QCassidy352
Jul 20, 03:53 PM
I hate to burst everyone's bubble, but Kentsfield will not be appearing in any of the Pro machines for some time.
Apple will be using them exclusively in the Xserves, at for the most part of 2007. This will finally give Apple another way to distinguish their server line from their pro line.
What? Apple*differentiates the XServes by having them 1U thick and rackmountable. One buys a rackmount server not because it's faster but because it's smaller and fits in a rack.
yeah, what he said. Apple does not have to distinguish powermacs from servers with processor speeds. People (businesses) who need servers are not going to buy powermacs to do the job even if they are a little bit faster or cheaper; they are going to buy real rack-mounted servers.
Apple will be using them exclusively in the Xserves, at for the most part of 2007. This will finally give Apple another way to distinguish their server line from their pro line.
What? Apple*differentiates the XServes by having them 1U thick and rackmountable. One buys a rackmount server not because it's faster but because it's smaller and fits in a rack.
yeah, what he said. Apple does not have to distinguish powermacs from servers with processor speeds. People (businesses) who need servers are not going to buy powermacs to do the job even if they are a little bit faster or cheaper; they are going to buy real rack-mounted servers.
Alx9876
Apr 6, 01:27 PM
What a joke of a tablet. Nothing but a piece of crap.
Multimedia
Aug 19, 07:18 AM
Darn it ... I just received my crossgrade upgrade yesterday eventhough I only own powerbook and am waiting for merom based laptop. While on the topic of fcp, can I install on my powerbook for now and in install on later on my future intel-laptop? (reading the legal eula it seems install is only allowed for one laptop and desktop... I guess I will have to uninstall first on powerbook .....) I am just not sure if apple will block my serial number or something ...No they won't block your serial number. It's the honor system. Yes you can put it on what you have now and what you get later.
�algiris
Mar 31, 03:27 PM
Android > iOS.
I was blind, but now i see. Oh wait ...
I was blind, but now i see. Oh wait ...
Snowy_River
Jul 30, 02:08 AM
It looks pretty good! The extra room would allow for the 3.5" HDD and a dedicated GPU--making it a "true" media center.
Not to nitpick, but maybe it would only have to be 1.5x wider rather than 2x wide. Either way, I think it's pretty cool. Thanks! ;)
I think that the bigger issue with Dan=='s design (full credit and kudos for the idea!) is that the Mac Mini is so small that it only uses laptop components. If you want to have a full-size optical drive or a full-size hard drive, you need to use a larger form factor. This is part of the reason for the size of my design.
Here's a comparison in sizes (I've also changed the floor because my wife thought that the reflection was confusing...)
http://www.ghwphoto.com/3MacsFrontSm.png
http://www.ghwphoto.com/3MacsBackSm.png
Cheers!
Not to nitpick, but maybe it would only have to be 1.5x wider rather than 2x wide. Either way, I think it's pretty cool. Thanks! ;)
I think that the bigger issue with Dan=='s design (full credit and kudos for the idea!) is that the Mac Mini is so small that it only uses laptop components. If you want to have a full-size optical drive or a full-size hard drive, you need to use a larger form factor. This is part of the reason for the size of my design.
Here's a comparison in sizes (I've also changed the floor because my wife thought that the reflection was confusing...)
http://www.ghwphoto.com/3MacsFrontSm.png
http://www.ghwphoto.com/3MacsBackSm.png
Cheers!
HecubusPro
Aug 26, 06:05 PM
I'm not sure if this is old news, but I only had heard last week that the UK Dell site was listing (not selling) Core 2 Duo systems. When I heard about that, I checked the US site, but no Core 2 Duo computers were yet advertised there. Well, I checked again today, and Dell is starting to sell their Core 2 Duo desktops. I didn't see anything about estimated ship time.
It doesn't look like their notebooks are selling the new chips yet.
http://www.dell.com/content/products/results.aspx/desktops?c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&~ck=anav&a=23~0~98591&navla=23~0~98591
It doesn't look like their notebooks are selling the new chips yet.
http://www.dell.com/content/products/results.aspx/desktops?c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&~ck=anav&a=23~0~98591&navla=23~0~98591
epitaphic
Aug 18, 09:06 PM
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.
Obviously, inherently the iMac design is inferior to the Mac Pro/Powermac. 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.
Here's some data regarding the Mac Pro's FSB:
the Mac Pro (...) actually takes longer to access main memory than the Core Duo processor in the MacBook Pro. This is much worse than it sounds once you take into account the fact that the MacBook Pro features a 667MHz FSB compared to the 1333MHz FSB (per chip) used in the Mac Pro.
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?
It's not Apple's fault, but FB-DIMMs absolutely kill memory latency; even running in quad channel mode, the FB-DIMM equipped Mac Pro takes 45% more time to access memory than our DDR2 equipped test bed at the same memory frequency.
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.
Memory issues aside, Woodcrests are faster than Conroes, 2.4% on average (source here (http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2795&p=6))
Obviously, inherently the iMac design is inferior to the Mac Pro/Powermac. 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.
Here's some data regarding the Mac Pro's FSB:
the Mac Pro (...) actually takes longer to access main memory than the Core Duo processor in the MacBook Pro. This is much worse than it sounds once you take into account the fact that the MacBook Pro features a 667MHz FSB compared to the 1333MHz FSB (per chip) used in the Mac Pro.
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?
It's not Apple's fault, but FB-DIMMs absolutely kill memory latency; even running in quad channel mode, the FB-DIMM equipped Mac Pro takes 45% more time to access memory than our DDR2 equipped test bed at the same memory frequency.
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.
Memory issues aside, Woodcrests are faster than Conroes, 2.4% on average (source here (http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2795&p=6))
shamino
Jul 21, 10:07 AM
With all these new technologies with 4, 8 and eventually 24-core capacities (some time in the not too distant future) all running at 64-bit, we musn't forget that software also has tobe developed for these machienes in order to get the most out of the hardware. At the moment we aren't even maximising core-duo, let alone a quad core and all the rest!!!!
It really depends on your application.
On the desktop, if you're a typical user that's just interested in web surfing, playing music files, organizing your photo collection, etc., more than two cores will probably not be too useful. For these kinds of users, even two cores may be overkill, but two are useful for keeping a responsive UI when an application starts hogging all the CPU time.
If you start using higher-power applications (like video work - iMovie/iDVD, for instance) then more cores will speed up that kind of work (assuming the app is properly multithreaded, of course.) 4-core systems will definitely benefit this kind of user.
With current applications, however, I don't think more than 4 cores will be useful. The kind of work that will make 8 cores useful is the kinds that requires expensive professional software - which most people don't use.
If you get away from the desktop and look to the server market, however, the picture changes. A web server may only be running one copy of Apache, but it may create a thread for every simultaneous connection. If you have 8 cores, then you can handle 8 times as many connections as a 1-core system can (assuming sufficient memory and I/O bandwidth, of course.) Ditto for database, transaction, and all kinds of other servers. More cores means more simultaneous connections without performance degradation.
Cluster computing has similar benefits. With 8 cores in each processor, it is almost as good as having 8 times as many computers in the cluster, and a lot less expensive. This concept will scale up as the number of cores increases, assuming motherbaords can be designed with enough memory and FSB bandwidth to keep them all busy.
I think we might see a single quad-core chip in consumer systems, like the iMac. I think it is likely that we'll see them in Pro systems, like the Mac Pro (including a high-end model with two quad-core chips.)
I think processors with more than 4 cores will never be seen outside of servers - Xserves and maybe some configurations of Mac Pro. Mostly because that's where there is a need for this kind of power.
It really depends on your application.
On the desktop, if you're a typical user that's just interested in web surfing, playing music files, organizing your photo collection, etc., more than two cores will probably not be too useful. For these kinds of users, even two cores may be overkill, but two are useful for keeping a responsive UI when an application starts hogging all the CPU time.
If you start using higher-power applications (like video work - iMovie/iDVD, for instance) then more cores will speed up that kind of work (assuming the app is properly multithreaded, of course.) 4-core systems will definitely benefit this kind of user.
With current applications, however, I don't think more than 4 cores will be useful. The kind of work that will make 8 cores useful is the kinds that requires expensive professional software - which most people don't use.
If you get away from the desktop and look to the server market, however, the picture changes. A web server may only be running one copy of Apache, but it may create a thread for every simultaneous connection. If you have 8 cores, then you can handle 8 times as many connections as a 1-core system can (assuming sufficient memory and I/O bandwidth, of course.) Ditto for database, transaction, and all kinds of other servers. More cores means more simultaneous connections without performance degradation.
Cluster computing has similar benefits. With 8 cores in each processor, it is almost as good as having 8 times as many computers in the cluster, and a lot less expensive. This concept will scale up as the number of cores increases, assuming motherbaords can be designed with enough memory and FSB bandwidth to keep them all busy.
I think we might see a single quad-core chip in consumer systems, like the iMac. I think it is likely that we'll see them in Pro systems, like the Mac Pro (including a high-end model with two quad-core chips.)
I think processors with more than 4 cores will never be seen outside of servers - Xserves and maybe some configurations of Mac Pro. Mostly because that's where there is a need for this kind of power.
devman
Aug 6, 02:00 PM
With the iSight and IR sensor rumored to be integrated into the new line of Cinema Displays, i guess apple's gonna adopt HDMI as the IO interface, making Apple one of the first corps to do so. Plus with a HDMI enabled Mac Pro and Leopard fully support it. Why? HDMI is just like ADC, plus its an industry standard port. U need only one cable to have all the communications (FW+USB+Sound+...) going, without having to clutter yr desktop with multiple cables. I see it coming!
I think they'll go UDI instead of HDMI (and save fees). The really interesting question here though is HDCP and what means for all existing hardware including cinema displays...
I think they'll go UDI instead of HDMI (and save fees). The really interesting question here though is HDCP and what means for all existing hardware including cinema displays...
vivithemage
Apr 27, 08:40 AM
They have some good wordsmiths :D
reden
Apr 6, 03:07 PM
Xoom-1.6Lbs vs iPad 2-1.3Lbs
dwight howard dunks on kobe
dwight howard dunking
Dwight Howard and
jumps over Dwight Howard
Dwight Howard dunking no57745
Well at least these screen
dwight howard dunks on.
Nate Robinson amp; Dwight Howard
princealfie
Nov 29, 09:28 AM
Same here, paying a levy on iPod's is like paying one on Hard drives as many of them contain copyrighted material, except they could never do that as the business world would go insane if they had to pay a levy to the music industry.
Anyone interested in creating an Universal blacklist of albums then?
Anyone interested in creating an Universal blacklist of albums then?
gwangung
Apr 25, 03:07 PM
Location services is not the same as storing every place you've ever been.
Why does the db never get cleared?
If location info is required for an app, why would I want to use info from possibly over a year ago that may no longer be accurate?
I won't put on a tinfoil hat just yet. For now I'll just chalk this issue up to sloppy programming. ;)
Apple still fails to answer the question of "why?"
Why do they need it if it is not used?
I know why a web browser has a cache. At least the web browser is smart enough to clean that up after a while.
While I would also like to know why, I'm not sure this is a big deal as it seems to me that the remedy to going to be very simple: a) encryption is on by default, and/or b) flushing the database after, say, six months.
Why does the db never get cleared?
If location info is required for an app, why would I want to use info from possibly over a year ago that may no longer be accurate?
I won't put on a tinfoil hat just yet. For now I'll just chalk this issue up to sloppy programming. ;)
Apple still fails to answer the question of "why?"
Why do they need it if it is not used?
I know why a web browser has a cache. At least the web browser is smart enough to clean that up after a while.
While I would also like to know why, I'm not sure this is a big deal as it seems to me that the remedy to going to be very simple: a) encryption is on by default, and/or b) flushing the database after, say, six months.
starflyer
Nov 29, 10:40 AM
most of the new stuff out sucks.
I agree. I am SICK AND TIRED of the music industry blaming lack of sales on piracy! Piracy is actually down from what it was a couple years ago but they still claim profits are worse now than ever.
Maybe if they didnt put out the same cookie-cutter bands year after year, album after album, put out albums with 9 good tracks instead on 1 good one with 15 filler pieces of crap sales might improve!
my $0.02
I agree. I am SICK AND TIRED of the music industry blaming lack of sales on piracy! Piracy is actually down from what it was a couple years ago but they still claim profits are worse now than ever.
Maybe if they didnt put out the same cookie-cutter bands year after year, album after album, put out albums with 9 good tracks instead on 1 good one with 15 filler pieces of crap sales might improve!
my $0.02
NickPill
Aug 7, 11:56 PM
It's not yet available to ADC Select/Premier members that didn't go to todays keynote.
I'd kinda like to know myself since I couldn't attend.
Thanks for the info. But I can�t believe Apple will not offer 10.5 for downloading. It sounded like that every ADC Select and Premier member would get a copy immediately... Too bad I couldn�t make it this year to the WWDC.
I'd kinda like to know myself since I couldn't attend.
Thanks for the info. But I can�t believe Apple will not offer 10.5 for downloading. It sounded like that every ADC Select and Premier member would get a copy immediately... Too bad I couldn�t make it this year to the WWDC.
mdriftmeyer
Aug 26, 12:37 PM
California, it's replies like this that pisses switchers off, even seasones mac users get upset with these replies. What the hell is Rev A?. What idiot argument is this?. That's it ok for apple to make a ****ed-up product cause it's the first version?. What?.. apple just started making computers that they don't know how to make quality products until they already made the first version?. Apple should be horrified at your suggestion. Imagine if no one bought Rev A (whatever the **** that means) machines from Apple. APPLE WOULD GO BROKE!!. There's always Rev A machines when it comes to computers dude. The next mac pro upgrade will use a new processor, faster, new video, more ram, newer harddrive and becomes rev A cause THEY ARE THE FIRST APPLE PRODUCTS TO USE THE NEW UPGRADED PROCESSOR, NEW HARDDIVE, ETC. Really, stop with this nonsense. You are like the 10th idiotic apple fan I have read using this dumb argument.
Let's make it clear. The first revision of any highly integrated system is produced with an acceptable failure rate. With results coming in, failures recorded and internal testing continuous between the life of the first and second revision you will see a drop in failures in the next revision.
Every item that is in the next revision will have been tested, more flaws removed, etc. No piece of hardware is released with zero defects. [human interference aside such as dropping the product, overheating it, intentionally forcing failure]
If for every 1000 systems shipped approximately 20 fail, after a minimum predicted total hours, this 2% attrition rate is highly desirable. If you can't accept it you can stop using technology, now.
For every ten people bitching on this board about failures there is over 1,000 that don't.
Let's make it clear. The first revision of any highly integrated system is produced with an acceptable failure rate. With results coming in, failures recorded and internal testing continuous between the life of the first and second revision you will see a drop in failures in the next revision.
Every item that is in the next revision will have been tested, more flaws removed, etc. No piece of hardware is released with zero defects. [human interference aside such as dropping the product, overheating it, intentionally forcing failure]
If for every 1000 systems shipped approximately 20 fail, after a minimum predicted total hours, this 2% attrition rate is highly desirable. If you can't accept it you can stop using technology, now.
For every ten people bitching on this board about failures there is over 1,000 that don't.
DeathChill
Apr 19, 08:06 PM
Me, Urg, first caveman to make rock round! Michelin and Firestone steal idea!
I'm not a lawyer but I play one on the Internet. You have a bulletproof case; let's sue.
I'm not a lawyer but I play one on the Internet. You have a bulletproof case; let's sue.
parapup
Apr 11, 11:46 AM
Just picked up a Atrix 4G and on my way checked out the iPhone 4 - it looks decidedly antique and bland in front of the competition - Apple waiting until September would mean they rely awful lot on people's stupidity to keep buying it for 8 more months!
That ain't gonna happen - we will see a dual core iPhone 5 by June shipping by July or something (followed by shortages and long waits.)!
That ain't gonna happen - we will see a dual core iPhone 5 by June shipping by July or something (followed by shortages and long waits.)!
RedTomato
Sep 13, 11:04 AM
Quoting myself, bad boy,
Arrays of cheap RAM on a PCIe card?
http://www.superssd.com/products/tera-ramsan/indexb.htm
That's one answer. 1 TB of DDR on a (rather big) card. Takes 2500 watts to power, but gives you 32GB/sec continous bandwidth.
Would that be enough to feed an 8-core Mac Pro? (4GB/sec per core, running through the entire 1TB in 32 seconds.... hmmm)
Wonder when products like that will filter down?
There's a rather sad Gigabye Ramdisk card at
http://www.gigabyte.com.tw/Products/Storage/Products_Overview.aspx?ProductID=2180&ProductName=GC-RAMDISK
Costs only £100 but has a max capacity of 4GB. You'd be better off spending the money on more system RAM.
Arrays of cheap RAM on a PCIe card?
http://www.superssd.com/products/tera-ramsan/indexb.htm
That's one answer. 1 TB of DDR on a (rather big) card. Takes 2500 watts to power, but gives you 32GB/sec continous bandwidth.
Would that be enough to feed an 8-core Mac Pro? (4GB/sec per core, running through the entire 1TB in 32 seconds.... hmmm)
Wonder when products like that will filter down?
There's a rather sad Gigabye Ramdisk card at
http://www.gigabyte.com.tw/Products/Storage/Products_Overview.aspx?ProductID=2180&ProductName=GC-RAMDISK
Costs only £100 but has a max capacity of 4GB. You'd be better off spending the money on more system RAM.
flopticalcube
Apr 27, 10:37 AM
I believe the 'long form' is rearranging the deck chairs. :)
At least they made it up on deck.
At least they made it up on deck.
morespce54
Aug 11, 12:18 PM
Using TimeMachine, Steve is going to release it two years ago.
LOL !!!!!!! Stop it !!!!! :D
LOL !!!!!!! Stop it !!!!! :D
ciTiger
Apr 11, 07:53 AM
I hope there are big improvements...
Mad Mac Maniac
Apr 7, 10:24 PM
Please tell him.
me too! I wanna learn!
How does withholding stock from the public aid a company? I can imagine holding them till everything is registered in their system and accounted for. But turning people away when they actually do have stock doesn't sound like a good business practice to me
me too! I wanna learn!
How does withholding stock from the public aid a company? I can imagine holding them till everything is registered in their system and accounted for. But turning people away when they actually do have stock doesn't sound like a good business practice to me
rovex
Mar 22, 12:49 PM
Blackberry playbook = The IPad 2 killer - you heard it here first.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
