decimortis
Apr 6, 10:38 AM
I loves me my 11.6 ultimate and it hasn't let me down yet in the power department for my work with CS5, but of course, updated more faster, more shiny MBA's are always welcome. Can't say I'll upgrade but nice to see them progressing.
D.
D.
gibbz
Mar 25, 10:36 PM
What? this seems hard to believe... Already done on development? :confused:
Development is never done.
Development is never done.
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 11, 10:57 AM
Go figure - an American phone with less features than the one sold in the rest of the world.
Doesn't that suggest Paris this year being a very likely time and place for the introduction of the iPhone? I doubt Apple will wait one more year considering the competition (see SE W810i (http://www.sonyericsson.com/spg.jsp?cc=us&lc=en&ver=4000&template=pp1_loader&php=PHP1_10376&zone=pp&lm=pp1&pid=10376) and others)
Doesn't that suggest Paris this year being a very likely time and place for the introduction of the iPhone? I doubt Apple will wait one more year considering the competition (see SE W810i (http://www.sonyericsson.com/spg.jsp?cc=us&lc=en&ver=4000&template=pp1_loader&php=PHP1_10376&zone=pp&lm=pp1&pid=10376) and others)
michaelz
Mar 25, 11:06 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8C148)
In another news: iPad 3 is released in Fall 2011.
Yes, ipad3 will run os x lion! MBA will have a touch screen!!
In another news: iPad 3 is released in Fall 2011.
Yes, ipad3 will run os x lion! MBA will have a touch screen!!
littleman23408
Dec 3, 03:10 PM
Some of them do but not sure do all of them. I've got several nice rides from those series but they are mainly from higher level series.
Cool, Thanks. You must be pretty far?
Cool, Thanks. You must be pretty far?
quigleybc
Aug 11, 11:54 AM
Oh my god....this phone....sigh....this phone...
This is the new G5 Powerbook....so many rumors/front page stories....
it's tiresome...
yes, I want one....but I'm tired of the speculation.
This is the new G5 Powerbook....so many rumors/front page stories....
it's tiresome...
yes, I want one....but I'm tired of the speculation.
yoak
Apr 12, 07:25 AM
I'm on a 2006 Mac Pro 2.66GHz.
I never set up QMaster. It's installed, but I never touched it. Mpeg2 (highest quality double pass) saturates all cores.
EDIT: sending to compressor from the timeline doesn't change. FCP and compressor together use 350% CPU (400% max).
Very interesting, could you check your batch monitor to see if it uses every core to compress?.
I think maybe we are talking past each other and it�s my mistake. For Compressor to use all of the machines CORES you have to do what I described. This speeds up the rendering times as every core work at 80-90%, each core rendering a chunk (1/8) of the file.
I never set up QMaster. It's installed, but I never touched it. Mpeg2 (highest quality double pass) saturates all cores.
EDIT: sending to compressor from the timeline doesn't change. FCP and compressor together use 350% CPU (400% max).
Very interesting, could you check your batch monitor to see if it uses every core to compress?.
I think maybe we are talking past each other and it�s my mistake. For Compressor to use all of the machines CORES you have to do what I described. This speeds up the rendering times as every core work at 80-90%, each core rendering a chunk (1/8) of the file.
Sodner
Apr 8, 06:56 AM
another low for apple, i ordered Mar 19th still waiting ...
fiasco just continues, does not look nice apple.
Why is this Apple's fault? Please tell me.
fiasco just continues, does not look nice apple.
Why is this Apple's fault? Please tell me.
HecubusPro
Aug 26, 04:22 PM
same here! I just hope Sept 5th or sooner:D
I would hope within the first few weeks of September at least. I shipments Apple was supposed to receive from overseas will reportedly hit on the 5th of September. After that, it would seem that all Apple has to do is ship products to the resellers and their online warehouses and begin selling them. I'm thinking the merom MBP's will start shipping to coincide with the Paris Expo next month though.
Still, it's getting close. I went ahead and dropped some cash on my first .mac account/software. I just can't wait to start using it on my new merom MPB 2.33ghz 17".:cool:
I would hope within the first few weeks of September at least. I shipments Apple was supposed to receive from overseas will reportedly hit on the 5th of September. After that, it would seem that all Apple has to do is ship products to the resellers and their online warehouses and begin selling them. I'm thinking the merom MBP's will start shipping to coincide with the Paris Expo next month though.
Still, it's getting close. I went ahead and dropped some cash on my first .mac account/software. I just can't wait to start using it on my new merom MPB 2.33ghz 17".:cool:
TheManOfSilver
Aug 27, 08:57 PM
I think im gonna wait and buy in 2007 with leopard and iLife 07 :rolleyes:
That's my plan (if I can hold out until then) ... as much as I'm dying to get my hands on an iMac right now, having an upgraded iMac and an upgraded OS will be that much better.
That's my plan (if I can hold out until then) ... as much as I'm dying to get my hands on an iMac right now, having an upgraded iMac and an upgraded OS will be that much better.
Pared
Apr 6, 02:01 PM
No need to take shots at the Xoom - it's actually nice little device.
Doesn't have the best polish software-wise... but to act like it is THAT far off from the iPad2 is lunacy.
Doesn't have the best polish software-wise... but to act like it is THAT far off from the iPad2 is lunacy.
Multimedia
Aug 17, 03:51 PM
Some people do things called graphic design and video editing for a living. Sometimes, when you want to make money and put food on the table, you want top of the line equipment.:rolleyes:Yes. I agree totally. If you are making your living with your Mac doing graphics and video work, every minute saved is another minute you can take on another client or meet a perviously impossible deadline. So in that case the extra $850 is made up in a matter of a few weeks or months at worst. Totally understandable when time is money for the Mac professional. :)
Bubba Satori
Mar 26, 12:05 PM
Great news.
Hopefully there will be a big computer oriented media event when it's released
along with new Minis, iMacs, Mac Pros and finally some affordable xMacs. :D
No, I won't put the bong down. :cool:
http://boxothoughts.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/bongcat.jpg
Hopefully there will be a big computer oriented media event when it's released
along with new Minis, iMacs, Mac Pros and finally some affordable xMacs. :D
No, I won't put the bong down. :cool:
http://boxothoughts.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/bongcat.jpg
theBB
Mar 31, 07:13 PM
If you're going to licence your project as open source, then you do actually have to release the source. I know there's often a delay with commercial products. I suppose the tolerance of the open source community depends on the reason and the amount of time the code is held back.
Well, the rules for GPL say you need to release the source code along with the software and you actually have to offer them through the same channel, so that you cannot make it practically impossible for people to get to the source even if it is theoretically available. Of course, GPL is not the only "open source" license. This is Google's playground, so they get to define it any way they wish.
Well, the rules for GPL say you need to release the source code along with the software and you actually have to offer them through the same channel, so that you cannot make it practically impossible for people to get to the source even if it is theoretically available. Of course, GPL is not the only "open source" license. This is Google's playground, so they get to define it any way they wish.
Oh-es-Ten
Apr 5, 05:02 PM
So many things that FCP / FCS can improve upon here - they need the equivalent of Adobe's Mercury Engine, leveraging Grand Central, QTX, and a full Cocoa build for all the FCS apps...
At present we have to re-encode a lot of our footage (7D / Minicam etc), and you don't need to do that in Premiere, it just plays on the timeline - however editing in that is quite frankly an exercise in sheer frustration and strange bugs.
Come on, please be true! The days of pressing CMD+R I would love to see over! Especially when you are rendering an audio effect that actual renders in a microsecond, yet won't play realtime... Sigh.
At present we have to re-encode a lot of our footage (7D / Minicam etc), and you don't need to do that in Premiere, it just plays on the timeline - however editing in that is quite frankly an exercise in sheer frustration and strange bugs.
Come on, please be true! The days of pressing CMD+R I would love to see over! Especially when you are rendering an audio effect that actual renders in a microsecond, yet won't play realtime... Sigh.
AidenShaw
Jul 14, 11:22 PM
top heavy is just idiotic.
Has anyone noticed that three or four disk drives actually weigh a lot more than a power supply?
Especially a modern power supply! (Those Apple IIfx supplies had a lot of iron - but today a 600watt supply is pretty light.)
Get a life (and an IEC 90° cord) and forget whining about power supply top or bottom.
Worrying about "Top heavy" is simply nonsense - I have top PS systems and bottom PS systems, and "top heaviness" has never been an issue - the centre of gravity of my systems is usually determined by the number, capacity, and location of the disks.
Has anyone noticed that three or four disk drives actually weigh a lot more than a power supply?
Especially a modern power supply! (Those Apple IIfx supplies had a lot of iron - but today a 600watt supply is pretty light.)
Get a life (and an IEC 90° cord) and forget whining about power supply top or bottom.
Worrying about "Top heavy" is simply nonsense - I have top PS systems and bottom PS systems, and "top heaviness" has never been an issue - the centre of gravity of my systems is usually determined by the number, capacity, and location of the disks.
starflyer
Nov 29, 11:03 AM
Oh yeah - for anyone who thinks most music these days sucks, you're just looking in the wrong place. Major labels ceased to produce anything of worth quite some time ago. Dig a little deeper and there's a wealth of wonderful music being made right now (and over the last 10 years specifically).
I'll help you dig...
www.sf59.com
www.toothandnailrecords.com
www.themilitiagroup.com
www.velvetbluemusic.com
www.jadetree.com
I'll help you dig...
www.sf59.com
www.toothandnailrecords.com
www.themilitiagroup.com
www.velvetbluemusic.com
www.jadetree.com
JoeG4
Nov 29, 12:56 AM
In other news: universal thinks they're god.
aswitcher
Aug 6, 07:34 AM
MBP owners don't need to worry yet. AnandTech (http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2808&p=1)
"The biggest performance gains are associated with 3D rendering and media encoding tasks. While Core 2 Duo does look nice, as long as you've got a good notebook today you'll probably want to wait until Santa Rosa before upgrading (at the earliest). With Santa Rosa, clock speeds will go up slightly but more importantly we'll get access to a faster FSB. Unfortunately a side-effect of keeping Core 2 Duo fed with a faster FSB is that while performance may go up, battery life may go down. For Apple users this means that early adopters of the new MacBook or MacBook Pro won't be too pressured to upgrade again by the end of this year. Of course Apple has this way of making incremental changes irresistible."
Thats great news. I was wondering if a 6 week old machine was going to be left in the dust by the new chips. Santa Rosa april 2007?
"The biggest performance gains are associated with 3D rendering and media encoding tasks. While Core 2 Duo does look nice, as long as you've got a good notebook today you'll probably want to wait until Santa Rosa before upgrading (at the earliest). With Santa Rosa, clock speeds will go up slightly but more importantly we'll get access to a faster FSB. Unfortunately a side-effect of keeping Core 2 Duo fed with a faster FSB is that while performance may go up, battery life may go down. For Apple users this means that early adopters of the new MacBook or MacBook Pro won't be too pressured to upgrade again by the end of this year. Of course Apple has this way of making incremental changes irresistible."
Thats great news. I was wondering if a 6 week old machine was going to be left in the dust by the new chips. Santa Rosa april 2007?
MrCrowbar
Aug 26, 05:51 PM
Well, I have some problems with my MacBook (LCD backlighting flickers horribly sometimes and from time to time the power goes off without reason, even 1 second after powering the mashine on). So I will bring it to the apple store in New Jersey soon. Did you know you can buy an Apple laptop anywhere in the world and get it repaired anywhere else? I bought it in Europe and can get it fixed here. Neato.
Now I wonder if I should wait one or two weeks just in case they want to give me a new one :)
Now I wonder if I should wait one or two weeks just in case they want to give me a new one :)
Nuck81
Dec 9, 11:24 AM
My biggest complaint about the game is that it's atmosphere and presentation are just absolutely sterile.
With the exception of car models the graphics don't approach what we see in other console racers. NFSL Shift makes it look like a PS2 game when it comes to detail, but GT5 makes a huge comeback and almost breaks dead even since it runs at 60fps. I went back and played Shift the other day and it was so choppy I almost couldn't play it.
The sound is also disappointing. Except for the car engines (to the guy that said they all sound the same, stop putting the same muffler and tranny on every car, it covers up their distinct sound) everything else is canned a tinny. When I go off track I hardly get any indication on sound. Go off track on Shift and you can hear pebbles, gravel, and dirt grinding under your car and banging around on the sides. Shift snarls, roars, rumbles and get's you excited to be out there and racing with other cars. GT5 is like driving miss daisy. The AI follows a single line, there is no off road sound, hardly any rumble on the gamepad, and it doesn't do a lot to put you in the game.
But GT5 makes up for a lot just by how the cars feel when they drive. Every single car is different and you can tell instantly. It drives so well I had to go get a Driving Force GT just to enjoy the drive as much as I can. Also I'll use it for Shift 2, and other racing games I have.
If you want a racing game, there are better ones than GT5. I'd recommend Shift over GT5 to someone who just wants a racing game. But if you want to drive cars, and come as close as you can without actually driving one on a console, there is not a better ride on any system (other than PC) than GT5.
With the exception of car models the graphics don't approach what we see in other console racers. NFSL Shift makes it look like a PS2 game when it comes to detail, but GT5 makes a huge comeback and almost breaks dead even since it runs at 60fps. I went back and played Shift the other day and it was so choppy I almost couldn't play it.
The sound is also disappointing. Except for the car engines (to the guy that said they all sound the same, stop putting the same muffler and tranny on every car, it covers up their distinct sound) everything else is canned a tinny. When I go off track I hardly get any indication on sound. Go off track on Shift and you can hear pebbles, gravel, and dirt grinding under your car and banging around on the sides. Shift snarls, roars, rumbles and get's you excited to be out there and racing with other cars. GT5 is like driving miss daisy. The AI follows a single line, there is no off road sound, hardly any rumble on the gamepad, and it doesn't do a lot to put you in the game.
But GT5 makes up for a lot just by how the cars feel when they drive. Every single car is different and you can tell instantly. It drives so well I had to go get a Driving Force GT just to enjoy the drive as much as I can. Also I'll use it for Shift 2, and other racing games I have.
If you want a racing game, there are better ones than GT5. I'd recommend Shift over GT5 to someone who just wants a racing game. But if you want to drive cars, and come as close as you can without actually driving one on a console, there is not a better ride on any system (other than PC) than GT5.
GoodWatch
Apr 27, 09:51 AM
Good job Apple. Now let's move on to someone else, like freakin' Sony and their Playstation network.
Why?
Why?
kny3twalker
Apr 6, 10:36 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_6 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E200 Safari/6533.18.5)
ULV CPUs (17W) will go to 11.6". The TDP of 320M is not known but 9400M has TDP of 12W so it is quite safe to assume that the TDP is similar to that. That means current 11.6" MBA has TDP of 22W (includes CPU, GPU, chipset) while SB 11.6" MBA would have a TDP of 21W (17W for the CPU and ~4W for the PCH).
13" will go with LV CPUs (25W). Again, currently it has 17W for the CPU and 12W for 320M. That's 29W. 25W CPU and ~4W for PCH gives you the same 29W.
11.6" - Core i5-2537M (option for Core i7-2657M)
13.3" - Core i7-2629M (option for Core i7-2649M)
You should submit this. As the current article had me confused as to the potential configurations, and I am sure I am not alone there as your reply represents.
ULV CPUs (17W) will go to 11.6". The TDP of 320M is not known but 9400M has TDP of 12W so it is quite safe to assume that the TDP is similar to that. That means current 11.6" MBA has TDP of 22W (includes CPU, GPU, chipset) while SB 11.6" MBA would have a TDP of 21W (17W for the CPU and ~4W for the PCH).
13" will go with LV CPUs (25W). Again, currently it has 17W for the CPU and 12W for 320M. That's 29W. 25W CPU and ~4W for PCH gives you the same 29W.
11.6" - Core i5-2537M (option for Core i7-2657M)
13.3" - Core i7-2629M (option for Core i7-2649M)
You should submit this. As the current article had me confused as to the potential configurations, and I am sure I am not alone there as your reply represents.
Multimedia
Jul 21, 12:20 PM
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...
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.I strongly disagree. I could use 16 cores right now for notihng more than simple consumer electronics video compression routines. There will be a Mac Pro with 8 cores this Winter 2007.
You are completely blind to the need for many cores right now for very simple stupid work. All I want to do is run 4 copies of Toast while running 4 copies of Handbrake simultaneously. Each wants 2 cores or more. So you are not thinking of the current need for 16 cores already.
This is not even beginning to discuss how many Final Cut Studio Editors need 16 Cores. Man, I can't believe you wrote that. I think you are overlooking the obvious - the need to run multiple copies of today's applicaitons simultaneously.
So as long as the heat issue can be overcome, I don't see why 8 Cores can't belong inside an iMac by the end of 2008.
I apologize if I read a little hot. But I find the line of thought that 4 or 8 Cores are enough or more than enough to really annoy me. They are not nearly enough for those of us who see the problem of not enough cores EVERY DAY. The rest of you either have no imagination or are only using your Macs for word processing, browsing and email.
I am sincerely frustrated by not having enough cores to do simple stupid work efficiently. Just look at how crippled this G5 Quad is already only running three things. They can't even run full speed due to lack of cores.
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...
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.I strongly disagree. I could use 16 cores right now for notihng more than simple consumer electronics video compression routines. There will be a Mac Pro with 8 cores this Winter 2007.
You are completely blind to the need for many cores right now for very simple stupid work. All I want to do is run 4 copies of Toast while running 4 copies of Handbrake simultaneously. Each wants 2 cores or more. So you are not thinking of the current need for 16 cores already.
This is not even beginning to discuss how many Final Cut Studio Editors need 16 Cores. Man, I can't believe you wrote that. I think you are overlooking the obvious - the need to run multiple copies of today's applicaitons simultaneously.
So as long as the heat issue can be overcome, I don't see why 8 Cores can't belong inside an iMac by the end of 2008.
I apologize if I read a little hot. But I find the line of thought that 4 or 8 Cores are enough or more than enough to really annoy me. They are not nearly enough for those of us who see the problem of not enough cores EVERY DAY. The rest of you either have no imagination or are only using your Macs for word processing, browsing and email.
I am sincerely frustrated by not having enough cores to do simple stupid work efficiently. Just look at how crippled this G5 Quad is already only running three things. They can't even run full speed due to lack of cores.
No comments:
Post a Comment