4God
Jan 1, 05:38 PM
I think we'll hear more on iTV. I also think now would be the time for iLife and Leopard announcements. It wouldn't surprise me to see an update to the displays, including a built in iSight and a move from 23" to 24" - don't know 'bout that 50 incher though. :rolleyes: I don't think we'll see an update to FCP or MacPros untill NAB.
Gem�tlichkeit
Nov 24, 10:07 AM
uh...
that seems awful clunky as a container for a pair of sunglasses...
I do believe that's a gun case.
that seems awful clunky as a container for a pair of sunglasses...
I do believe that's a gun case.
ciTiger
Apr 13, 06:15 AM
Lets see the rest of the suite!
MCIowaRulz
Apr 19, 01:14 PM
FINALLY! I've been holding off for over a year upgrading my 2007 iMac because of the ancient ports. Give me my Thunderbolt!
I HAD YOU ALL BEAT:D
I'm GOING to upgrade from a slow single processor 867Mhz G4 from 2001 running Tiger with a 120GB+60GB HD and the ancient ATI 9000 Pro.:)
1 21.5 (or 24 please)
3.x Ghz Quad SB i7
8 GB (or 16GB)
2 TB HD
Ati 6000x series
etc etc:):)
I HAD YOU ALL BEAT:D
I'm GOING to upgrade from a slow single processor 867Mhz G4 from 2001 running Tiger with a 120GB+60GB HD and the ancient ATI 9000 Pro.:)
1 21.5 (or 24 please)
3.x Ghz Quad SB i7
8 GB (or 16GB)
2 TB HD
Ati 6000x series
etc etc:):)
iW00t
Jan 7, 12:45 AM
But the screen on the 17in MBP (1680x1050) by definition can't do HD (1920x1080). I don't care how well it can scale down, scaling down is not playing at true native resolution, and with most new content heading toward 1080i (and eventually 1080p), getting anything less than that now is just heading toward a dead end media wise IMO.
Why do you need HD on such a small device?
People have been watching TV on 640*480 28" TV sets for decades just fine. Likewise your Macbook Pro at 17" is doing as good as it possibly can at 17 inches, not like that extra 30 pixels vertically will make some difference.
My main concern with the Macbook Pros getting higher resolution displays is that there may be a possibility that Apple will break away from the current crop of low quality grainy displays and drop something else better in. Perhaps when Leopard is released we may even get the option to BTO in a higher resolution display.
Why do you need HD on such a small device?
People have been watching TV on 640*480 28" TV sets for decades just fine. Likewise your Macbook Pro at 17" is doing as good as it possibly can at 17 inches, not like that extra 30 pixels vertically will make some difference.
My main concern with the Macbook Pros getting higher resolution displays is that there may be a possibility that Apple will break away from the current crop of low quality grainy displays and drop something else better in. Perhaps when Leopard is released we may even get the option to BTO in a higher resolution display.
tablo13
Sep 20, 08:02 PM
What was the checkout like? Did you have to go through their checkout? I'm always suspicious of those places, and am concerned that they're using unsecured special checkouts and/or are stealing identities. And I'm not usually a suspicious person.
I'm pretty sure they use the eBay's PayPal checkout. :rolleyes:
I'm pretty sure they use the eBay's PayPal checkout. :rolleyes:
ccunning
Jul 14, 11:28 AM
I just saw this and though it was pretty interesting:
Sony also introduced their own small-format 90.0 � 94.0 mm disk, similar to the others but somewhat simpler in construction than the AmDisk. The first computer to use this format was the HP-150 of 1983, and Sony also used them fairly widely on their line of MSX computers. Other than this the format suffered from a similar fate as the other new formats; the 5�-inch format simply had too much market share. Things changed dramatically in 1984 when Apple Computer selected the format for their new Macintosh computers. By 1989 the 3�-inch was outselling the 5�-inch.
Here is the source:
Sony's 3.5" Floppy Disk (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floppy_drive#The_3.C2.BD-inch_microfloppy_diskette)
Sony also introduced their own small-format 90.0 � 94.0 mm disk, similar to the others but somewhat simpler in construction than the AmDisk. The first computer to use this format was the HP-150 of 1983, and Sony also used them fairly widely on their line of MSX computers. Other than this the format suffered from a similar fate as the other new formats; the 5�-inch format simply had too much market share. Things changed dramatically in 1984 when Apple Computer selected the format for their new Macintosh computers. By 1989 the 3�-inch was outselling the 5�-inch.
Here is the source:
Sony's 3.5" Floppy Disk (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floppy_drive#The_3.C2.BD-inch_microfloppy_diskette)
chuckles:)
Aug 24, 06:52 PM
Maybe dual optical drives like the Mac pro. This is getting standard on Macs obviously.
:p
Obviously???
the Mac Pro is one thing, but you wont see dual optical drives in an iMac much less a Mini, there's no point 4 the standard consumer market.
:p
Obviously???
the Mac Pro is one thing, but you wont see dual optical drives in an iMac much less a Mini, there's no point 4 the standard consumer market.
quagmire
Mar 19, 09:32 AM
And we have a right to try to stop them killing each other?
No.
No, but we were asked to help out. We aren't sticking our noses into a mess we are not welcome in.
As long as we are not sending ground troops in, I support it. Right now, the Air Force and Navy are capable of bombing runs. They'll probably send in B-2's and F-22's for the initial strike to get rid of the anti-aircraft systems since they are stealth planes and then probably turn most of the enforcement of the no-fly zone over to the Europeans.
No.
No, but we were asked to help out. We aren't sticking our noses into a mess we are not welcome in.
As long as we are not sending ground troops in, I support it. Right now, the Air Force and Navy are capable of bombing runs. They'll probably send in B-2's and F-22's for the initial strike to get rid of the anti-aircraft systems since they are stealth planes and then probably turn most of the enforcement of the no-fly zone over to the Europeans.
BlizzardBomb
Sep 1, 12:41 PM
My Guess:
iMac 17" - 1299
1.83 GHz
512MB RAM
160 SATA
8x DL
ATI x1600 - 128
iMac 20" - 1699
2.0 GHz upgradable to 2.16
512MB RAM
250 SATA
8x DL
ATI x1600 128 upgradable to 256 (As is already)
iMac 23": 1900 x 1200 - 1999
2.16 GHz upgradable to 2.33
1 GB Standard
250 SATA upgradable to 500 (as 17" and 20" is)
8x DL
ATI x1600 256
FW 800
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
I didn't say upgradable on 17" and 20" hard drives because we already know that.
In a dream world I'd say the 23" vCard would go to the x1800 or something
Hmm... the problem with that line-up is that when consumers see the shiny new advert saying "Meet the new iMacs" they'll look at the clock speeds and say "What new iMacs?". I think it would be reasonable for Apple to offer...
17" iMac - $1,199 - 2 GHz, X1650 Pro 128 MB
20" iMac - $1,599 - 2.16 GHz, X1650 Pro 256 MB
23" iMac - $2,099 - 2.33 GHz, X1650 Pro 256 MB
iMac 17" - 1299
1.83 GHz
512MB RAM
160 SATA
8x DL
ATI x1600 - 128
iMac 20" - 1699
2.0 GHz upgradable to 2.16
512MB RAM
250 SATA
8x DL
ATI x1600 128 upgradable to 256 (As is already)
iMac 23": 1900 x 1200 - 1999
2.16 GHz upgradable to 2.33
1 GB Standard
250 SATA upgradable to 500 (as 17" and 20" is)
8x DL
ATI x1600 256
FW 800
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
I didn't say upgradable on 17" and 20" hard drives because we already know that.
In a dream world I'd say the 23" vCard would go to the x1800 or something
Hmm... the problem with that line-up is that when consumers see the shiny new advert saying "Meet the new iMacs" they'll look at the clock speeds and say "What new iMacs?". I think it would be reasonable for Apple to offer...
17" iMac - $1,199 - 2 GHz, X1650 Pro 128 MB
20" iMac - $1,599 - 2.16 GHz, X1650 Pro 256 MB
23" iMac - $2,099 - 2.33 GHz, X1650 Pro 256 MB
digitaldean
Feb 26, 10:54 PM
I currently have a 4.7L V8 Dodge Dakota. I'd buy a diesel version of it in a heartbeat. I could still get the power/hauling ability needed but have the mileage to justify having the pickup.
But now with the possibility of having $5/gal gas looming, the 18 HWY MPG may force my hand.
Had the truck for over 5 years, but it may get too cost prohibitive to keep.
But now with the possibility of having $5/gal gas looming, the 18 HWY MPG may force my hand.
Had the truck for over 5 years, but it may get too cost prohibitive to keep.
roland.g
Sep 1, 01:45 PM
One more thing... they'll change the name from iMac to Mac, bringing a perfect symmetry to their product line-up:
Mac
Mac Pro
MacBook
MacBook Pro
Umm, no. They would have changed the name in January when they did the MBP and went intel. The i will stay because it is the internet or integrated Mac
Mac
Mac Pro
MacBook
MacBook Pro
Umm, no. They would have changed the name in January when they did the MBP and went intel. The i will stay because it is the internet or integrated Mac
RaceTripper
Jan 10, 04:16 PM
The RS's are very nice i used to have a Mk 1 RS the limited edition blue one they did 4500 cars of.
The ST's are not much different still have the 2.5 Turbo 5 cylinder engine but only 225bhp. I'm looking at the Mountune Kit with takes it to 260bhp for �1200.
But the new one is to much money �28,000 you can buy much nicer cars with that sort of money.
MattI have to agree. I probably wouldn't buy one myself, even if I could. But I'd love to drive one just try it out. As it is I think my JCW was too much, but it's a hell of a fun car to drive, and very fast around a circuit.
Americans mostly don't get the allure of a rallye type car. Ovals and 1/4 mile are about as sophisticated as we can manage. :p
The ST's are not much different still have the 2.5 Turbo 5 cylinder engine but only 225bhp. I'm looking at the Mountune Kit with takes it to 260bhp for �1200.
But the new one is to much money �28,000 you can buy much nicer cars with that sort of money.
MattI have to agree. I probably wouldn't buy one myself, even if I could. But I'd love to drive one just try it out. As it is I think my JCW was too much, but it's a hell of a fun car to drive, and very fast around a circuit.
Americans mostly don't get the allure of a rallye type car. Ovals and 1/4 mile are about as sophisticated as we can manage. :p
WRIGHTRACING
Nov 15, 11:39 PM
Toyota fixes all vehicles because they all have the potential to have dangerous problems.
Most iPhone owners have no problem whatsoever, and there's no danger at all to anyone.
So Toyota HAS to fix them all. It would be pointless for Apple to fix all iPhones in the field when most of them never have an issue needing a fix. But if you do have a problem, let them know and they will fix it for you for free. That's hardly a burden for such a non-dangerous situation.
We live in this ridiculous era of expectations. Apple comes out with a reasonable solution to a problem that affects a tiny percentage of users, and they get slammed for it. Hypocrisy.
This isn't necessarily directed at you, but to all of you comparing Apple/Phone manufacturer to Toyota/Car manufacturer.
So the deal with the "SAFETY" recall of the sticking accelerator, the way it works in the auto industry, generally they catch these things in testing "ON TRACK", but this was one that slipped thru the tracks, just the same as software issues Apple had with iOS4.0 and 4.1 on the older iPhones. So the customers experienced the problem, and it was reported. Toyota(the same as all other greedy, self righteous companies out there, deny everything), then had to create a software fix for the problem in the computer of the car. They then mail out letter's to everyone, because this is a safety issue. You can bring your vehicle in, if you feel safe, and if not, they will tow it at cost to warranty.
Now there are also other things that are problems with cars, and are reported by many consumers, but it isn't classified as a recall, because it is not a safety recall. Take the Chrysler 2.7 engine. It was unfortunate, because it was a good engine, but they had a flaw. The cylinder heads over time got oil buildup from the scorched oil around the overhead valvetrain. It was caused by the heads having a flaw in design that caused them to get hot spots and scorching the oil. So it was noted to Chrysler, and they decided if the engine had this problem and the owner kept sufficient evidence of oil changes, and it was within a certain mileage. They never sent this information out to anyone, and most don't know of this replacement, but the dealers know about it, and the company knows about it as well, and they will pay to replace it under certain circumstances, so long as you do your studying, and find what you can on this engine. As I said this is not safety related, and doesn't apply to everyone, so they don't let everyone know, or don't replace everyone's engine.
Most iPhone owners have no problem whatsoever, and there's no danger at all to anyone.
So Toyota HAS to fix them all. It would be pointless for Apple to fix all iPhones in the field when most of them never have an issue needing a fix. But if you do have a problem, let them know and they will fix it for you for free. That's hardly a burden for such a non-dangerous situation.
We live in this ridiculous era of expectations. Apple comes out with a reasonable solution to a problem that affects a tiny percentage of users, and they get slammed for it. Hypocrisy.
This isn't necessarily directed at you, but to all of you comparing Apple/Phone manufacturer to Toyota/Car manufacturer.
So the deal with the "SAFETY" recall of the sticking accelerator, the way it works in the auto industry, generally they catch these things in testing "ON TRACK", but this was one that slipped thru the tracks, just the same as software issues Apple had with iOS4.0 and 4.1 on the older iPhones. So the customers experienced the problem, and it was reported. Toyota(the same as all other greedy, self righteous companies out there, deny everything), then had to create a software fix for the problem in the computer of the car. They then mail out letter's to everyone, because this is a safety issue. You can bring your vehicle in, if you feel safe, and if not, they will tow it at cost to warranty.
Now there are also other things that are problems with cars, and are reported by many consumers, but it isn't classified as a recall, because it is not a safety recall. Take the Chrysler 2.7 engine. It was unfortunate, because it was a good engine, but they had a flaw. The cylinder heads over time got oil buildup from the scorched oil around the overhead valvetrain. It was caused by the heads having a flaw in design that caused them to get hot spots and scorching the oil. So it was noted to Chrysler, and they decided if the engine had this problem and the owner kept sufficient evidence of oil changes, and it was within a certain mileage. They never sent this information out to anyone, and most don't know of this replacement, but the dealers know about it, and the company knows about it as well, and they will pay to replace it under certain circumstances, so long as you do your studying, and find what you can on this engine. As I said this is not safety related, and doesn't apply to everyone, so they don't let everyone know, or don't replace everyone's engine.
xenotaku
Jan 3, 07:12 PM
i am really hoping for a 12" model.
Blasphemic
Jan 7, 03:58 AM
Here's my first and only car I've ever "owned". It's a 1.2 litre Corsa SXI 2001. It was initially bought as a learner car for me and my sisters to start learning in. I passed 2 years ago, and since then it's only me who's been driving the car. My big sister has her own car now, and my little sister won't be starting for another year.
So at the moment it's just me who's using the car, so I get to use it in University - which makes me very lucky I believe.
And I also took this picture this morning. A fresh wave of snow has just arrived in Wales, just when I thought I had seen the last of the snow last week.:(
http://img713.imageshack.us/img713/706/corsab.jpg
Is that a Vauxhall Corsa i see there? great little car, not very cool i admit but it just keeps on going =)
So at the moment it's just me who's using the car, so I get to use it in University - which makes me very lucky I believe.
And I also took this picture this morning. A fresh wave of snow has just arrived in Wales, just when I thought I had seen the last of the snow last week.:(
http://img713.imageshack.us/img713/706/corsab.jpg
Is that a Vauxhall Corsa i see there? great little car, not very cool i admit but it just keeps on going =)
Counterfit
Mar 19, 06:12 PM
Only 2% use MACs so they're unlikely to be exposed to one, PC users (98%) will bad mouth a MAC, and Apples advertising, while award winning does very little to enlighten people about the product. two notes: 1.) MAC is a networking thing, among others. Mac is a computer or a nickname.
2.) market share is not the same as installed user base.
2.) market share is not the same as installed user base.
cmustin
Nov 24, 11:09 PM
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41C0o2GAJGL._SS500_.jpg
Props if anyone knows who used that bag.
I use this same bag. Did you pick it up at an Army surplus store? That's where I got mine.
Props if anyone knows who used that bag.
I use this same bag. Did you pick it up at an Army surplus store? That's where I got mine.
JGowan
May 3, 12:45 AM
MAS? The Muslim American Society? The Municipal Art Society of NY? Malaysia Airlines? Monetary Authority of Singapore?
Try MacAppStore (you know, the generic name with Mac in front of it)It was a joke. "Muslim American Society"?... if that doesn't spell joke, I dunno what would. :rolleyes:
Try MacAppStore (you know, the generic name with Mac in front of it)It was a joke. "Muslim American Society"?... if that doesn't spell joke, I dunno what would. :rolleyes:
jav6454
Mar 24, 02:02 PM
But the GPU still has to decode what was sent and put it on the screen, which is why I asked if the TB itself can do the encoding. If it can how much overhead will that add (again as it has to happen over the PCIe side)?
Or can you send graphics information over DP that still needs to be processed, ie raw frames?
The GPU can do that, no need for CPU. The CPU is just there to tell the GPU what to crunch assuming no FLAGS were thrown regarding a particular DRM-protected data.
Thunderbolt is just the transmission protocol, there is no actual decode or encode besides what is hard wired at the ports.
Or can you send graphics information over DP that still needs to be processed, ie raw frames?
The GPU can do that, no need for CPU. The CPU is just there to tell the GPU what to crunch assuming no FLAGS were thrown regarding a particular DRM-protected data.
Thunderbolt is just the transmission protocol, there is no actual decode or encode besides what is hard wired at the ports.
mc68k
Oct 14, 01:40 PM
Thanks! I'll try it on my work computer, its a quad.yeah unfortunately there's no partial credit, it's either complete before the deadline or no points
ffakr
Nov 26, 02:42 PM
The quad core CPUs in Xserve definitely make sense. However, I'm not sure what you're saying.. Apple started shipping Xserve on Nov. 1st with the dual-core Xeon CPUs and they're currently listed with 24hour shipping times.
They shipped the XServe but there is no longer an XServe Cluster node model. Apple used to ship a stipped down XServe with only one drive. You used to be able to get dual processors in the Cluster Node for the price of a single Proc XServe [proper].
The Cluster nodes had better price/performance but they weren't designed for running real 24x7 server tasks.
ffakr.
They shipped the XServe but there is no longer an XServe Cluster node model. Apple used to ship a stipped down XServe with only one drive. You used to be able to get dual processors in the Cluster Node for the price of a single Proc XServe [proper].
The Cluster nodes had better price/performance but they weren't designed for running real 24x7 server tasks.
ffakr.
BlizzardBomb
Sep 1, 01:17 PM
Just think of how high the resolution on a 42" screen would be like. 4800 x 3000? At least a dozen megapixels!
Hmm.. I don't think that's a valid resolution. The next 16:10 up is WQUXGA at 3840x2400 and if Apple go crazy, WHUXGA at a monstrous 7680x4800 (the benchmark in 2015 ;) ).
Conroe inside a new design is much more likely.
Much more likely according to who? Sorry but when two great sites like AppleInsider and MacOSXRumors agree 100% with each other, then it seems that it's almost certainly going to be that way.
Hmm.. I don't think that's a valid resolution. The next 16:10 up is WQUXGA at 3840x2400 and if Apple go crazy, WHUXGA at a monstrous 7680x4800 (the benchmark in 2015 ;) ).
Conroe inside a new design is much more likely.
Much more likely according to who? Sorry but when two great sites like AppleInsider and MacOSXRumors agree 100% with each other, then it seems that it's almost certainly going to be that way.
jaxstate
Aug 6, 09:18 PM
Blah, it should read "Mac OS X Leopard, introducing Panter 2.0"
