amin
Aug 18, 10:28 PM
Obviously, inherently the iMac design is inferior to the Mac Pro/Powermac.
It may be obvious, but based on your earlier statement that a Conroe iMac would be "able to crunch through" apps faster than a Mac Pro, the obvious seemed worth identifying.
But I think there's a bigger reason why Apple chose to go all quad with the Mac Pro: Apple chose all quad because a duo option would have had the same performance in professional apps (again, excluding handbrake and toast which are the only two examples touted about). A single processor Woodcrest or Conroe option will have the same obtainable CPU power for 90-95% of the professional market for another 6-12 months at the very least.
So you think they put an extra processor in across the line just to be able to say they had a quad? Even the AnandTech article you used as a source showed here (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2816&p=18) that PS took advantage of quad cores in Rosetta
Here's some data regarding the Mac Pro's FSB:
*snip*
What can we take from this? Because of the use of FB-DIMMs, the Mac Pro's effective FSB is that of ~640MHz DDR2 system.
And how does it fare in memory latency?
*snip*
Your points about latency and FSB are not separate negatives as you have made them. They are redundant theoretical concerns with implications of unclear practical significance.
As for bandwidth, although the Mac Pro has a load of theoretical bandwidth, the efficiency is an abysmal 20%. In real use a DDR2 system has 72% more usable bandwidth. (source here (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2816&p=11))
I don't know bout you, but if I were a heavy user of memory intensive apps such as Photoshop, I'd be worried. Worried in the sense that a Conroe would be noticeably faster.
I am not worried. Everything anyone has come up with on this issue are taken from that same AnandTech article. Until I see more real-world testing, I will not be convinced. Also, I expect that more pro apps such as PS will be able to utilize quad cores in the near future, if they aren't already doing so. Finally, even if Conroe is faster, Woodcrest is fast enough for me ;).
Memory issues aside, Woodcrests are faster than Conroes, 2.4% on average (source here (http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2795&p=6))
I think you misread that. They were comparing Core 2 Extreme (not Woodcrest) and Conroe to see whether the increased FSB of the former would make much difference.
It may be obvious, but based on your earlier statement that a Conroe iMac would be "able to crunch through" apps faster than a Mac Pro, the obvious seemed worth identifying.
But I think there's a bigger reason why Apple chose to go all quad with the Mac Pro: Apple chose all quad because a duo option would have had the same performance in professional apps (again, excluding handbrake and toast which are the only two examples touted about). A single processor Woodcrest or Conroe option will have the same obtainable CPU power for 90-95% of the professional market for another 6-12 months at the very least.
So you think they put an extra processor in across the line just to be able to say they had a quad? Even the AnandTech article you used as a source showed here (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2816&p=18) that PS took advantage of quad cores in Rosetta
Here's some data regarding the Mac Pro's FSB:
*snip*
What can we take from this? Because of the use of FB-DIMMs, the Mac Pro's effective FSB is that of ~640MHz DDR2 system.
And how does it fare in memory latency?
*snip*
Your points about latency and FSB are not separate negatives as you have made them. They are redundant theoretical concerns with implications of unclear practical significance.
As for bandwidth, although the Mac Pro has a load of theoretical bandwidth, the efficiency is an abysmal 20%. In real use a DDR2 system has 72% more usable bandwidth. (source here (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2816&p=11))
I don't know bout you, but if I were a heavy user of memory intensive apps such as Photoshop, I'd be worried. Worried in the sense that a Conroe would be noticeably faster.
I am not worried. Everything anyone has come up with on this issue are taken from that same AnandTech article. Until I see more real-world testing, I will not be convinced. Also, I expect that more pro apps such as PS will be able to utilize quad cores in the near future, if they aren't already doing so. Finally, even if Conroe is faster, Woodcrest is fast enough for me ;).
Memory issues aside, Woodcrests are faster than Conroes, 2.4% on average (source here (http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2795&p=6))
I think you misread that. They were comparing Core 2 Extreme (not Woodcrest) and Conroe to see whether the increased FSB of the former would make much difference.
BryanBensing
Apr 6, 03:11 PM
Rotfl
apple also sold about 100k ipad's - yesterday.
apple also sold about 100k ipad's - yesterday.
EagerDragon
Aug 27, 11:03 AM
Apple is now getting their parts from the same bin that PC makers use. Intel = cheap parts. Cheap parts = low quality.
Same thing with the batteries....
OS X can run on PPC and X86. Apple should target X86 to consumers and PPC for pro's.
That $100 million that Apple just wasted on Creative could have meant new supercooled mobile G5's if it would have been pumped into IBM (Power.org). Instead we have these halfbaked Wintel parts to deal with MUCH fewer problems with PowerPC based Mac's.
http://www.appledefects.com/?cat=6
http://www.appledefects.com/wiki/index.php?title=MacBook_Pro
If Apple could not get IBM to provide cooler and more powerful chips back then with the full set of customers behind them......... what makes you think that the pro comunity will be able to do so?
I have no idea what the pro vs the rest of us is but I am sure it is less than 100% of all users, as such it is less likely.
IBM has no incentive to produce a cool and fast chip, our pro comunity also wants performance to create all those videos and edit all those photos.
There are a few snags, but they will iron them out. I am glad they did the switch to Intel. Do notice from my signature I do not yet own one, I am waiting for Leopard to take full advantage of the Intel chips. So this time next year I will be looking to get my 1 or 2 additional systems based on SantaRosa and Leopard.
Same thing with the batteries....
OS X can run on PPC and X86. Apple should target X86 to consumers and PPC for pro's.
That $100 million that Apple just wasted on Creative could have meant new supercooled mobile G5's if it would have been pumped into IBM (Power.org). Instead we have these halfbaked Wintel parts to deal with MUCH fewer problems with PowerPC based Mac's.
http://www.appledefects.com/?cat=6
http://www.appledefects.com/wiki/index.php?title=MacBook_Pro
If Apple could not get IBM to provide cooler and more powerful chips back then with the full set of customers behind them......... what makes you think that the pro comunity will be able to do so?
I have no idea what the pro vs the rest of us is but I am sure it is less than 100% of all users, as such it is less likely.
IBM has no incentive to produce a cool and fast chip, our pro comunity also wants performance to create all those videos and edit all those photos.
There are a few snags, but they will iron them out. I am glad they did the switch to Intel. Do notice from my signature I do not yet own one, I am waiting for Leopard to take full advantage of the Intel chips. So this time next year I will be looking to get my 1 or 2 additional systems based on SantaRosa and Leopard.
Bill McEnaney
Mar 3, 10:48 AM
Why do you conflate homosexuality with abuse and paedophilia?
I'm not conflating them. See post 129.
I'm not conflating them. See post 129.
tyroja00
Sep 19, 12:48 AM
Is that irony?
I'm also a student, and I don't think I could wait any longer than a month for these long-overdue MacBook Pros to ship... so a possible late November arrival is worrying to say the least.
I'll tell you what irony is...spending all your time making commercials that tout your products cutting edge over the lame PC's while steadily showing how truly behind you really are.
Try concentrating on the products instead of the gimmicks...
As for me, they have 2 more weeks of my patience before I revert back to my PC days. I'm tired of getting made fun of by my PC Geek friends while I play on my outdated G4 PB.
I'm beginning to believe my friends when they say that Apple pats their own backs for crap that PC makers created a year ago.
I'm also a student, and I don't think I could wait any longer than a month for these long-overdue MacBook Pros to ship... so a possible late November arrival is worrying to say the least.
I'll tell you what irony is...spending all your time making commercials that tout your products cutting edge over the lame PC's while steadily showing how truly behind you really are.
Try concentrating on the products instead of the gimmicks...
As for me, they have 2 more weeks of my patience before I revert back to my PC days. I'm tired of getting made fun of by my PC Geek friends while I play on my outdated G4 PB.
I'm beginning to believe my friends when they say that Apple pats their own backs for crap that PC makers created a year ago.
Digital Skunk
Mar 22, 01:05 PM
Can I exchange my iPad 2 for this Playbook?
I really like the minimal app appearance of the Playbook compared to Apple's cluttered group of tens of thousands of applications.
Hopefully Apple will take a cue from that.
I too do hate the way iOS looks on the home screen. It wreaks of tacky 4 year old OS.
I might have to go back and edit my first comment to be clearer.
I can leave the OS behind, but it's the 3rd party apps that I long for on a tablet. It's too bad that these guys don't port their apps over toe Android.
+1
'lets make a tablet for our business users, to get serious workloads done. we can call it the playbook'.
i didn't know charlie sheen was in charge of their team?
Playbook . . . as in what sport coaches use to hold their plays . . . e.g. their next moves, their plans on winning the game.
I really like the minimal app appearance of the Playbook compared to Apple's cluttered group of tens of thousands of applications.
Hopefully Apple will take a cue from that.
I too do hate the way iOS looks on the home screen. It wreaks of tacky 4 year old OS.
I might have to go back and edit my first comment to be clearer.
I can leave the OS behind, but it's the 3rd party apps that I long for on a tablet. It's too bad that these guys don't port their apps over toe Android.
+1
'lets make a tablet for our business users, to get serious workloads done. we can call it the playbook'.
i didn't know charlie sheen was in charge of their team?
Playbook . . . as in what sport coaches use to hold their plays . . . e.g. their next moves, their plans on winning the game.
skunk
Feb 28, 08:02 PM
Fornication doesn't matter if the person doesn't care about the religious connotations of marriageIt matters that you describe it as fornication.
Greek culture also endorsed pederasty!What has this dubious claim to do with anything? :confused:
Greek culture also endorsed pederasty!What has this dubious claim to do with anything? :confused:
marksman
Apr 11, 03:14 PM
You're kidding right? iPhone 4 and iOS 4 are incredibly stale. Apple has realized this and hence strong rumors suggest a total revamped iOS 5. Anyway i don't agree with you, i don't think the iPhone 4 is the best smartphone in the market.
No I am not kidding. If those are the best phones in the market why do multiple iPhone and Blackberry devices outsell the best android phone ALWAYS?
People keep wanting to point to these android spec whore of the month models, but they don't offer a superior experience... It is just silly.
Like I said,t he iPhone 4 is stil the best smartphone out there.
The thunderbolt doesn't even come close to outselling the iPhone just on Verizon.
No I am not kidding. If those are the best phones in the market why do multiple iPhone and Blackberry devices outsell the best android phone ALWAYS?
People keep wanting to point to these android spec whore of the month models, but they don't offer a superior experience... It is just silly.
Like I said,t he iPhone 4 is stil the best smartphone out there.
The thunderbolt doesn't even come close to outselling the iPhone just on Verizon.
11thIndian
Apr 6, 09:04 PM
Never said it was an industry-wide trent (sic). I said "a lot of professionals" have made the switch.
Thanks.
When what you meant to say was, "A lot of professionals I know.".
Your welcome.
Thanks.
When what you meant to say was, "A lot of professionals I know.".
Your welcome.
Reach9
Mar 22, 03:12 PM
Someone give Android's UI and Playbook's UI huge recognition so Apple will change it's old grid-like UI.
PhantomPumpkin
Apr 25, 04:39 PM
You are skating around the issue of user permission. If you use this app to track your location - its YOUR CHOICE. However, the issue here is that Apple is collecting the data without the option of user choice. Even turning off location services does not stop the collection and submittal to Apple of this information.
That is what is the hearty of the matter - do we, as users, have the right to opt to to the collection and submittal of location data to Apple ? With your example, you do, as you can turn off the app at will.
Please, link me any evidence this is submitted to Apple.
That is what is the hearty of the matter - do we, as users, have the right to opt to to the collection and submittal of location data to Apple ? With your example, you do, as you can turn off the app at will.
Please, link me any evidence this is submitted to Apple.
amin
Aug 18, 07:39 PM
... If apple releases a 2.66GHz Conroe iMac/Mac/whathaveyou it will be able to crunch through FCP/Photoshop/etc faster than a Mac Pro because it can use regular DDR2 and won't suffer from horrendous memory latency.
Where is your evidence to back up this statement? You have presented limited evidence about FCP, and none regarding "PS/etc." So far there is no "Mac/whathaveyou." Do you think a Conroe iMac will beat a Mac Pro due to lower memory latency alone? Do you have real experience or data regarding how horrendous a problem this is? Extra dual-core processor aside, the Mac Pro has a higher speed FSB, higher memory bus bandwidth, higher RAM capacity, and ability to set up internal RAID amongst other advantages over a Conroe iMac.
Where is your evidence to back up this statement? You have presented limited evidence about FCP, and none regarding "PS/etc." So far there is no "Mac/whathaveyou." Do you think a Conroe iMac will beat a Mac Pro due to lower memory latency alone? Do you have real experience or data regarding how horrendous a problem this is? Extra dual-core processor aside, the Mac Pro has a higher speed FSB, higher memory bus bandwidth, higher RAM capacity, and ability to set up internal RAID amongst other advantages over a Conroe iMac.
ArchaicRevival
Apr 5, 09:51 PM
Ugh. Final Cut is fine the way it is for now... We need iWeb overhaul!! Make it more search engine friendly, none of the text as an image crap. grrr...
nickXedge
Apr 7, 11:20 PM
Good for Apple on this. One less retailer over charging for their products. I hope they pull the Apple stores out all together and find a new retail partner.
Apple products are price-locked. No second hand retailer marks up on them, like Bose. Retailers are told what to sell at and they comply or they lose rights to sell the product. If these are overpriced, it is Apples doing.
Apple products are price-locked. No second hand retailer marks up on them, like Bose. Retailers are told what to sell at and they comply or they lose rights to sell the product. If these are overpriced, it is Apples doing.
LC475
Apr 11, 06:49 PM
There's nothing to fear about Apple making FCP less than professional.
The thing to understand is that NLEs never change their basic structure of how editing works, i.e moving clips in the timeline, trimming, etc. Look at Avid - it hasn't changed much at all since the 90s because they know if they did, they would lose their base of users. Avid came in the early 90s, and FCP came in the late 90s. FCP is an improvement to the Avid idea of NLE editing, and it's a good improvement. That's one reason why it became popular. Sure, the GUI might change but the basic way of working will not. After Effects is a good example. The GUI looks totally different than it did on version 5, but you can still work basically the same.
I don't understand what people mean by FCP lagging behind Avid and Adobe. In the last couple years, FCP has been making strong gains in Hollywood. WB, 20th Fox, Paramount have all used FCP on major movies. I worked as an AE on one of them. Professionals like FCP, many movie editors I know like FCP, major post houses use it, and I'm sure after tomorrow we will like it even more.
If anything, FCP has become less of a consumer app and more of a professional one. Hollywood wouldn't have thought of using FCP in 1999 on version 1, but they're using it now. It's become more professional over the last ten years.
With the new technology of thunderbolt, 64bit support, and multithreading support, in addition to iPad support, we should see an awesome upgrade tomorrow.
The thing to understand is that NLEs never change their basic structure of how editing works, i.e moving clips in the timeline, trimming, etc. Look at Avid - it hasn't changed much at all since the 90s because they know if they did, they would lose their base of users. Avid came in the early 90s, and FCP came in the late 90s. FCP is an improvement to the Avid idea of NLE editing, and it's a good improvement. That's one reason why it became popular. Sure, the GUI might change but the basic way of working will not. After Effects is a good example. The GUI looks totally different than it did on version 5, but you can still work basically the same.
I don't understand what people mean by FCP lagging behind Avid and Adobe. In the last couple years, FCP has been making strong gains in Hollywood. WB, 20th Fox, Paramount have all used FCP on major movies. I worked as an AE on one of them. Professionals like FCP, many movie editors I know like FCP, major post houses use it, and I'm sure after tomorrow we will like it even more.
If anything, FCP has become less of a consumer app and more of a professional one. Hollywood wouldn't have thought of using FCP in 1999 on version 1, but they're using it now. It's become more professional over the last ten years.
With the new technology of thunderbolt, 64bit support, and multithreading support, in addition to iPad support, we should see an awesome upgrade tomorrow.
Multimedia
Aug 27, 04:03 PM
I really hope that they keep the option for a matte screen open when the upgraded MacBook Pros finally arrive.
I have been waiting a while now to upgrade to a MacBook Pro but have held off primarily as i would like to see if the enclosure gets a few nips and tucks a la Macbook!
The switchable HD bay would be awesome, and the magnetic latch and updated keyboard also would be nice but PLEASE DO NOT make glossy screen a standard on Pro notebooks!
I have a few friends who own PC laptops with glossy screens and all of them have keyboards imprinted on their screens! I cannot say from experience if this happens with the MacBooks but i'd rather not risk it....Closing A Laptop Without The Foam Barrier it ships with Or A Cloth Barrier Is Poor Maintenance. I would NEVER close my laptop without a barrier between the keyboard and the screen. I don't understand those who do. :rolleyes:
I still have the foam barrier and slipcase that came with my 3 year old PowerBook and always use them in addition to two iKlear (http://iKlear.com) cloth barriers on the keyboard as well as on the trackpad.
I have been waiting a while now to upgrade to a MacBook Pro but have held off primarily as i would like to see if the enclosure gets a few nips and tucks a la Macbook!
The switchable HD bay would be awesome, and the magnetic latch and updated keyboard also would be nice but PLEASE DO NOT make glossy screen a standard on Pro notebooks!
I have a few friends who own PC laptops with glossy screens and all of them have keyboards imprinted on their screens! I cannot say from experience if this happens with the MacBooks but i'd rather not risk it....Closing A Laptop Without The Foam Barrier it ships with Or A Cloth Barrier Is Poor Maintenance. I would NEVER close my laptop without a barrier between the keyboard and the screen. I don't understand those who do. :rolleyes:
I still have the foam barrier and slipcase that came with my 3 year old PowerBook and always use them in addition to two iKlear (http://iKlear.com) cloth barriers on the keyboard as well as on the trackpad.
Multimedia
Jul 23, 03:14 PM
Given the change in Clovertown schedule, I expect that at WWDC Apple will release 2 "lower end" Mac Pro configurations both with dual Woodcrests. The higher end configuration with two Clovertowns will ship early Q1 (maybe around MW'07).
I expect it will be 2.33GHz and 2.67GHz Woodcrest models with 3.0GHz as a BTO option. Conroe in Mac Pro is looking highly unlikely.
Anyone care to speculate on Intel's pricing for a 2.67GHz Clovertown? I am thinking $999.Well Swami I am going to have to call your bluff. Makes no sense to skip Conroe Dual Cores on the Mac Pro yet. This Winter 2007 with Clovertowns, perhaps post MacWorld SF. But not yet. And maybe not ever.
There are some who may never find a need for more than two cores. But therein creeps back the need for a cheaper dual core tower line in the same price range as the iMacs. Seems inevitable doesn't it? Expand the Tower line down to $999 and let it go all the way up to $3.5k. Six models instead of only 3 expensive ones.
January - March 2007
..$999 - Dual 2.13 GHz One Conroe
$1399 - Dual 2.4 GHz One Conroe
$1699 - Dual 2.67 GHz One Conroe
$1999 - Quad 2.67 GHz One Kentsfield
$2499 - Quad 3.2 GHz One Kentsfield
$3499 or more for Mac OctoPod Fastest On EARTH - 8 x 3.2 GHz
Two Clovertown later One Yorkfield for less money.
I found that word "OctoPod" in my Tiger's Oxford Dictionary. It's a REAL word.
When they get to 8 via a Yorkfield then the whole line can be based on the less expensive desktop family motherboards and chipsets except the extreeme top where pairs of Harpertown will make 16 etc etc.
You fill in the specs. I can't remember what speeds are being offered. This is all just a wild guestimate for discussion purposes. Please don't flame me.
I expect it will be 2.33GHz and 2.67GHz Woodcrest models with 3.0GHz as a BTO option. Conroe in Mac Pro is looking highly unlikely.
Anyone care to speculate on Intel's pricing for a 2.67GHz Clovertown? I am thinking $999.Well Swami I am going to have to call your bluff. Makes no sense to skip Conroe Dual Cores on the Mac Pro yet. This Winter 2007 with Clovertowns, perhaps post MacWorld SF. But not yet. And maybe not ever.
There are some who may never find a need for more than two cores. But therein creeps back the need for a cheaper dual core tower line in the same price range as the iMacs. Seems inevitable doesn't it? Expand the Tower line down to $999 and let it go all the way up to $3.5k. Six models instead of only 3 expensive ones.
January - March 2007
..$999 - Dual 2.13 GHz One Conroe
$1399 - Dual 2.4 GHz One Conroe
$1699 - Dual 2.67 GHz One Conroe
$1999 - Quad 2.67 GHz One Kentsfield
$2499 - Quad 3.2 GHz One Kentsfield
$3499 or more for Mac OctoPod Fastest On EARTH - 8 x 3.2 GHz
Two Clovertown later One Yorkfield for less money.
I found that word "OctoPod" in my Tiger's Oxford Dictionary. It's a REAL word.
When they get to 8 via a Yorkfield then the whole line can be based on the less expensive desktop family motherboards and chipsets except the extreeme top where pairs of Harpertown will make 16 etc etc.
You fill in the specs. I can't remember what speeds are being offered. This is all just a wild guestimate for discussion purposes. Please don't flame me.
-SD-
Aug 18, 05:14 AM
So Japan is getting GT5 on November 3rd too, but at least they get a nifty Titanium Blue console and Ltd Edition game bundle. (http://www.engadget.com/2010/08/18/ps3-gets-titanium-blue-makeover-for-gran-turismo-5-launch-bundle/)
http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2010/08/10x08189ub234tewfja.jpg
:apple:
http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2010/08/10x08189ub234tewfja.jpg
:apple:
Island Dog
Aug 25, 08:24 PM
Right. Because the whole "if your battery's serial number falls within this range, this range, or this range" concept was so terribly difficult to grasp.
Yep. My serial falls into the range and the website still won't accept it. I guess I will have to sit on hold Monday morning.
Yep. My serial falls into the range and the website still won't accept it. I guess I will have to sit on hold Monday morning.
marksman
Mar 31, 04:37 PM
no, the question is: "Is this evil?" when google starts rejecting Facebook Android phones, or android versions using Bing and not Google...
thats the question.
I don't think it is evil. It is crazy for people to pretend like Google makes Android to be benevolent and help the world. They have financial motives, and they have to protect their interests. Removing Google as search is probably going to be a huge no-no. It is kind of dumb that anyone has even tried to do that... That is part of the problem. Some of the carriers/manufacturers are stupid.
They have disrespected what Google has done for them and forced Google to clamp down. When someone gives you something for free and does a lot of work for you, you can at least respect their position and understand when you do things that might be stepping on their toes.
That is the real problem with the android commodity market though. It is not google, it is all the second rate manufacturers who sucked at making smartphones before Apple and Google, and continue to do dumb things to this day.
You mix a more general usage based OS with a hardware marketplace filled with knuckleheads, and you end up with the mess that is the Android hardware market and ecosystem.
thats the question.
I don't think it is evil. It is crazy for people to pretend like Google makes Android to be benevolent and help the world. They have financial motives, and they have to protect their interests. Removing Google as search is probably going to be a huge no-no. It is kind of dumb that anyone has even tried to do that... That is part of the problem. Some of the carriers/manufacturers are stupid.
They have disrespected what Google has done for them and forced Google to clamp down. When someone gives you something for free and does a lot of work for you, you can at least respect their position and understand when you do things that might be stepping on their toes.
That is the real problem with the android commodity market though. It is not google, it is all the second rate manufacturers who sucked at making smartphones before Apple and Google, and continue to do dumb things to this day.
You mix a more general usage based OS with a hardware marketplace filled with knuckleheads, and you end up with the mess that is the Android hardware market and ecosystem.
gregorsamsa
Aug 28, 07:35 AM
OEM licensing OS X would not be a panacea. I supported NeXTSTEP/Openstep for NeXT and Apple. We had a nightmare dealing with OEMs who pushed us into the trash heap.
When the merger happened they showed no more interest knowing that we could move the OS to Intel since we had it running on Intel.
Motherboard manufacturers cut corners. OEMs cut all sorts of corners on their I/O cards.
Corralling all necessary OEMs to stick to a specific spec would be a nightmare.
Vista is a classic example of diluting your OS. Five years and counting.
Apple is both a hardware and software company.
The price for their latest Mac Pro shows how price competitive it is with the rest of the industry.
Having built several clone boxes none of them from the case design, integrated motherboard design, controller design, heat transfer requirements, etc comes close to the Mac Pro. It doesn't include Hardware RAID out of the box. Big deal.
When the clone industry can produce cases in general that compete for structural integrity, motherboards with as few cables, easily maintanable cases that are easy to keep dust free then Apple might feel concerned about it's claim to having the most complete experience.
OS X has shortcomings in areas for Engineering (CAD/CAM, FEM, etc. All 3rd party concerns), Games (3rd party concerns, OpenGL 2 concerns that Apple will fix), Vertical Solution concerns (assuming Apple wants to attack the business sectors they will have to address this lack of productivity tools for Finance & Accounting within iWorks) and some other deficiencies.
They are covering their bases and growing their base, quarter by quarter.
When ROME is finally built are we all going to whine that you can save $50 here or there with a clone?
I expect no less.
Good points, some of which I don't disagree with. Yes, "Vista is a classic example of diluting your OS," but I'll still be surprised if it doesn't achieve record sales on release. Though Apple's userbase continues to grow (& rightly so!), the crunch time for Apple in sustaining this will surely come when the shops are full of competitively-priced, Vista-enabled PCs.
Licensing out OS X wouldn't necessarily mean compromising its security; the compromise would come in some of the non-Apple hardware OS X ran on. Much has changed since the days of the original Apple clones that proved to be an expensive failure. Today, technology generally is much less expensive. Customers would appreciate the kind of choice that, after all, hasn't done too much harm to sales of Windows PCs. (I'd probably still buy Apple, but some others may buy a cheaper Dell running OS X).
Granted that the Mac Pro is competitively priced, those recent comparisons with the more expensive Dell workstation overlook that the Mac Pro graphics (Geforce 7300 GT) cost approx $100; the Dell's Nvidia graphics are closer to $1,000. (A point for objectivity's sake).
Like most Mac owners, I believe Apple are still by far the best for overall quality & service (though I think they're currently lacking at least one more consumer-aimed computer). I'm just interested in any ideas that could further expand the OS X userbase, & sustain it long-term.
PS: ROME has already been built: M$. But that empire so overreached itself it now looks as if it's beginning to crumble.
When the merger happened they showed no more interest knowing that we could move the OS to Intel since we had it running on Intel.
Motherboard manufacturers cut corners. OEMs cut all sorts of corners on their I/O cards.
Corralling all necessary OEMs to stick to a specific spec would be a nightmare.
Vista is a classic example of diluting your OS. Five years and counting.
Apple is both a hardware and software company.
The price for their latest Mac Pro shows how price competitive it is with the rest of the industry.
Having built several clone boxes none of them from the case design, integrated motherboard design, controller design, heat transfer requirements, etc comes close to the Mac Pro. It doesn't include Hardware RAID out of the box. Big deal.
When the clone industry can produce cases in general that compete for structural integrity, motherboards with as few cables, easily maintanable cases that are easy to keep dust free then Apple might feel concerned about it's claim to having the most complete experience.
OS X has shortcomings in areas for Engineering (CAD/CAM, FEM, etc. All 3rd party concerns), Games (3rd party concerns, OpenGL 2 concerns that Apple will fix), Vertical Solution concerns (assuming Apple wants to attack the business sectors they will have to address this lack of productivity tools for Finance & Accounting within iWorks) and some other deficiencies.
They are covering their bases and growing their base, quarter by quarter.
When ROME is finally built are we all going to whine that you can save $50 here or there with a clone?
I expect no less.
Good points, some of which I don't disagree with. Yes, "Vista is a classic example of diluting your OS," but I'll still be surprised if it doesn't achieve record sales on release. Though Apple's userbase continues to grow (& rightly so!), the crunch time for Apple in sustaining this will surely come when the shops are full of competitively-priced, Vista-enabled PCs.
Licensing out OS X wouldn't necessarily mean compromising its security; the compromise would come in some of the non-Apple hardware OS X ran on. Much has changed since the days of the original Apple clones that proved to be an expensive failure. Today, technology generally is much less expensive. Customers would appreciate the kind of choice that, after all, hasn't done too much harm to sales of Windows PCs. (I'd probably still buy Apple, but some others may buy a cheaper Dell running OS X).
Granted that the Mac Pro is competitively priced, those recent comparisons with the more expensive Dell workstation overlook that the Mac Pro graphics (Geforce 7300 GT) cost approx $100; the Dell's Nvidia graphics are closer to $1,000. (A point for objectivity's sake).
Like most Mac owners, I believe Apple are still by far the best for overall quality & service (though I think they're currently lacking at least one more consumer-aimed computer). I'm just interested in any ideas that could further expand the OS X userbase, & sustain it long-term.
PS: ROME has already been built: M$. But that empire so overreached itself it now looks as if it's beginning to crumble.
PhantomPumpkin
Apr 27, 10:55 AM
The difference is a question of access. To get at the records kept by your cell phone provider, you need a subpoena. Any roommate/guest/thief/stalker with access to your computer or iPhone can get the data off your iphone or the backup as it exists right now. I don't mind the former, but I want to do everything I can to prevent the latter.
Keep better tabs on your phone. Encrypt the computer backup. Yeah yeah, I know sometimes we lose things. Hell, I've lost my iphone in my couch and took a half hour to find out WHERE in the couch it went.
Even still, you have to take some responsibility at some point. We can't all rely on Apple/Google/Purina Brand Puppy Chow to keep our data completely 100% safe. As they say in the IT security industry, "Your biggest threats are the end users". Technology can only go so far.
If you're REALLY paranoid, install Where's my Iphone, and if you lose it, remote wipe it.
Keep better tabs on your phone. Encrypt the computer backup. Yeah yeah, I know sometimes we lose things. Hell, I've lost my iphone in my couch and took a half hour to find out WHERE in the couch it went.
Even still, you have to take some responsibility at some point. We can't all rely on Apple/Google/Purina Brand Puppy Chow to keep our data completely 100% safe. As they say in the IT security industry, "Your biggest threats are the end users". Technology can only go so far.
If you're REALLY paranoid, install Where's my Iphone, and if you lose it, remote wipe it.
NoSmokingBandit
Aug 18, 10:37 PM
I hate how some people think the ~800 standard cars are going to look like GT4 cars. Obviously they wont, because even at half the poly density of the premium cars they would still look gorgeous.
Meh, haters gonna hate as the kids say.
I just hope the it has a 2008 cobalt in the game. My friend claims the focus is one of the worst cars ever made but he drives a cobalt :rolleyes: So i want to pit them against each other on a track.
Meh, haters gonna hate as the kids say.
I just hope the it has a 2008 cobalt in the game. My friend claims the focus is one of the worst cars ever made but he drives a cobalt :rolleyes: So i want to pit them against each other on a track.
stormj
Aug 11, 06:41 PM
We can argue in circles about whether GSM or CDMA is better. Each has its advantages. The fact remains that GSM networks are everywhere, including the US. CDMA networks exist on a tiny scale outside of the US.
UMTS uses W-CDMA anyway, so for that part of the technology, which is critical to the itunes store working, you'll get those much touted soft-handoffs. Only the voice part (assuming you're not in a VOIP connection) would go by the allegedly inferior GSM connection.
I'd bet a significant chunk of money that Apple makes a GSM version of any phone it produces, regardless of whether or not it does make a CDMA version.
P.S. no w-IDEN defenders? lolz.
UMTS uses W-CDMA anyway, so for that part of the technology, which is critical to the itunes store working, you'll get those much touted soft-handoffs. Only the voice part (assuming you're not in a VOIP connection) would go by the allegedly inferior GSM connection.
I'd bet a significant chunk of money that Apple makes a GSM version of any phone it produces, regardless of whether or not it does make a CDMA version.
P.S. no w-IDEN defenders? lolz.
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий