Peterkro
Mar 23, 01:53 PM
Anti-Daffy sites attacked including:
http://feb17.info/
Back up now.:mad:
http://feb17.info/
Back up now.:mad:
LarryC
Mar 24, 05:22 PM
Mac Pro's have big power supplies but thats mainly for the CPU and Ram, adding a 6970 would be pushing its limits, especially for gaming.
Couldn't they simply upgrade that as well? I can't imagine why they couldn't. I mean we are talking future Mac Pros.
Couldn't they simply upgrade that as well? I can't imagine why they couldn't. I mean we are talking future Mac Pros.
kadajawi
Sep 6, 11:21 AM
Now that the Minis are Core Duo I like it more. Even though it's still $599 ($579 Edu) for the low end, it is at least not a solo. The Mini is still a good computer for a low end price range, even if it isn't the very newest processor available. I would definitely recommend a Mini, but since the iMac is so close in the Edu department, it is a little tough for the 1.83 clockspeed.
I don't think the iMac is so close. The low end iMac doesn't has a superdrive, no Front Row remote... it does have more than twice the HD and a slightly faster CPU, but other than that it seems pretty identical to the low end Mac Mini. That means $400 gets me a not so big TFT screen (far less than $200... although the quality may be better on the iMac... but you would get a bigger one for less than $200...), a bit more and faster storage space (external HD? How much is that? $100 for a small one (still bigger than the iMacs 160 GB, if you take the built in space. And you can make use of Time Machine)), and a slightly faster CPU (not a big deal to me) + you get Front Row.
If you don't mind you can get an external superdrive. A DVD writer is 30 � here, dunno about the case. Might be faster too. And you may upgrade the drive to Blue Ray or HD-DVD, later.
I don't think the iMac is so close. The low end iMac doesn't has a superdrive, no Front Row remote... it does have more than twice the HD and a slightly faster CPU, but other than that it seems pretty identical to the low end Mac Mini. That means $400 gets me a not so big TFT screen (far less than $200... although the quality may be better on the iMac... but you would get a bigger one for less than $200...), a bit more and faster storage space (external HD? How much is that? $100 for a small one (still bigger than the iMacs 160 GB, if you take the built in space. And you can make use of Time Machine)), and a slightly faster CPU (not a big deal to me) + you get Front Row.
If you don't mind you can get an external superdrive. A DVD writer is 30 � here, dunno about the case. Might be faster too. And you may upgrade the drive to Blue Ray or HD-DVD, later.
Hellhammer
Apr 21, 03:50 PM
I'd welcome HellHammer's thoughts on this as he generally has a well informed perspective on these things.
I have made my predictions and I still stand behind them. I don't really follow this thread though so if someone has me a question, you may be better off PMing me.
1199$ 21.5" iMac
Intel Core i3-2100 (3.1GHz)
AMD 6490M with 256MB GDDR5
500GB HD
2x2GB RAM; option for 4x2GB
1499$ 21.5" iMac
Intel Core i5-2400S (2.5/3.3GHz); option for Core i5-2500S (2.7/3.7GHz)
AMD 6750M with 512MB GDDR5
1TB HD; option for 2TB
2x2GB RAM: option for 4x2GB
1699$ 27" iMac
Intel Core i5-2400 (3.1/3.4GHz)
AMD 6750M with 512MB GDDR5; option for AMD 6950M with 1024MB GDDR5
1TB HD; option for 2TB
2x2GB RAM; options for 4x2GB, 2x4GB and 4x4GB
1999$ 27" iMac
Intel Core i7-2600 (3.4/3.8GHz)
AMD 6950M with 1024MB GDDR5
1TB HD; option for 2TB
2x4GB RAM; option for 4x4GB
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=11688279&postcount=26
I'm sure it's been done to death, but I spent some time actually thinking about realistic-ish speculations of what the new line could look like. I think they're going to get rid of one SKU ( the step up 27" without the quad i7), because it's kind of redundant, and for the $100 price difference, I can't imagine anyone NOT spending the extra modey to get the quad core). The only spec that is more of a wishful thinking piece is the inclusion of the HD6800M 1GB card in the 27" quad i7. THAT would be a beast!
Common Upgrades
1. Thunderbolt port
2. HDMI out
3. Sandybridge
Now, here's the model breakdown:
21.5" (1920x1080) display
3.2 GHz i3 processor
4 GB RAM
500 GB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 4870 (256MB)
HDMI out
$1199.99
21.5" (1920x1080) display
3.5 GHz i3 processor
8 GB RAM
1 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 4870 (256MB)
HDMI out
$1499.99
27" (2560x1440) display
2.8 GHz i5 processor
4 GB RAM
1 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 5870 (512MB)
HDMI out
$1699.99
27" (2560x1440) display
3.2 GHz quad i7 processor
8 GB RAM
2 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 6970 (1 GB)
HDMI out
$1999.99
ATI 4870M has TDP of 65W, there is no way it is going to fit in 21.5". Also, it makes absolutely no sense to use three different generations as that, if something, would confuse consumers a big time. The only possibility I see is that the low-end gets ATI 5670 (aka 5730M) like Apple did in previous update. Other models will very likely feature AMD 6000M-series graphics.
I also doubt that Apple will use i3 in other than the low-end iMac. All MBPs have i5 or better, even the 1199$ one. Using i3 in 1499$ iMac sounds stupid because in the end, the consumer thinks that i5 is better because 5 is greater than 3, even though that doesn't really mean that when comparing desktop and mobile CPUs. Moreover, there is no 3.5GHz i3 either.
HDMI doesn't sound too likely, seeing that only Mac Mini has it. Thunderbolt or mDP can provide the same functionality and much more.
I have made my predictions and I still stand behind them. I don't really follow this thread though so if someone has me a question, you may be better off PMing me.
1199$ 21.5" iMac
Intel Core i3-2100 (3.1GHz)
AMD 6490M with 256MB GDDR5
500GB HD
2x2GB RAM; option for 4x2GB
1499$ 21.5" iMac
Intel Core i5-2400S (2.5/3.3GHz); option for Core i5-2500S (2.7/3.7GHz)
AMD 6750M with 512MB GDDR5
1TB HD; option for 2TB
2x2GB RAM: option for 4x2GB
1699$ 27" iMac
Intel Core i5-2400 (3.1/3.4GHz)
AMD 6750M with 512MB GDDR5; option for AMD 6950M with 1024MB GDDR5
1TB HD; option for 2TB
2x2GB RAM; options for 4x2GB, 2x4GB and 4x4GB
1999$ 27" iMac
Intel Core i7-2600 (3.4/3.8GHz)
AMD 6950M with 1024MB GDDR5
1TB HD; option for 2TB
2x4GB RAM; option for 4x4GB
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=11688279&postcount=26
I'm sure it's been done to death, but I spent some time actually thinking about realistic-ish speculations of what the new line could look like. I think they're going to get rid of one SKU ( the step up 27" without the quad i7), because it's kind of redundant, and for the $100 price difference, I can't imagine anyone NOT spending the extra modey to get the quad core). The only spec that is more of a wishful thinking piece is the inclusion of the HD6800M 1GB card in the 27" quad i7. THAT would be a beast!
Common Upgrades
1. Thunderbolt port
2. HDMI out
3. Sandybridge
Now, here's the model breakdown:
21.5" (1920x1080) display
3.2 GHz i3 processor
4 GB RAM
500 GB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 4870 (256MB)
HDMI out
$1199.99
21.5" (1920x1080) display
3.5 GHz i3 processor
8 GB RAM
1 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 4870 (256MB)
HDMI out
$1499.99
27" (2560x1440) display
2.8 GHz i5 processor
4 GB RAM
1 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 5870 (512MB)
HDMI out
$1699.99
27" (2560x1440) display
3.2 GHz quad i7 processor
8 GB RAM
2 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 6970 (1 GB)
HDMI out
$1999.99
ATI 4870M has TDP of 65W, there is no way it is going to fit in 21.5". Also, it makes absolutely no sense to use three different generations as that, if something, would confuse consumers a big time. The only possibility I see is that the low-end gets ATI 5670 (aka 5730M) like Apple did in previous update. Other models will very likely feature AMD 6000M-series graphics.
I also doubt that Apple will use i3 in other than the low-end iMac. All MBPs have i5 or better, even the 1199$ one. Using i3 in 1499$ iMac sounds stupid because in the end, the consumer thinks that i5 is better because 5 is greater than 3, even though that doesn't really mean that when comparing desktop and mobile CPUs. Moreover, there is no 3.5GHz i3 either.
HDMI doesn't sound too likely, seeing that only Mac Mini has it. Thunderbolt or mDP can provide the same functionality and much more.
Erwin-Br
May 2, 05:28 PM
No, Microsoft have not got it right. There should be no need for a specific tool to uninstall applications. applications should be self-contained and be deletable with the press of a button�
Many applications work this way on Mac, some developers still put related files into various other locations though unfortunately...
Uhm, not every app can be self-contained, and it's even in Apple's documentation that you need to store your plists OUTSIDE of the App container and in the Library folder instead.
And that makes sense, because for example, there are apps that need to save settings. If you store these settings inside the app, the next time your user updates it the settings are overwritten.
I hate it how dragging a Mac App to the trashcan leaves plists and other files scattered around.
Many applications work this way on Mac, some developers still put related files into various other locations though unfortunately...
Uhm, not every app can be self-contained, and it's even in Apple's documentation that you need to store your plists OUTSIDE of the App container and in the Library folder instead.
And that makes sense, because for example, there are apps that need to save settings. If you store these settings inside the app, the next time your user updates it the settings are overwritten.
I hate it how dragging a Mac App to the trashcan leaves plists and other files scattered around.
toddybody
Mar 24, 01:12 PM
next step amd cpus
*Children Screaming in background
Im no snob against AMD GPUS...but their CPU's are nearly 2 generations behind intel. I dont think Bulldozer is going to match the 1155 SB, much less the upcoming 2011 socket chips.
What I want to see is a 27inch iMac with an HD 6970 2GB...Whoa whoa wee wow:eek:
*Children Screaming in background
Im no snob against AMD GPUS...but their CPU's are nearly 2 generations behind intel. I dont think Bulldozer is going to match the 1155 SB, much less the upcoming 2011 socket chips.
What I want to see is a 27inch iMac with an HD 6970 2GB...Whoa whoa wee wow:eek:
gnasher729
Aug 29, 04:47 PM
IF TRUE - Just In Time Invintory Management Makes When Yonah Price Falls The Time To Do It. That would be once Merom is shipping - like NOW.
I'm still not convinced this rumor is true. I've got my fingers crossed these two processors are going to be C2D at 1.66 and 1.83GHz - not Yonah.
Only fair & logical reason it might be true would be due to constrained supply of Merom to begin with so Apple has to use all those for MacBook Pro first, then iMac - excluding a Conroe plan -, MacBook and finally mini when supply of Merom is unconstrained like around November-December. By first doing the speed bumps to the Merom speeds with Yonah, they can deliver an immediate benefit to their mini customers without spreading the limited supply of Meroms all over the lines yet.
So after they have enough Meroms for MBP they can switch the MB to Meroms at the same speeds as now, then switch the mini ALMOST silently once that line is satisfied fully. iMac is a big unknown due to Conroe possability.
More I think about it, that is probably what's happening. Intel probably has the order with Apple designed to reduce the Yonah supply as quickly as they can provde enough Meroms to keep satisfying Apple's every growing appetite for more and more C2 Intel processors at the ever growing assembly lines in Taiwan & China.
I think Apple has to use a Core 2 Duo chip in the iMac immediately following the MacBook Pro, before MacBook and MacMini. So if a Conroe iMac isn't developed quick enough, I would expect iMac using Merom, even if it ships that way for two months only.
I'm still not convinced this rumor is true. I've got my fingers crossed these two processors are going to be C2D at 1.66 and 1.83GHz - not Yonah.
Only fair & logical reason it might be true would be due to constrained supply of Merom to begin with so Apple has to use all those for MacBook Pro first, then iMac - excluding a Conroe plan -, MacBook and finally mini when supply of Merom is unconstrained like around November-December. By first doing the speed bumps to the Merom speeds with Yonah, they can deliver an immediate benefit to their mini customers without spreading the limited supply of Meroms all over the lines yet.
So after they have enough Meroms for MBP they can switch the MB to Meroms at the same speeds as now, then switch the mini ALMOST silently once that line is satisfied fully. iMac is a big unknown due to Conroe possability.
More I think about it, that is probably what's happening. Intel probably has the order with Apple designed to reduce the Yonah supply as quickly as they can provde enough Meroms to keep satisfying Apple's every growing appetite for more and more C2 Intel processors at the ever growing assembly lines in Taiwan & China.
I think Apple has to use a Core 2 Duo chip in the iMac immediately following the MacBook Pro, before MacBook and MacMini. So if a Conroe iMac isn't developed quick enough, I would expect iMac using Merom, even if it ships that way for two months only.
quadgirl
Sep 1, 01:29 PM
Talking about the iMac chin, isn't it time for a new-look iMac? I couldn't imagine a 23" wide chin :eek:
azentropy
Apr 19, 11:13 AM
I'll put in a plug again hoping for a Matte screen option.
Doctor Q
Sep 6, 07:50 PM
Why exactly is fixed pricing so important? isn't that.. well.. a bit anti supply/demand? Anyone have any stats on the percentages that bestbuy, a local music/video store, and apple are making on a normal purchase?You are correct that "market pricing", where the price of a movie is based on what that particular movie might be worth to people, and possibly on the relative cost of bringing it to you, would better follow the principles of supply and demand.
The other side of the story is that Apple wants to keep things as simple as possible, and fixed pricing is very easy for consumers to understand. It changes a tricky buying decision (is this movie worth this price?) to a simpler buying decision (which movies are worth the standard price?). It may not seem that complicated either way, but it makes a difference with skittish first timer buyers. It's like not having to haggle when the price of something isn't negotiable. Less flexibility, but less decisionmaking.
Among the general public, there has been a much larger resistance to these download services than you'd know from reading posts from tech-minded people in forums like these. I think fixed pricing for iTunes music was one of the keys to the success of the iTunes Music Store. Remember that only a small percentage of music buyers buy online, and movies are going to start out the same way.
The other side of the story is that Apple wants to keep things as simple as possible, and fixed pricing is very easy for consumers to understand. It changes a tricky buying decision (is this movie worth this price?) to a simpler buying decision (which movies are worth the standard price?). It may not seem that complicated either way, but it makes a difference with skittish first timer buyers. It's like not having to haggle when the price of something isn't negotiable. Less flexibility, but less decisionmaking.
Among the general public, there has been a much larger resistance to these download services than you'd know from reading posts from tech-minded people in forums like these. I think fixed pricing for iTunes music was one of the keys to the success of the iTunes Music Store. Remember that only a small percentage of music buyers buy online, and movies are going to start out the same way.
7on
Mar 25, 08:52 PM
In addition to that, the education price is $1599 and if you remove the superdrive and 56k modem it's down to $1399.
Crap, thats less than HALF that my 1Ghz TiBook costed, fully loaded of course.
But you can get cheap G4s.
G4 (http://www.powermax.com/cgi-global/generate_css_temp.cgi?p=c-u55002)
Even cheaper if you buy from ebay.
http://www.powermax.com/cgi-global/generate_css_temp.cgi?p=c-u55002
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2795923528&category=14912
Crap, thats less than HALF that my 1Ghz TiBook costed, fully loaded of course.
But you can get cheap G4s.
G4 (http://www.powermax.com/cgi-global/generate_css_temp.cgi?p=c-u55002)
Even cheaper if you buy from ebay.
http://www.powermax.com/cgi-global/generate_css_temp.cgi?p=c-u55002
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2795923528&category=14912
drkstar
Nov 29, 02:54 PM
According to Bob Cringley:
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2006/pulpit_20060922_000979.html
"Now what about that USB port on the back of each iTV box? Giving his tour of the gizmo last week, Jobs rushed right past the USB port. What could that port be for? It's not for a USB hard drive, that's for sure, because the key brain in this system is back in your Mac or PC and its very large hard drive. Nor will Apple (immediately) enable the iTV to act as a digital video recorder, because that might step on TV network toes before Apple is ready to do so. The USB port is clearly intended for an Apple iSight camera, a webcam to go with your HDTV."
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2006/pulpit_20060922_000979.html
"Now what about that USB port on the back of each iTV box? Giving his tour of the gizmo last week, Jobs rushed right past the USB port. What could that port be for? It's not for a USB hard drive, that's for sure, because the key brain in this system is back in your Mac or PC and its very large hard drive. Nor will Apple (immediately) enable the iTV to act as a digital video recorder, because that might step on TV network toes before Apple is ready to do so. The USB port is clearly intended for an Apple iSight camera, a webcam to go with your HDTV."
~Shard~
Nov 23, 06:34 AM
SideNote: The Madonna Concert in HD on NBC tonight is groundbreaking broadcast television. One of the most amazing telecasts I have ever seen-heard.
The fact that it is in HD? I suppose so. The concert itself groundbreaking? Well, hopefully that's not what you meant or else you've obviously never seen a show across the pond... :p ;) :cool:
The fact that it is in HD? I suppose so. The concert itself groundbreaking? Well, hopefully that's not what you meant or else you've obviously never seen a show across the pond... :p ;) :cool:
JRM PowerPod
Aug 7, 04:42 AM
Not too brag or anything :D but it works out great for us in UK. Get in from work 5.30pm / open a beer / macrumors / keynote 6pm / tears of joy / rob bank 9pm / buy mac pro :D
Yeah, but you have to live in the UK. It all works out
Yeah, but you have to live in the UK. It all works out
corywoolf
Sep 6, 03:26 PM
How is it expensive? 99$ a year is $8.25 a month...thats not bad!
Luckily I get .Mac for free, but $99 is very expensive when compared to using flcker, gmail, youtube, etc.
Luckily I get .Mac for free, but $99 is very expensive when compared to using flcker, gmail, youtube, etc.
Chaos123x
Apr 12, 10:02 PM
$299 are you out of your mind?
kntgsp
Sep 14, 10:46 AM
The way CR seems to approach it (and I might have to reread their article that they keep changing and updating and reaffirming and I lost interest a while ago) is as if they approached a computer review like this:
"The aluminum Macbook can survive a 3 foot fall and still function. The aluminum Macbook will not melt on the stove."
"The plastic Toshiba can survive a 2.8 foot fall and still function. The plastic Toshiba will melt on the stove."
They then give excess weight to the latter statements about each laptop despite it not really being a normal use scenario and declare the Toshiba not recommendable. So what's the point? Is "not melting on a stove" an advantage? Sure. Is there a reason you should have a computer on a stove? No.
It seems like it's more fair to stress the importance of the initial normal use results than the secondary observations that have nothing to do with everyday usage and are not representative of what people will be doing with the device.
Of course that kind of reasoning is often met with "you can't tell a user how they should use a device". I agree, you can't. However when you label something not recommendable based essentially entirely on the extra -3dB attenuation (compared to my Galaxy S) and the fact that if you place the device on a flat surface and bridge the antenna with your finger you get the same extra -3dB attenuation, I fail to see the credible argument.
/yes I realize the pinky finger attenuation while laying a phone on a table is not destructive like cooking a laptop is. They are both about as relevant to everyday usage in my opinion.
"The aluminum Macbook can survive a 3 foot fall and still function. The aluminum Macbook will not melt on the stove."
"The plastic Toshiba can survive a 2.8 foot fall and still function. The plastic Toshiba will melt on the stove."
They then give excess weight to the latter statements about each laptop despite it not really being a normal use scenario and declare the Toshiba not recommendable. So what's the point? Is "not melting on a stove" an advantage? Sure. Is there a reason you should have a computer on a stove? No.
It seems like it's more fair to stress the importance of the initial normal use results than the secondary observations that have nothing to do with everyday usage and are not representative of what people will be doing with the device.
Of course that kind of reasoning is often met with "you can't tell a user how they should use a device". I agree, you can't. However when you label something not recommendable based essentially entirely on the extra -3dB attenuation (compared to my Galaxy S) and the fact that if you place the device on a flat surface and bridge the antenna with your finger you get the same extra -3dB attenuation, I fail to see the credible argument.
/yes I realize the pinky finger attenuation while laying a phone on a table is not destructive like cooking a laptop is. They are both about as relevant to everyday usage in my opinion.
Kulman
Mar 22, 05:04 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
Uh, without the iPod Classic, there would be no iPhone, iPod Nano, iPad, or iTouch. Don't knock down what brought you up!
Where's the Zune now??? Dead
Uh, without the iPod Classic, there would be no iPhone, iPod Nano, iPad, or iTouch. Don't knock down what brought you up!
Where's the Zune now??? Dead
MacRumors
Mar 22, 03:40 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/22/steve-jobs-no-plans-to-discontinue-ipod-classic/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/03/22/163626-ipod_classic_2009_all_sides.jpg
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/03/22/163626-ipod_classic_2009_all_sides.jpg
piecewise
Nov 29, 01:48 PM
This is completely useless. An analyst thinks the iTV will have an additional feature? Fantastic. Like what, specifically?
You know, I suspect the next version of the iPod will also feature something different or new. Just a hunch, though. Nothing solid to back that up yet.
Safe bet.
You know, I suspect the next version of the iPod will also feature something different or new. Just a hunch, though. Nothing solid to back that up yet.
Safe bet.
URFloorMatt
Apr 2, 09:05 PM
Much, much better than the recent slate of iPhone ads, which have been terrible. (The "If you don't have an iPhone, well, you don't have an iPhone" ads.)
ejl10
Sep 1, 01:26 PM
Anyone care to speculate on prices?
What's the price difference between the 20" ACD and the 23" one?
What's the price difference between the 20" ACD and the 23" one?
steviem
Mar 26, 02:55 PM
Wow, this is pretty cool.
I think Apple is waiting on the next PlayStation/Xbox to do something better.
I can see them using AppleTV/iPad/iPhone to their advantage, having the same games running on all devices, keeping the same save points, so you can be at work, play some Madden or whatever on your iPhone on a bathroom break, then on the train home, pull out your iPad, continue where you left off, get home and continue your Franchise on the Apple TV.
The HDMI dongle doesn't seem to be quite right yet, but I think this is encouraging for Apple and game developers.
I think Apple is waiting on the next PlayStation/Xbox to do something better.
I can see them using AppleTV/iPad/iPhone to their advantage, having the same games running on all devices, keeping the same save points, so you can be at work, play some Madden or whatever on your iPhone on a bathroom break, then on the train home, pull out your iPad, continue where you left off, get home and continue your Franchise on the Apple TV.
The HDMI dongle doesn't seem to be quite right yet, but I think this is encouraging for Apple and game developers.
milo
Aug 29, 09:15 AM
This is the lowest end machine Apple makes. Let's be realistic. This is a reasonable update for the base model. And it's probably being done in advance of a Core 2 Duo update to the iMac.
Compared to similarly priced PC's, $799 for a yonah duo 1.8 is pretty weak.
To be honest, I'd rather see the cheaper model drop in price (if not both) than a speed bump.
Compared to similarly priced PC's, $799 for a yonah duo 1.8 is pretty weak.
To be honest, I'd rather see the cheaper model drop in price (if not both) than a speed bump.