MrCrowbar
Aug 26, 10:21 PM
Yes, and as someone has already pointed out, if the Core2 can do 20% better with the same power, can't you just throttle your new Core2 MBP down 20% and get a laptop with the same performance of your old one with 20% better battery life?
Talk about not seeing the forest through the trees. :rolleyes:
You won't get 20% more battery life unless the screens and other components don't get more power efficient too. I think 7% battery life increase is more realistic. You can already upgrade todays macbooks with more RAM (saves HDD work) and more efficient HDDs. With the screen brightness down, I get 6 and a half hours of text editing out of that thing.
Talk about not seeing the forest through the trees. :rolleyes:
You won't get 20% more battery life unless the screens and other components don't get more power efficient too. I think 7% battery life increase is more realistic. You can already upgrade todays macbooks with more RAM (saves HDD work) and more efficient HDDs. With the screen brightness down, I get 6 and a half hours of text editing out of that thing.
BillyShears
Aug 7, 09:32 PM
all the pictures i've seen of leopard show a unified interface :D
Safari appears to be brushed metal. Go here (http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/dashboard.html) and go to about 1/6 of the way through.
Safari appears to be brushed metal. Go here (http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/dashboard.html) and go to about 1/6 of the way through.
REDolution
Apr 12, 12:49 PM
This was a very good blog post.
I agree, great read
I agree, great read
samcraig
Apr 27, 08:39 AM
if any of you are concerned about being tracked - why on earth would you buy any product that has a GPS in it (all computers cash info) and why on earth would you buy a cell phone - the towers know almost exactly when (which apple doesn't know) and where you are? The reaction to this news is stupid.
Your type of apathy in the long term will do more harm than good.
There is a big difference between voluntarily and involuntarily giving out personal information and that's what was at stake here.
Apple admitted error - it's ok - you can admit it might not have been in the best interest of consumers too. Apple won't come and take your iPhone away.
Your type of apathy in the long term will do more harm than good.
There is a big difference between voluntarily and involuntarily giving out personal information and that's what was at stake here.
Apple admitted error - it's ok - you can admit it might not have been in the best interest of consumers too. Apple won't come and take your iPhone away.
Silentwave
Aug 18, 10:21 AM
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/mac%20pro_081406100848/12798.png
I think this speaks for itself.
When I'm working on one project, that's all my attention to it. When I'd like to encode it, I'd like my however many cores to be at full blast. Sadly, that's not happening at the moment and will remain so until they rewrite h264 encoding.
Like I said, unless people are doing what you do (sending multiple files to be encoded at the same time all the time) they won't benefit from 4, 8, 100 cores.
Now if anyone can show benchmarks that show FCP being 40-50% faster on a quad than on a dual when working on a project, I'll shut up :)
Or maybe they have?
Didn't FCP just get updated to optimize it for the Mac Pro?
I think they need the latest version over there and should rerun the test.
I think this speaks for itself.
When I'm working on one project, that's all my attention to it. When I'd like to encode it, I'd like my however many cores to be at full blast. Sadly, that's not happening at the moment and will remain so until they rewrite h264 encoding.
Like I said, unless people are doing what you do (sending multiple files to be encoded at the same time all the time) they won't benefit from 4, 8, 100 cores.
Now if anyone can show benchmarks that show FCP being 40-50% faster on a quad than on a dual when working on a project, I'll shut up :)
Or maybe they have?
Didn't FCP just get updated to optimize it for the Mac Pro?
I think they need the latest version over there and should rerun the test.
DPazdanISU
Sep 19, 06:53 AM
Sorry but I've heard this so many times it gets pretty annoying. Dont assume to know what ppl want to use their Macbooks for. I want to use it for music production which can be very intensive on the processor, other people for graphics etc where a few seconds shaved off processing times when added up many times can make quite a difference to productivity.
Also, when the new chips come out it will instantly knock a chunk off the resell value - yes this is always the way with technology but buying when an update is coming soon seems silly.
i agree, I need a computer to encode video in iDVD because it takes forever on my PPC. That little difference in power is a big difference.
Also, when the new chips come out it will instantly knock a chunk off the resell value - yes this is always the way with technology but buying when an update is coming soon seems silly.
i agree, I need a computer to encode video in iDVD because it takes forever on my PPC. That little difference in power is a big difference.
Legion93
Apr 6, 03:34 PM
Perfect day for this news....
I have a new 13" MBA sitting here at my desk unopened...just dropped off from FedEx today. I'm debating whether or not to just return it and wait for the refresh or be happy with what I got.
I'm a very light user..web, email, iTunes, sync iPhone and iPad. Do I really need the Sandy Bridge power..probably not but I dont want to have the "old not so shiny ball" come June (as the rumors suggest).
Any help from the MR community is greatly appreciated!
Don't get your hopes up, as any rumour is just a speculation. Apple may or may not release any updated version of the MBA very soon, but it can all depend. If you really want power, you could sell your Air for a MBP, which came out only couple months ago.
I have a new 13" MBA sitting here at my desk unopened...just dropped off from FedEx today. I'm debating whether or not to just return it and wait for the refresh or be happy with what I got.
I'm a very light user..web, email, iTunes, sync iPhone and iPad. Do I really need the Sandy Bridge power..probably not but I dont want to have the "old not so shiny ball" come June (as the rumors suggest).
Any help from the MR community is greatly appreciated!
Don't get your hopes up, as any rumour is just a speculation. Apple may or may not release any updated version of the MBA very soon, but it can all depend. If you really want power, you could sell your Air for a MBP, which came out only couple months ago.
^squirrel^
Jul 15, 02:21 PM
Good: Dual-Core 2GHz Intel Xeon, 512MB DDR 667, ATI Radeon X1600 Pro, 250GB Hard Drive,$1799
Better: Dual-Core 2.33GHz Intel Xeon, 1GB DDR2 667, ATI Radeon X1800 Pro, 320GB Hard Drive, $2499
Best: Two Dual-Core 2.66 Intel Xeon, 1GB DDR2 667, ATI Radeon X1800 Pro, 320GB Hard Drive, $3299
I wonder if i'll be able to upgrade to the X1900?
Better: Dual-Core 2.33GHz Intel Xeon, 1GB DDR2 667, ATI Radeon X1800 Pro, 320GB Hard Drive, $2499
Best: Two Dual-Core 2.66 Intel Xeon, 1GB DDR2 667, ATI Radeon X1800 Pro, 320GB Hard Drive, $3299
I wonder if i'll be able to upgrade to the X1900?
dhollister
Sep 19, 12:49 AM
Does it even MATTER if Apple keeps up? Do we actually WANT Apple to release a new computer every month when Intel bumps up their chips a few megahertz?
See, it's easy to get lost in the specs war. The Mac Pros came out and I was salivating, even though I have a dual 2.0GHz G5 sitting at home. And then one day, as I was editing some HD footage, it occurred ot me that my G5 here - my now outdated G5 - was editing 1080p high-def footage without so much as a flinch. It was SO fast it was not even necessary at all.
So I really have to ask - does Apple really need to get into that stupid-ass PC specs war? Is it really hurting you guys that Apple has been slow to update? Are you really doing tasks that the current computer lineup cannot do?
See, it's easy to get lost in the specs war. The Mac Pros came out and I was salivating, even though I have a dual 2.0GHz G5 sitting at home. And then one day, as I was editing some HD footage, it occurred ot me that my G5 here - my now outdated G5 - was editing 1080p high-def footage without so much as a flinch. It was SO fast it was not even necessary at all.
So I really have to ask - does Apple really need to get into that stupid-ass PC specs war? Is it really hurting you guys that Apple has been slow to update? Are you really doing tasks that the current computer lineup cannot do?
boringName
Nov 29, 10:14 AM
The only thing this royalty grants you is a tacit guarantee that Universal will continue to provide digital content.
Yes, that's the irritating part - Universal isn't providing anyone with anything, here. It seems much more like blackmail to continue offering their music library on iTunes (should this "deal" go through) and the Zune store.
To address another item - I'd like to point out that, while not an angel, I "ripped" far more of my friends' music back in the old-days of cassette tapes.
Yes, that's the irritating part - Universal isn't providing anyone with anything, here. It seems much more like blackmail to continue offering their music library on iTunes (should this "deal" go through) and the Zune store.
To address another item - I'd like to point out that, while not an angel, I "ripped" far more of my friends' music back in the old-days of cassette tapes.
Vegasman
Apr 27, 11:32 AM
Really? So you're telling me that the location saved, of the cell tower 100 miles away, is actually really MY location?
Wow!
If you believe this is not a problem, the burden of proof is not to show there is at least one instance where the information would not be useful. Instead, the burden of proof is if for you to show there is NO circumstance where this information could be used against someone.
Wow!
If you believe this is not a problem, the burden of proof is not to show there is at least one instance where the information would not be useful. Instead, the burden of proof is if for you to show there is NO circumstance where this information could be used against someone.
ThunderSkunk
Apr 25, 03:04 PM
...if there is no apparent good in tracking personal data, one should object to it.
I think thats the whole thing this boils down to. Apple doesn't track you, your phone does (course, so does everything else), but Apple enables this by default because they see apps being able to utilize Location Services as a feature that'll enhance the user experience.
If they'd:
I actually saw Wiz Khalifa
Wiz Khalifa#39;s #39;Roll Up#39; Video
I think thats the whole thing this boils down to. Apple doesn't track you, your phone does (course, so does everything else), but Apple enables this by default because they see apps being able to utilize Location Services as a feature that'll enhance the user experience.
If they'd:
IscariotJ
Mar 26, 09:21 AM
OS X is still based on UNIX, dating back to '69.
Part of what makes OSX great......
Part of what makes OSX great......
MacRumors
Mar 25, 10:25 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/25/apple-already-nearing-golden-master-candidate-versions-of-mac-os-x-lion/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/03/25/232441-lion_mission_control.jpg
![wiz khalifa roll up pics. Wiz Khalifa – Roll Up [AUDIO]](http://glendushis.com/wp-content/uploads/mvbthumbs/img_364_wiz-khalifa-roll-up-audio.jpg "Wiz Khalifa – Roll Up [AUDIO]")
Wiz Khalifa – Roll Up [AUDIO]
song Roll Up Wiz Khalifa
01 - Wiz Khalifa-Roll Up
Wiz+khalifa+roll+up+video+
Check out the Wiz Khalifa Roll
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/03/25/232441-lion_mission_control.jpg
jonnysods
Apr 6, 10:44 AM
Sign me up for this please!!!
Aeolius
Aug 5, 04:10 PM
... The Mac Pro will have Front Row, and how will you control it by remote if you're meant to keep it under your desk?
Keep your Mac UNDER your desk?!?! Blasphemy!! :D
Keep your Mac UNDER your desk?!?! Blasphemy!! :D
goobot
Apr 25, 01:42 PM
I dont understand how anyone would get the info from your phone.
Apple Corps
Sep 19, 09:10 AM
Im still on for today, 4 hours and counting.
0710 PDT - no updates yet - keep counting :-(
0710 PDT - no updates yet - keep counting :-(
PeterQVenkman
Apr 27, 09:06 AM
Because they hoped people will grow up and educate themselfs. That never happened obviously.
Obviously. ;)
Obviously. ;)
Scottsdale
Apr 6, 11:38 AM
clock speed is not everything... a 1.4ghz sb processor will kill anything you are doing with a 2.4ghz c2d. There are many other factors in a processor than just clock speed so i wouldn't be worried. There is no doubt that the sb will be a much faster processor than the ancient c2d.
Also, I would say 50% less graphics is a bit of a stretch. Haven't personally ran any benchmarks but was reading a thread the other day and in the benchmarks and graphics they were showing that the 320m averages about 5-10 extra fps over the 3000.
here is a thread you can look at and compare for yourself.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1103257
Sure the integrated graphics are going to be slightly worse, but at least you will have a nice new processor. Can't always have your cake and eat it too, especially in an ultraportable.
When the mba was refreshed everyone was complaining about the outdated processor, now rumors of a processor upgrade and people bitch about the integrated graphics. Guess you can't please everyone but jesus, sometimes it just seems like people find anything they can to complain about.
Here's a simple solution for all of you, if you want the "slightly" better graphics go buy a macbook air right now, it's not like apple has stopped selling them. If you'd rather have a sandy bridge processor, wait it out. Seems simple but i guess that's just me?!?!?!:eek:
Sure clock speed isn't everything. But you better go read up some more on Tue Intel HD3000 IGP. You're using facts from the STD voltage SB IGP and applying them to the ULV SB IGP. Go read about the graphics on the Samsung Series 9 laptops. The 13" model uses this very chip cited. It shows greater than a 50% drop in graphics performance from the 320m to ULV IGP used in SB.
This has been the problem all along with everyone. They're attributing facts that are actually fallacies to this Intel IGP.
Also, I would say 50% less graphics is a bit of a stretch. Haven't personally ran any benchmarks but was reading a thread the other day and in the benchmarks and graphics they were showing that the 320m averages about 5-10 extra fps over the 3000.
here is a thread you can look at and compare for yourself.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1103257
Sure the integrated graphics are going to be slightly worse, but at least you will have a nice new processor. Can't always have your cake and eat it too, especially in an ultraportable.
When the mba was refreshed everyone was complaining about the outdated processor, now rumors of a processor upgrade and people bitch about the integrated graphics. Guess you can't please everyone but jesus, sometimes it just seems like people find anything they can to complain about.
Here's a simple solution for all of you, if you want the "slightly" better graphics go buy a macbook air right now, it's not like apple has stopped selling them. If you'd rather have a sandy bridge processor, wait it out. Seems simple but i guess that's just me?!?!?!:eek:
Sure clock speed isn't everything. But you better go read up some more on Tue Intel HD3000 IGP. You're using facts from the STD voltage SB IGP and applying them to the ULV SB IGP. Go read about the graphics on the Samsung Series 9 laptops. The 13" model uses this very chip cited. It shows greater than a 50% drop in graphics performance from the 320m to ULV IGP used in SB.
This has been the problem all along with everyone. They're attributing facts that are actually fallacies to this Intel IGP.
shamino
Jul 20, 09:58 AM
No I think you are confused. :) I meant "Is having more cores, lets say 8, more efficient than one big core equal in processing power to the 8 cores?"
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.
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.
Nym
Nov 29, 11:28 AM
I don't listen to anything that comes from that Universal Artists list shown above :)
So Universal Music Group must have received something in the region of $112 so far from Zune sales.
AHAHAHAHAHA
You my friend, sound like a socialist...
More like a Capitalist, he thinks they should get money, profit logic.
Universal is being greedy, they are entitled to 1$ per iPod the same way as I am, because after all, I'm advertising for Apple when I'm holding it in my hand right? It's just stupid beyond everything I've heard! And the artists will be the last ones to get even a glimpe of the money that M$ is gonna pay Universal (7$ ??).
If by any chance Apple would give in to Universal, every crap Record Label would start requiring the same fee and one day we'll have "the new iPod Nano, starting at 500$" :)
iPoop on Record Labels :D
So Universal Music Group must have received something in the region of $112 so far from Zune sales.
AHAHAHAHAHA
You my friend, sound like a socialist...
More like a Capitalist, he thinks they should get money, profit logic.
Universal is being greedy, they are entitled to 1$ per iPod the same way as I am, because after all, I'm advertising for Apple when I'm holding it in my hand right? It's just stupid beyond everything I've heard! And the artists will be the last ones to get even a glimpe of the money that M$ is gonna pay Universal (7$ ??).
If by any chance Apple would give in to Universal, every crap Record Label would start requiring the same fee and one day we'll have "the new iPod Nano, starting at 500$" :)
iPoop on Record Labels :D
cmaier
Apr 19, 10:39 PM
I totally forgot about that! What a joke. Apple has become the king of hypocrites. And they copied the Apple logo from the Beatle's Apple Records.
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Apple-Woolworths-logo-lawsuit,8784.html
http://gizmodo.com/#!5374027/deja-vu-apple-sues-someone-because-their-logo-looks-like-fruit
http://www.theage.com.au/business/apple-bites-over-woolworths-logo-20091005-ghzr.html
Even if that were true, so what? Apple Records was not a competitor of Apple Computer. Trademark law allows multiple companies to have the same trademark so long as they don't sell the same type of products in the same location. This is why you can have a 100 companies like "AAA Locksmith, AAA Laundry," etc. Or you can have "Hollywood Video" in Michigan being totally different than "Hollywood Video" everywhere else [interesting story that. I may have the state wrong. Federal registration grants national scope, but pre-existing competition is a problem]
Only truly "famous" marks (e.g. Coke, McDonalds, etc.) which can be "diluted" by use with other types of products are protected against this sort of thing.
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Apple-Woolworths-logo-lawsuit,8784.html
http://gizmodo.com/#!5374027/deja-vu-apple-sues-someone-because-their-logo-looks-like-fruit
http://www.theage.com.au/business/apple-bites-over-woolworths-logo-20091005-ghzr.html
Even if that were true, so what? Apple Records was not a competitor of Apple Computer. Trademark law allows multiple companies to have the same trademark so long as they don't sell the same type of products in the same location. This is why you can have a 100 companies like "AAA Locksmith, AAA Laundry," etc. Or you can have "Hollywood Video" in Michigan being totally different than "Hollywood Video" everywhere else [interesting story that. I may have the state wrong. Federal registration grants national scope, but pre-existing competition is a problem]
Only truly "famous" marks (e.g. Coke, McDonalds, etc.) which can be "diluted" by use with other types of products are protected against this sort of thing.
mc68k
Dec 4, 12:38 PM
I think you may have saw the Ferrari 458....yep im pretty sure thats what i saw! pretty cool this game
my PSN name is psychofetus
my PSN name is psychofetus
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario