FlameofAnor
Apr 7, 11:58 PM
Explains why Apple is opening up Toys R' Us as another outlet.
Seems like both Target and Radio Shack should be getting more stock soon. ;)
Seems like both Target and Radio Shack should be getting more stock soon. ;)
weg
Aug 8, 04:23 AM
heh... they give MS so much crap for photocopying, but if anything, this is more or less taking a page out of MS's book with System Restore. Granted, it looks like it will be better, but still, MS had this kind of thing first.
Not trolling, just pointing it out :)
This is in line with their other "innovations":
Spaces? Wow. A blatant Desktop Manager (http://desktopmanager.berlios.de/) rip-off, and Linux supports virtual desktops since 20 years.
Multiuser support for iCal? I'm sure Microsoft will copy that immediately.. oh, wait... Outlook supports that since years.
Time Machine? This feature is overly complicated.. nothing but a fancy undo option. Lots of eye candy.
Not trolling, just pointing it out :)
This is in line with their other "innovations":
Spaces? Wow. A blatant Desktop Manager (http://desktopmanager.berlios.de/) rip-off, and Linux supports virtual desktops since 20 years.
Multiuser support for iCal? I'm sure Microsoft will copy that immediately.. oh, wait... Outlook supports that since years.
Time Machine? This feature is overly complicated.. nothing but a fancy undo option. Lots of eye candy.
fullmanfullninj
Apr 8, 02:14 AM
Did it ever occur to you that perhaps BB take a cut of Apple's share of the profit when they sell an iPad?
Based on what I've seen, BB doesn't take a cut of the profit.
Look at it this way - Apple has to approve a certain retailer to sell their products. Why would they then pay that retailer that they have approved? I admit this isn't a very compelling example.
My point(s) remain that managers are not hoarding iPads to meet their daily budgets and I do not believe BB gets any sort of money from Apple for every sale. Even then, that would not explain the stop-sale. In fact, that would encourage BB to go through their stock...
Based on what I've seen, BB doesn't take a cut of the profit.
Look at it this way - Apple has to approve a certain retailer to sell their products. Why would they then pay that retailer that they have approved? I admit this isn't a very compelling example.
My point(s) remain that managers are not hoarding iPads to meet their daily budgets and I do not believe BB gets any sort of money from Apple for every sale. Even then, that would not explain the stop-sale. In fact, that would encourage BB to go through their stock...
ImNoSuperMan
Aug 26, 01:11 PM
Thank God Apple had shut down Indian Support centre before this happened. Otherwise all the web community would be blaming Indian Call Center for degrading Apple support service even if they were not at fault.
batitombo
Apr 25, 02:20 PM
I'm so over this ****
PeterQVenkman
Apr 27, 09:06 AM
Because they hoped people will grow up and educate themselfs. That never happened obviously.
Obviously. ;)
Obviously. ;)
babyj
Sep 19, 07:07 AM
It amazes me that people can get so worked up about a processor that was only officially released three weeks ago.
It never ends either. As soon as Merom chips are in the MacBook range everyone will just move on to the next thing. When are Apple going to put quad cores in their high end products? When are the Macbooks going to be updated with Santa Rosa? When are we going to get nand cache?
I'm even more amazed that some people seem ready to move computer platforms just to get a speed increase a few weeks earlier. By the time you've finished moving everything over to a Windows laptops the new Macbooks will of been available for a few weeks.
It never ends either. As soon as Merom chips are in the MacBook range everyone will just move on to the next thing. When are Apple going to put quad cores in their high end products? When are the Macbooks going to be updated with Santa Rosa? When are we going to get nand cache?
I'm even more amazed that some people seem ready to move computer platforms just to get a speed increase a few weeks earlier. By the time you've finished moving everything over to a Windows laptops the new Macbooks will of been available for a few weeks.
Kane.Elson
Jul 29, 03:42 AM
Love this news. Just what I was expecting and one of the main reasons to have waited for Core 2 Duo mobile Macs. :)
Ahh the rewards of waiting.
The performance increase and the 64-bit sounded good but this just makes me grin about the fact that I waited. I can never get enough battery life.
Ahh the rewards of waiting.
The performance increase and the 64-bit sounded good but this just makes me grin about the fact that I waited. I can never get enough battery life.
skellener
Apr 8, 01:38 AM
WTF??? I have a ********** credit I've been wanting to use at BB for an iPad2 since before it even came out. They sold out so fast I've been waiting for the restock, and now this? F%*$#!!!!:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:
Hellhammer
Apr 8, 09:01 AM
The trouble is .. I find the TDP numbers for Sandy Bridge very misleading. For example the previous i7 2.66Ghz dual core had a TDP of 35W and the current i7 2.2Ghz quad core has a TDP of 45W. Theoretically, it should only use 10W more when doing CPU intensive task, but according to anandtech who measured the task, the i7 Sandy Bridge Quad core was using almost 40W more when running cinebench.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4205/the-macbook-pro-review-13-and-15-inch-2011-brings-sandy-bridge/14
It just doesn't make any sense. Going by those figures, if the i7 dual core was 35W, the i7 Sandy Bridge quad core would be around 70W.
Not sure how this relates to potential MacBook Air Sandy Bridge processors, but keep in mind.. there must be a reason why Samsung went for the ULV processor in their 13" laptop instead of the LV one.
CPU isn't the only thing that changed. AMD 6750M (~30W) has higher TDP than NVidia GT 330M (~23W). I had to put ~ because their TDPs are not officially stated by AMD or NVidia so it's just based on previous GPUs and their TDPs. The point is that AMD 6750M has higher TDP.
There is also another thing. TDP is not the maximum power draw. Maximum power dissipation is usually 20-30% more than the actual TDP. While MPD is rarely achieved as it requires maximum voltage and temperature, it can (nearly) be achieved with heavy benchmarking applications.
For example, the combined TDP from quad core SB and AMD 6750M is 75W. If we use 20% extra as the MPD, that is 90W, just from the CPU and GPU! Of course those parts are not using 90W in that test because things like screen, HD, RAM etc need power too. As the MPD is usually in percents, it can explain why the difference is so big in watts.
40W sounds a bit too much to explain with MPD though. IIRC the GT 330M is underclocked but I'm not 100% sure. You have a valid point that the SBs may be using more power than their predecessors. To make this more accurate, we should compare them with C2Ds though ;)
I guess we will have to wait and see, but an ULV in 13" would be more than a disappointment.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4205/the-macbook-pro-review-13-and-15-inch-2011-brings-sandy-bridge/14
It just doesn't make any sense. Going by those figures, if the i7 dual core was 35W, the i7 Sandy Bridge quad core would be around 70W.
Not sure how this relates to potential MacBook Air Sandy Bridge processors, but keep in mind.. there must be a reason why Samsung went for the ULV processor in their 13" laptop instead of the LV one.
CPU isn't the only thing that changed. AMD 6750M (~30W) has higher TDP than NVidia GT 330M (~23W). I had to put ~ because their TDPs are not officially stated by AMD or NVidia so it's just based on previous GPUs and their TDPs. The point is that AMD 6750M has higher TDP.
There is also another thing. TDP is not the maximum power draw. Maximum power dissipation is usually 20-30% more than the actual TDP. While MPD is rarely achieved as it requires maximum voltage and temperature, it can (nearly) be achieved with heavy benchmarking applications.
For example, the combined TDP from quad core SB and AMD 6750M is 75W. If we use 20% extra as the MPD, that is 90W, just from the CPU and GPU! Of course those parts are not using 90W in that test because things like screen, HD, RAM etc need power too. As the MPD is usually in percents, it can explain why the difference is so big in watts.
40W sounds a bit too much to explain with MPD though. IIRC the GT 330M is underclocked but I'm not 100% sure. You have a valid point that the SBs may be using more power than their predecessors. To make this more accurate, we should compare them with C2Ds though ;)
I guess we will have to wait and see, but an ULV in 13" would be more than a disappointment.
DoFoT9
Aug 11, 07:42 PM
I mean, if we don't get to compare GT to NFS because of that, then surely you shouldn't compare GT to Forza for the same reason.
goes GT allow dragging/drifting ? :p
its kind of like comparing two different beasts imo.
goes GT allow dragging/drifting ? :p
its kind of like comparing two different beasts imo.
bendejo
Jul 27, 10:57 AM
Since the WWDC is focused on developers, wouldn't it make the most sense for Apple to do all of the chip transition announcements plus the Leopard preview at WWDC and wait until MW SanFran or hold a special event for the video iPod/iTunes movie announcements? After all, developers want to know what to expect in the forthcoming OS and what the processing abilities for the full range of hardware will be so they can devise applications to fully exploit the specs on the OS and the various hardware configs. iPod and iTunes announcements may be neat, but they would seem to be less relevant to the WWDC audience.
ciTiger
Mar 25, 10:35 PM
What? this seems hard to believe... Already done on development? :confused:
SevenInchScrew
Nov 26, 07:46 PM
You need to level up quite a bit before the damage is fully introduced.
Gran Turismo: The REAL driving simulator ....as long as you've grinded long enough. :rolleyes:
Gran Turismo: The REAL driving simulator ....as long as you've grinded long enough. :rolleyes:
AppliedVisual
Oct 15, 03:47 PM
... hmmm ... i just ordered a mac pro quad 3ghz ... 8 cores would be somehow nicer ;)
.a
The 8-core Mac Pro @ 2.33GHz should be about the same price as the quad-core 2.66GHz. Theoretically, the 8-core 2.66GHz should be about the same price as what you just ordered.
Before you seriously consider canceling, just be sure that your workflow can benefit from the various CPU cores. Very few applications can take advantage of dual-core CPUs, let alone quad-core. In most situations, you need to be running various instances or multiple apps at once that can handle 2 or more threads to benefit from these newer multi-core systems. If you do any 3D animation or heavy rendering, scientific computing, visualization, massive database management/development, etc... You may be a candidate. Depending on your requirements, a quad-core 3GHz may still be the best performing system for you.
.a
The 8-core Mac Pro @ 2.33GHz should be about the same price as the quad-core 2.66GHz. Theoretically, the 8-core 2.66GHz should be about the same price as what you just ordered.
Before you seriously consider canceling, just be sure that your workflow can benefit from the various CPU cores. Very few applications can take advantage of dual-core CPUs, let alone quad-core. In most situations, you need to be running various instances or multiple apps at once that can handle 2 or more threads to benefit from these newer multi-core systems. If you do any 3D animation or heavy rendering, scientific computing, visualization, massive database management/development, etc... You may be a candidate. Depending on your requirements, a quad-core 3GHz may still be the best performing system for you.
Denarius
Mar 22, 03:22 PM
A government in power is responding against a rebellion.
If a rebellion sprang up in the United States, our government would respond with force as well.
"Slaughtering his own people" sounds a little propogandish to me. Are you saying that Qaddafi is taking people who have no connection to the rebellion at all and slaughtering them?
How can any government meet armed internal rebellion without qualifying as "slaughtering their own people"?
It wasn't a rebellion when it first started, it was an unarmed march protesting against the number of people in Benghazi that had just disappeared in Benghazi over many years. They had some footage from the start of the protests on BBC's Panorama last night showing the march. Some guys in yellow builder's hats came in with a mixture of sticks and guns and started killing people at random, which is when it started escalating into a full-blown rebellion.
If a rebellion sprang up in the United States, our government would respond with force as well.
"Slaughtering his own people" sounds a little propogandish to me. Are you saying that Qaddafi is taking people who have no connection to the rebellion at all and slaughtering them?
How can any government meet armed internal rebellion without qualifying as "slaughtering their own people"?
It wasn't a rebellion when it first started, it was an unarmed march protesting against the number of people in Benghazi that had just disappeared in Benghazi over many years. They had some footage from the start of the protests on BBC's Panorama last night showing the march. Some guys in yellow builder's hats came in with a mixture of sticks and guns and started killing people at random, which is when it started escalating into a full-blown rebellion.
milozauckerman
Jul 14, 02:54 PM
Without a doubt. And in keeping with long tradition, the "less expensive" name-brand PC will mysteriously come with less (ports, software, even speed if Netburst lingers) than the Mac
I'm talking about Core2 Duo machines - either Conroe or Woodcrest.
Ports? My G5 tower had no more ports than any other PC I've seen. My current CD iMac actually lacks any kind of high-speed port for external hard-drives or burners.
Software? OK, I know it's supposed to be a selling point, but there's not a damn thing outside of iTunes I use in iLife enough to justify hardware prices at any level. They're nice freebies, but I happily pay the Apple Tax to have an OS that works with me rather than against me. Unquestionably worth it, but I'm not going to pretend that I'm getting good value in the (theoretical) hardware.
I think I know what the apologists will say - no one else will offer Woodcrest in a low-end pro machine, they'll use Conroe. And yeah, that's probably true, but for a reason - there's no reason to put Woodcrest in the low-end tower offering, aside from a desire to perpetuate the artifical line distinctions. Which isn't going to cut it in the Intel world.
I'm talking about Core2 Duo machines - either Conroe or Woodcrest.
Ports? My G5 tower had no more ports than any other PC I've seen. My current CD iMac actually lacks any kind of high-speed port for external hard-drives or burners.
Software? OK, I know it's supposed to be a selling point, but there's not a damn thing outside of iTunes I use in iLife enough to justify hardware prices at any level. They're nice freebies, but I happily pay the Apple Tax to have an OS that works with me rather than against me. Unquestionably worth it, but I'm not going to pretend that I'm getting good value in the (theoretical) hardware.
I think I know what the apologists will say - no one else will offer Woodcrest in a low-end pro machine, they'll use Conroe. And yeah, that's probably true, but for a reason - there's no reason to put Woodcrest in the low-end tower offering, aside from a desire to perpetuate the artifical line distinctions. Which isn't going to cut it in the Intel world.
room271
Mar 22, 01:17 PM
I don't get all the negative ratings/comments.
1. Competition is good (I know this is hardly an original point)
2. The tablets look interesting.
In particular, the stylus input and software for the Blackberry device allowing simple notetaking etc.
Personally, I dislike Apple's walled-garden (even though I appreciate this doesn't bother many people) so this is good news.
1. Competition is good (I know this is hardly an original point)
2. The tablets look interesting.
In particular, the stylus input and software for the Blackberry device allowing simple notetaking etc.
Personally, I dislike Apple's walled-garden (even though I appreciate this doesn't bother many people) so this is good news.
theBB
Aug 11, 07:28 PM
Confused.
Can somebody explain me the differences between the cellphone market between the US and Europe.
Will a 'iPhone' just be marketed to the US or worldwide (as the iPod does)?
Well, let's see, about 20 years ago, a lot of countries in Europe, Asia and elsewhere decided on a standard digital cell phone system and called it GSM. About 15 years ago GSM networks became quite widespread across these countries. In the meantime US kept on using analog cell phones. Motorola did not even believe that digital cell phone had much of a future, so it decided to stay away from this market, a decision which almost bankrupted the company.
US started rolling out digital service only about 10 years ago. As US government does not like to dictate private companies how to conduct their business, they sold the spectrum and put down some basic ground rules, but for the most part they let the service providers use any network they wished. For one reason or another, these providers decided go with about 4 different standards at first. Quite a few companies went with GSM, AT&T picked a similar, but incompatible TDMA (IS=136?) standard, Nextel went with a proprietary standard they called iDEN and Sprint and Verizon went with CDMA, a radically different standard (IS-95) designed by Qualcomm. At the time, other big companies were very skeptical, so Qualcomm had to not only develop the underlying communication standards, but manufacture cell phones and the electronics for the cell towers. However, once the system proved itself, everybody started moving in that direction. Even the upcoming 3G system for these GSM networks, called UMTS, use a variant of CDMA technology.
CDMA is a more complicated standard compared to GSM, but it allows the providers to cram more users into each cell, it is supposedly cheaper to maintain and more flexible in some respects. However, anybody in that boat has to pay hefty royalties to Qualcomm, dampening its popularity. While creating UMTS, GSM standards bodies did everything they could to avoid using Qualcomm patents to avoid these payments. However, I don't know how successful they got in these efforts.
Even though Europeans here on these forums like to gloat that US did not join the worldwide standard, that we did not play along, that ours is a hodge podge of incompatible systems; without the freedom to try out different standards, CDMA would not have the opportunity to prove its feasibility and performance. In the end, the rest of the world is also reaping the benefits through UMTS/WCDMA.
Of course, not using the same standards as everybody else has its own price. The components of CDMA cell phones cost more and the system itself is more complicated, so CDMA versions of cell phones hit the market six months to a year after their GSM counterparts, if at all. The infrastructure cost of a rare system is higher as well, so AT&T had to rip apart its network to replace it with GSM version about five years after rolling it out. Sprint is probably going to convert Nextel's system in the near future as well.
I hope this answers your question.
Can somebody explain me the differences between the cellphone market between the US and Europe.
Will a 'iPhone' just be marketed to the US or worldwide (as the iPod does)?
Well, let's see, about 20 years ago, a lot of countries in Europe, Asia and elsewhere decided on a standard digital cell phone system and called it GSM. About 15 years ago GSM networks became quite widespread across these countries. In the meantime US kept on using analog cell phones. Motorola did not even believe that digital cell phone had much of a future, so it decided to stay away from this market, a decision which almost bankrupted the company.
US started rolling out digital service only about 10 years ago. As US government does not like to dictate private companies how to conduct their business, they sold the spectrum and put down some basic ground rules, but for the most part they let the service providers use any network they wished. For one reason or another, these providers decided go with about 4 different standards at first. Quite a few companies went with GSM, AT&T picked a similar, but incompatible TDMA (IS=136?) standard, Nextel went with a proprietary standard they called iDEN and Sprint and Verizon went with CDMA, a radically different standard (IS-95) designed by Qualcomm. At the time, other big companies were very skeptical, so Qualcomm had to not only develop the underlying communication standards, but manufacture cell phones and the electronics for the cell towers. However, once the system proved itself, everybody started moving in that direction. Even the upcoming 3G system for these GSM networks, called UMTS, use a variant of CDMA technology.
CDMA is a more complicated standard compared to GSM, but it allows the providers to cram more users into each cell, it is supposedly cheaper to maintain and more flexible in some respects. However, anybody in that boat has to pay hefty royalties to Qualcomm, dampening its popularity. While creating UMTS, GSM standards bodies did everything they could to avoid using Qualcomm patents to avoid these payments. However, I don't know how successful they got in these efforts.
Even though Europeans here on these forums like to gloat that US did not join the worldwide standard, that we did not play along, that ours is a hodge podge of incompatible systems; without the freedom to try out different standards, CDMA would not have the opportunity to prove its feasibility and performance. In the end, the rest of the world is also reaping the benefits through UMTS/WCDMA.
Of course, not using the same standards as everybody else has its own price. The components of CDMA cell phones cost more and the system itself is more complicated, so CDMA versions of cell phones hit the market six months to a year after their GSM counterparts, if at all. The infrastructure cost of a rare system is higher as well, so AT&T had to rip apart its network to replace it with GSM version about five years after rolling it out. Sprint is probably going to convert Nextel's system in the near future as well.
I hope this answers your question.
whooleytoo
Apr 27, 08:48 AM
I thought they said that there was not any concerns?
Because, despite how Apple excel at so many things, when it comes to handling user (quality or privacy) concerns like this, they suck.
Look at their responses to the iPhone 4 antenna issue:
"You're holding it wrong" - Blame the customer.
'Every phone has the same issue' - Our phone is bad, but no worse than anyone else's
'Let's change how the signal bars are displayed' - Let's hide the problem.
'Let's give a bumper case with the iPhone' - Let's offer a solution to some users, to get them off our back for a problem we used to deny even existed.
I'm not even saying the antenna issue was a serious problem, but Apple's dismissive attitude is only throwing fuel on the fire. If they had tackled it quicker, it would be never have been newsworthy.
It's great that Apple are addressing this (location) issue much quicker, but still it only is happening after they initially denied there was any issue, and waiting for the furore to grow before acting.
Because, despite how Apple excel at so many things, when it comes to handling user (quality or privacy) concerns like this, they suck.
Look at their responses to the iPhone 4 antenna issue:
"You're holding it wrong" - Blame the customer.
'Every phone has the same issue' - Our phone is bad, but no worse than anyone else's
'Let's change how the signal bars are displayed' - Let's hide the problem.
'Let's give a bumper case with the iPhone' - Let's offer a solution to some users, to get them off our back for a problem we used to deny even existed.
I'm not even saying the antenna issue was a serious problem, but Apple's dismissive attitude is only throwing fuel on the fire. If they had tackled it quicker, it would be never have been newsworthy.
It's great that Apple are addressing this (location) issue much quicker, but still it only is happening after they initially denied there was any issue, and waiting for the furore to grow before acting.
robbyx
Apr 25, 04:32 PM
Dig deeper Watson. Turning off location services DOES NOT disable this feature. It is still logged, even with location services off. That's the whole issue the smart people have. There's no way to auto-truncate the file, and there's no way to turn it off.
Why should Location Services stop your phone from logging cell tower information, the same information your cell company logs?
Now if it's in Airplane Mode, then I'd wonder...
I don't think the "smart people" are all that smart if that's their issue!
Why should Location Services stop your phone from logging cell tower information, the same information your cell company logs?
Now if it's in Airplane Mode, then I'd wonder...
I don't think the "smart people" are all that smart if that's their issue!
081440
Aug 18, 08:31 PM
My Pro now starts 10.4.7 in less than 5 seconds!
NO WAY!! that would be awesome
NO WAY!! that would be awesome
littleman23408
Dec 1, 04:41 PM
Well i'm retarded. After all that yelling at the tv, I didn't realize there were two laps. :p. When I looked at the one person's post that gave me a little help, i thought "why is he talking about so many turns?"
After realizing it was 2 laps, I easily beat it.
After realizing it was 2 laps, I easily beat it.
balamw
Aug 7, 04:24 PM
If Apple had had that feature for years and MS would include it into Vista now, you'd call it copying, no !? ;)
If you were picking on Mail.app's Stationery I'd probably agree with you.
None of the things that Time Machine have been compared to seem even close to what they are planning to do. Including my own VMS file versioning analogies. System Restore is not capable of restoring a single file, and particularly not within a running application. It seems kind of more like a system wide undo function when it comes to files...
B
If you were picking on Mail.app's Stationery I'd probably agree with you.
None of the things that Time Machine have been compared to seem even close to what they are planning to do. Including my own VMS file versioning analogies. System Restore is not capable of restoring a single file, and particularly not within a running application. It seems kind of more like a system wide undo function when it comes to files...
B
No comments:
Post a Comment