-1215179.html
Gist of it :
- less features than Samba
- no more Active Directory Services
- Just file sharing now.
Samba developers have also noted that the true motive behind this move might not be the GPLv3 per say, but a more global move away from the GPL. Is Apple moving to close the source on more and more of OS X ?
Anyway, Samba v4 could have given them all the "features" they implemented and much more. Their own in-house version won't necessarily be better just because it's written by Apple. The Samba team does a great job with what Microsoft puts out as documentation (if you can even call it that).
Note that from the article, this change only impacts OS X Server. The client was already an in-house solution.
Although from my understanding from people using this today, the Apple implementation is dramatically faster than the Samba implementation. Just like WebKit started from KHTML and had fewer features than Mozilla, its ended up being the best browser engine out there. Leaner. Meaner. Faster. But it took time. Apple's SMB/CIFS implementation is going the same route. Now I've read elsewhere that it DOES support Active Directory. And elsewhere that it doesn't. The Preview version of Lion was 2 months old by the time devs got it, so its also possible that those reports are all just wrong in as far as what works and what is supposed to work (i.e. it may support AD, but bugs cause it not to work well or at all on some installs).
You will be foolish to wait around unless you want to get buried in the on-slaught of new and improved apps to take advantage of Lion from day one.
Exactly. I know of at least one major app right now that is going to go Lion only...
Windows manages to run legacy apps still. Even if you do have to resort to using the virtual machine they've called 'XP Mode.'
Fortunately, my one and only PPC program does indeed have an intel version that I wasn't aware of, so I'm fine.
You just gave the perfect answer. Using a VM. Run SL in a VM for Rosetta apps :)
It's needed for me.
Look, Rosetta isn't a part of OS X by default. If it is installed, then it is needed by the user, and thus isn't "crap." If the user doesn't need it, it won't be installed. For most users, it will be "cut out." I don't see why having the option there for people who need it stifles progress.
Actually its not a small piece. Its a big piece. EVERY OS X Library has to be provided in PowerPC code as well as x86. So Rosetta itself, by itself is tiny. But all the extra libraries that make up OS X is huge. And that's why its cut out.
In SL, it shipped with all the libraries, but not the Rosetta piece. So it was a simple install of just the Rosetta piece.
jeanlain
Apr 12, 02:14 AM
-
- removal of "insufficient content" ...
:confused: so FPC should create content?
The major thing, though, is they HAVE to start utilizing multiple cores. It's not and as video gets larger, rendering gets more taxing.
They do. FCP regularly uses more than 100% CPU during render. Not saying it can't be improved though.
- removal of "insufficient content" ...
:confused: so FPC should create content?
The major thing, though, is they HAVE to start utilizing multiple cores. It's not and as video gets larger, rendering gets more taxing.
They do. FCP regularly uses more than 100% CPU during render. Not saying it can't be improved though.
triceretops
Apr 27, 08:59 AM
I wonder if this is why I can no longer get more than a days charge on my iPhone 4 with minimal use since it seems like it's an always on thing.
If you are having battery issues and you have Apple Care on the phone, you can take it to a store and have them replace the battery.
If you are having battery issues and you have Apple Care on the phone, you can take it to a store and have them replace the battery.
BlizzardBomb
Jul 27, 10:22 AM
Well there's always going to be some die-hard PPC and Core Duo users who will vote negative on this story :p
Well Apple, get those Core 2 Duos in the iMacs and MacBook Pros, and a Woodcrest... No... 2 Woodcrests in the Mac Pros.
Well Apple, get those Core 2 Duos in the iMacs and MacBook Pros, and a Woodcrest... No... 2 Woodcrests in the Mac Pros.
SevenInchScrew
Nov 26, 07:46 PM
You need to level up quite a bit before the damage is fully introduced.
Gran Turismo: The REAL driving simulator ....as long as you've grinded long enough. :rolleyes:
Gran Turismo: The REAL driving simulator ....as long as you've grinded long enough. :rolleyes:
gkp
Jun 17, 11:43 AM
I got to my local RS at 8am, nobody there, left and came back around 8:45, there were a few people there. The manager was on his cell phone listening to a conference call. After the call finished, he said that it was decided that they are NOT taking pre-orders, but only reservations. He took our names and info and said he would call later in the day with "Pin Numbers" that were assigned to their store. He also said that he could not reserve any iPhones in their system/computer until 10am. So, basically what happened is another store entered their reservations before the 10am assigned time and took up all the pin numbers for OUR area. (This cheating store is in Sacramento, Ca.)
So, later in the day, I called and the manager said that they could only hope for some iPhones to be sent to our store and if so, they would keep ours aside for us (first come, first serve). But, he said the likelyhood of this happening looks grim.
Why did Apple/RadioShack even bother? Even the manager told me the whole process was screwed up.
So, later in the day, I called and the manager said that they could only hope for some iPhones to be sent to our store and if so, they would keep ours aside for us (first come, first serve). But, he said the likelyhood of this happening looks grim.
Why did Apple/RadioShack even bother? Even the manager told me the whole process was screwed up.
rdowns
Apr 28, 08:04 AM
Step out of your little fairytale world
I loves me some irony.
I loves me some irony.
MacRumors
Apr 25, 01:32 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/25/federal-lawsuit-filed-over-apples-location-tracking-in-ios/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/25/143129-iphone_4_maps_compass.jpg
In what shouldn't be a surprise to anyone, Bloomberg briefly reports (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-04-25/apple-sued-over-user-location-data-storage-on-iphones-ipads.html) that a lawsuit has been filed in U.S. federal court targeting Apple over privacy concerns (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/20/researchers-disclose-iphone-and-ipad-location-tracking-privacy-issues/) related to location information being stored on iOS devices and in backups for those devices. The lawsuit is almost certainly the first of many regarding this issue.Apple Inc. (AAPL) was sued for alleged privacy invasion and computer fraud by two customers who claim the company is secretly recording and storing the location and movement of iPhone and iPad users, according to a federal complaint filed today in Tampa, Florida.As we noted earlier today (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/25/steve-jobs-on-ios-location-issue-we-dont-track-anyone/), Apple CEO Steve Jobs has reportedly replied to a customer email denying that Apple is tracking its customers and labeling the claims being widely discussed as "false".
Article Link: Federal Lawsuit Filed Over Apple's Location Tracking in iOS (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/25/federal-lawsuit-filed-over-apples-location-tracking-in-ios/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/25/143129-iphone_4_maps_compass.jpg
In what shouldn't be a surprise to anyone, Bloomberg briefly reports (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-04-25/apple-sued-over-user-location-data-storage-on-iphones-ipads.html) that a lawsuit has been filed in U.S. federal court targeting Apple over privacy concerns (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/20/researchers-disclose-iphone-and-ipad-location-tracking-privacy-issues/) related to location information being stored on iOS devices and in backups for those devices. The lawsuit is almost certainly the first of many regarding this issue.Apple Inc. (AAPL) was sued for alleged privacy invasion and computer fraud by two customers who claim the company is secretly recording and storing the location and movement of iPhone and iPad users, according to a federal complaint filed today in Tampa, Florida.As we noted earlier today (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/25/steve-jobs-on-ios-location-issue-we-dont-track-anyone/), Apple CEO Steve Jobs has reportedly replied to a customer email denying that Apple is tracking its customers and labeling the claims being widely discussed as "false".
Article Link: Federal Lawsuit Filed Over Apple's Location Tracking in iOS (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/25/federal-lawsuit-filed-over-apples-location-tracking-in-ios/)
Moyank24
Feb 28, 09:08 PM
Well, it's certainly sweeping drama based on fiction. Like so many Oscar winners, it's also a bit of vapid fluff that people will view and quickly forget. Frankly, I didn't mean to imply any excellence other than at making completely unfounded generalizations.
Are you saying you think people program themselves to be gay? Or is it based on what cartoons they watch as a kid? Maybe lack of a father figure? Tell us more, Doc!
I'm pretty sure I figured it out.
I watched Wonder Woman too much as a kid! :eek:
Are you saying you think people program themselves to be gay? Or is it based on what cartoons they watch as a kid? Maybe lack of a father figure? Tell us more, Doc!
I'm pretty sure I figured it out.
I watched Wonder Woman too much as a kid! :eek:
cult hero
Mar 26, 12:32 AM
Can't believe it's anywhere near GM time. Way too many bugs and inconsistencies in behavior. New networking tools in Server have to be implemented now that SMB is being canned - that's not a minor addition. Calling it a release candidate is a stretch, but calling it GM is just plain crazy.
The GPL3 issue with Samba has been around for a LONG time. The announcement was made in 2007. I have some feeling that Apple's been brewing their Samba replacement for a long time. (Although I don't think this is a GM either.)
About the only thing that I find disappointing about this release is the lack of a new filesystem. However, that might just be because coming from a Linux background I probably payed WAY more attention to filesystems than most people.
The GPL3 issue with Samba has been around for a LONG time. The announcement was made in 2007. I have some feeling that Apple's been brewing their Samba replacement for a long time. (Although I don't think this is a GM either.)
About the only thing that I find disappointing about this release is the lack of a new filesystem. However, that might just be because coming from a Linux background I probably payed WAY more attention to filesystems than most people.
grum
Sep 19, 09:26 AM
All you people who keep whining about "But I want 64 bit!!!" need to step back and think about what possible benefit a 64-bit system will give you. Those of you who need to address more than 4 gigs of RAM are excused. The rest of you, tell me WHY you need 64-bit computing.
When they go Merom I want the MBP's and MB's to have useful, practical features. More ports, user-removable hard drive, better battery life, better video card, stuff like that. I'm waiting just as impatiently as everyone else, but the hype needs to be toned way down.
why does anyone need to justify to you why they want 64-bit computing?
When they go Merom I want the MBP's and MB's to have useful, practical features. More ports, user-removable hard drive, better battery life, better video card, stuff like that. I'm waiting just as impatiently as everyone else, but the hype needs to be toned way down.
why does anyone need to justify to you why they want 64-bit computing?
ChickenSwartz
Jul 27, 11:49 AM
Since the WWDC is focused on developers, wouldn't it make the most sense for Apple to do all of the chip transition announcements plus the Leopard preview at WWDC...
This seems to make most sense to me. Obviously developers care about the OS. But introducing a line of "Pro" machines with the newest/best processor (maybe a new look?!?) seems intuitive at a developers conference but who knows.
I sit waiting anxiously. For me, I hope there is a new MBP with Merom by the time school starts. If they changed nothing but the processor I would be happy...it seems they have worked most of the kinks out (whine, etc.) by now.
This seems to make most sense to me. Obviously developers care about the OS. But introducing a line of "Pro" machines with the newest/best processor (maybe a new look?!?) seems intuitive at a developers conference but who knows.
I sit waiting anxiously. For me, I hope there is a new MBP with Merom by the time school starts. If they changed nothing but the processor I would be happy...it seems they have worked most of the kinks out (whine, etc.) by now.
Bill McEnaney
Apr 27, 12:21 PM
You obviously are posting without knowing anything about what a long form BC is. The short form is what the parents get and what you get when you ask the state for a copy. The long form is what is kept on file by the state. In other words, since it is handled very infrequently, it's probably going to look pristine.
If you don't like the guy, then say so, but it seems to me that to you, ignorance is more important than knowledge.
Maybe the certificate is legitimate, but I think the original short form would have been more convincing than a pristine copy of the long one. I like Obama, but I loathe his extreme liberalism.
If you don't like the guy, then say so, but it seems to me that to you, ignorance is more important than knowledge.
Maybe the certificate is legitimate, but I think the original short form would have been more convincing than a pristine copy of the long one. I like Obama, but I loathe his extreme liberalism.
generik
Sep 13, 05:34 AM
Seems like someone in Anantech has managed to do just that with the upcoming Clovertown chips (http://anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2832&p=6).
It is like the iMac/Mac Mini -> Merom all over again!
It is like the iMac/Mac Mini -> Merom all over again!
SevenInchScrew
Aug 12, 11:00 PM
but you do care. you are pointing out that you care by what you just typed. if you count the prologues, you get over 57M sold.
You originally said...
so either way, there's only 4 versions of the game out. at over 57 million copies sold, i'd say they sold a fair few.
...which as I've said, a few times now, is incorrect. If you only count 4 games, as you originally said in that quote, that only totals 46M. And besides, if you check that link I originally provided, which is FROM POLYPHONY THEMSELVES, you would see that the total worldwide is only 56M. At least if you're going to quote the number in the wrong context, use the right number.
i disagree. let's bring math into the equation, since you seem to have missed it.
100,000,000/15 = 6,666,667.
57,000,000/8 = 7,125,000.
so GT has sold more copies per game.
Yay, let's play the "Twist The Numbers To Fit Our Needs" game....
100M / 15 years = 6.66M per year (Need for Speed)
56M / 13 years = 4.31M per year (Gran Turismo)
So yea, Need for Speed sells 50% more per year. YAY, math is fun!!!
well again this is your opinion...
It is. I don't like the direction Polyphony has taken the game. A game that used to be my favorite game. It disappoints me. Thus my frustration. I bought my PS3 with the hopes
but the intention of the car was for the game. how do you not see that? specifically for the game. in fact, it's named GT after the game
Can I buy one and drive it to work? No? Then it isn't real, intentions or not.
how does sales have no relevance if something is great?
Then according to you, Wii Play is the "greatest" video game of all time. Just reading that sentence should show you exactly why sales have very little to do with the quality of a game.
I keep saying this, but it seems people don't really understand it. Sales, which deal with numbers, are an objective measure of something. Greatness, which deals with personal preferences, is a subjective measure. You can think GT, or the iPhone, or Star Wars, or whatever, is great. That is fine, and a personal opinion. But, the sales of those things can't be "great". They can be large, and they are, but they can't be great.
And really, if someone uses the sales of something to qualify the greatness of it to themselves, that is kind of sad. Quite a few of my favorite things, which I consider great, didn't sell very well. That doesn't make them any less great to me.
But anyway, I don't even know why I'm arguing about this. I'm not even going to be buying this game. I'm done with this thread now. I'll just tip my hat, and bid you adieu.
You originally said...
so either way, there's only 4 versions of the game out. at over 57 million copies sold, i'd say they sold a fair few.
...which as I've said, a few times now, is incorrect. If you only count 4 games, as you originally said in that quote, that only totals 46M. And besides, if you check that link I originally provided, which is FROM POLYPHONY THEMSELVES, you would see that the total worldwide is only 56M. At least if you're going to quote the number in the wrong context, use the right number.
i disagree. let's bring math into the equation, since you seem to have missed it.
100,000,000/15 = 6,666,667.
57,000,000/8 = 7,125,000.
so GT has sold more copies per game.
Yay, let's play the "Twist The Numbers To Fit Our Needs" game....
100M / 15 years = 6.66M per year (Need for Speed)
56M / 13 years = 4.31M per year (Gran Turismo)
So yea, Need for Speed sells 50% more per year. YAY, math is fun!!!
well again this is your opinion...
It is. I don't like the direction Polyphony has taken the game. A game that used to be my favorite game. It disappoints me. Thus my frustration. I bought my PS3 with the hopes
but the intention of the car was for the game. how do you not see that? specifically for the game. in fact, it's named GT after the game
Can I buy one and drive it to work? No? Then it isn't real, intentions or not.
how does sales have no relevance if something is great?
Then according to you, Wii Play is the "greatest" video game of all time. Just reading that sentence should show you exactly why sales have very little to do with the quality of a game.
I keep saying this, but it seems people don't really understand it. Sales, which deal with numbers, are an objective measure of something. Greatness, which deals with personal preferences, is a subjective measure. You can think GT, or the iPhone, or Star Wars, or whatever, is great. That is fine, and a personal opinion. But, the sales of those things can't be "great". They can be large, and they are, but they can't be great.
And really, if someone uses the sales of something to qualify the greatness of it to themselves, that is kind of sad. Quite a few of my favorite things, which I consider great, didn't sell very well. That doesn't make them any less great to me.
But anyway, I don't even know why I'm arguing about this. I'm not even going to be buying this game. I'm done with this thread now. I'll just tip my hat, and bid you adieu.
magbarn
Apr 9, 09:23 AM
Intel did indeed force Apple to use their IGP by not licensing other vendors to provide IGPs. The reason the MBP 13" and MBA 13" use IGPs and not dedicated GPU is one of space. Apple can't magically conjure up space on the logic board.
I push the GPU more often than I push the CPU on my MBA. I doubt I'm in the minority, though I'm probably part of the minority that actual knows this little fact. ;)
No matter how much you try to spin this, Intel got greedy on this one and couldn't back their greed with competence. They have sucked at GPUs since they have been in the GPU game (Intel i740 anyone ?).
I don't think 2IS is getting that IF Intel allowed Nvidia to continue making sandy bridge chipsets, Nvidia could've easily integrated a 320m successor into the south bridge. This would give you the best of both worlds, the downclocked Low-voltage Intel HD graphics when on battery or basic surfing, or the 320m successor in the south bridge when playing games or aperture photo editing. All this WITHOUT raising the motherboard chip count that putting a separate discrete (on it's own, not integrated into the chipset like 320m) would entail.
I push the GPU more often than I push the CPU on my MBA. I doubt I'm in the minority, though I'm probably part of the minority that actual knows this little fact. ;)
No matter how much you try to spin this, Intel got greedy on this one and couldn't back their greed with competence. They have sucked at GPUs since they have been in the GPU game (Intel i740 anyone ?).
I don't think 2IS is getting that IF Intel allowed Nvidia to continue making sandy bridge chipsets, Nvidia could've easily integrated a 320m successor into the south bridge. This would give you the best of both worlds, the downclocked Low-voltage Intel HD graphics when on battery or basic surfing, or the 320m successor in the south bridge when playing games or aperture photo editing. All this WITHOUT raising the motherboard chip count that putting a separate discrete (on it's own, not integrated into the chipset like 320m) would entail.
mactoday
Apr 6, 10:49 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/06/intel-launching-next-generation-macbook-air-processors/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/02/11/094654-mba.jpg
As reported by Fudzilla (http://www.fudzilla.com/processors/item/22323-new-17w-core-i7-king-brand-is-2657m) and HardMac (http://www.hardmac.com/news/2011/04/06/intel-to-launch-sandy-bridge-chips-that-could-be-found-in-the-new-macbook-air), Intel is about to launch its next generation Sandy Bridge ultra low voltage CPUs suitable for the MacBook Air.
Due to the MacBook Air's thin form factor, it has required the use of particularly low power CPUs from Intel. Apple has stuck with Core 2 Duo processors with a maximum Thermal Design Power (TDP) of 10-17W. Apple is believed to have continued to use this older processor design in order to keep NVIDIA's graphics chips powering their ultracompact notebook. Due to licensing disputes (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/01/10/nvidia-and-intel-settle-nvidia-still-prohibited-from-building-chipsets-for-newest-intel-processors/), NVIDIA was prohibited from building newer chipsets that supported Intel's newest processors.
With the release of Sandy Bridge, Intel upgraded the performance of their integrated graphics chipset. This was good enough (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/02/24/apple-launches-macbook-pros-with-thunderbolt-quad-core-cpus-amd-gpus/) for Apple to offer in their latest 13" MacBook Pros, so we expect it will be good enough for the upcoming MacBook Airs as well. Apple had been previously rumored (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/02/11/macbook-air-sandy-bridge-update-in-june/) to be introducing the "Sandy Bridge" MacBook Airs this June.
HardMac pinpoints the Core i5 2537M (17W) as the possible chip to be used, at least in the 13" model:Meanwhile, the current 11" MacBook air uses an even lower power (10W) processor, but it's not clear how much power savings is offered by removing the need for the NVIDIA graphics chipset, as the Intel solution is integrated within the processor itself.
Article Link: Intel Launching Next Generation MacBook Air Processors (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/06/intel-launching-next-generation-macbook-air-processors/)
Actually there is Core i7 2657M at 1.6Ghz 2 Cores with HT (4 threads) with turbo up to 2.4Ghz. TDP 17Watt. Looks better chip for top model 13" MacBook Air. Don't you think so? :)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/02/11/094654-mba.jpg
As reported by Fudzilla (http://www.fudzilla.com/processors/item/22323-new-17w-core-i7-king-brand-is-2657m) and HardMac (http://www.hardmac.com/news/2011/04/06/intel-to-launch-sandy-bridge-chips-that-could-be-found-in-the-new-macbook-air), Intel is about to launch its next generation Sandy Bridge ultra low voltage CPUs suitable for the MacBook Air.
Due to the MacBook Air's thin form factor, it has required the use of particularly low power CPUs from Intel. Apple has stuck with Core 2 Duo processors with a maximum Thermal Design Power (TDP) of 10-17W. Apple is believed to have continued to use this older processor design in order to keep NVIDIA's graphics chips powering their ultracompact notebook. Due to licensing disputes (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/01/10/nvidia-and-intel-settle-nvidia-still-prohibited-from-building-chipsets-for-newest-intel-processors/), NVIDIA was prohibited from building newer chipsets that supported Intel's newest processors.
With the release of Sandy Bridge, Intel upgraded the performance of their integrated graphics chipset. This was good enough (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/02/24/apple-launches-macbook-pros-with-thunderbolt-quad-core-cpus-amd-gpus/) for Apple to offer in their latest 13" MacBook Pros, so we expect it will be good enough for the upcoming MacBook Airs as well. Apple had been previously rumored (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/02/11/macbook-air-sandy-bridge-update-in-june/) to be introducing the "Sandy Bridge" MacBook Airs this June.
HardMac pinpoints the Core i5 2537M (17W) as the possible chip to be used, at least in the 13" model:Meanwhile, the current 11" MacBook air uses an even lower power (10W) processor, but it's not clear how much power savings is offered by removing the need for the NVIDIA graphics chipset, as the Intel solution is integrated within the processor itself.
Article Link: Intel Launching Next Generation MacBook Air Processors (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/06/intel-launching-next-generation-macbook-air-processors/)
Actually there is Core i7 2657M at 1.6Ghz 2 Cores with HT (4 threads) with turbo up to 2.4Ghz. TDP 17Watt. Looks better chip for top model 13" MacBook Air. Don't you think so? :)
AidenShaw
Jul 14, 03:54 PM
Now, that is FUNNY!
However, based on availability, Apple could get up to 3GHz if they
really wanted to:
Dual Core Intel� Xeon� Processors 5160 (4MB L2 Cache, 3 GHz 1333MHz FSB)
Perhaps "one more thing......"
Seven day delivery (which is standard) for dual 3.0 GHz Woodies.
Availability is not a big problem.
However, based on availability, Apple could get up to 3GHz if they
really wanted to:
Dual Core Intel� Xeon� Processors 5160 (4MB L2 Cache, 3 GHz 1333MHz FSB)
Perhaps "one more thing......"
Seven day delivery (which is standard) for dual 3.0 GHz Woodies.
Availability is not a big problem.
guzhogi
Jul 20, 10:07 AM
First of all, you assume that it is possible to make "one big core equal in processing power to the 8 cores". I don't think it is possible to do this (at least not with the x86 architecture using today's technology.)
But assuming such a chip exists, the answer depends on what kind of efficiency you're thinking of.
If you mean computational efficiency (meaning the most useful processing per clock-tick), then a single big core will do better. This is because single-threaded apps will be able to use the full power (whereas multiple threads are needed to take advantagte of multiple cores.) Also, the operating system can get rid of the overhead that is needed to keep software running on the multiple cores from stepping on each other.
If you mean energy efficiency (amount of processing per watt of electricity consumed), then it could go either way, depending on how the chips are made. But given today's manufacturing processes and the non-linear power curve that we see as clock speeds are increased, the multiple-core solution will almost definitely use less power.
I remember hearing about how it is possible to make multiple cores act like one (Idon't remember where I heard this). Anyways, whether 8 cores acting separately or together like 1 big processor has an advantage depends on the program you use. If the program is multi-threaded, then the cores acting separately might have the advantage while single threaded apps will have an advantage if the cores are acting like one. However, many apps today won't see that much improvement either way (like a simple calculator, or solitare and word processing).
But assuming such a chip exists, the answer depends on what kind of efficiency you're thinking of.
If you mean computational efficiency (meaning the most useful processing per clock-tick), then a single big core will do better. This is because single-threaded apps will be able to use the full power (whereas multiple threads are needed to take advantagte of multiple cores.) Also, the operating system can get rid of the overhead that is needed to keep software running on the multiple cores from stepping on each other.
If you mean energy efficiency (amount of processing per watt of electricity consumed), then it could go either way, depending on how the chips are made. But given today's manufacturing processes and the non-linear power curve that we see as clock speeds are increased, the multiple-core solution will almost definitely use less power.
I remember hearing about how it is possible to make multiple cores act like one (Idon't remember where I heard this). Anyways, whether 8 cores acting separately or together like 1 big processor has an advantage depends on the program you use. If the program is multi-threaded, then the cores acting separately might have the advantage while single threaded apps will have an advantage if the cores are acting like one. However, many apps today won't see that much improvement either way (like a simple calculator, or solitare and word processing).
jonharris200
Aug 7, 03:42 PM
I can exclusively reveal that the top top secret feature of Leopard will be... inbuilt photocopying! :D
enda1
Aug 11, 06:56 PM
Is Europe not a way bigger mobile phone market than the US anyway. I don't see why any technology company would alienate a huge sector of its market in this way. It will definitely be released in Europe too.
It will not be a flip phone, or a slide phone or any of those stupid ass gimmicky phones you use over there. It will be just a nano derivative I would say. It will be GSM, it will be quad band.
Signed,
Stevie J ;)
It will not be a flip phone, or a slide phone or any of those stupid ass gimmicky phones you use over there. It will be just a nano derivative I would say. It will be GSM, it will be quad band.
Signed,
Stevie J ;)
DoFoT9
Aug 11, 07:42 PM
I mean, if we don't get to compare GT to NFS because of that, then surely you shouldn't compare GT to Forza for the same reason.
goes GT allow dragging/drifting ? :p
its kind of like comparing two different beasts imo.
goes GT allow dragging/drifting ? :p
its kind of like comparing two different beasts imo.
Peace
Aug 5, 05:49 PM
snippet:
Finally, I think if there's any support for Front Row in the Mac Pros or Xserves, then the displays must have built-in iSight.
Why is Front Row dependent on iSight ?
Finally, I think if there's any support for Front Row in the Mac Pros or Xserves, then the displays must have built-in iSight.
Why is Front Row dependent on iSight ?
