emaja
Apr 2, 08:49 PM
Nice ad, but I am getting sick of Apple using "magical" to describe the iPad. It just sounds silly.
NathanMuir
Mar 19, 05:46 PM
I don't see a problem with its inclusion on the App Store.
As has been pointed out, its up to the user to decide if he or she wants to download an app.
IMO, the Fart and Porn/ Pin Up apps are more distasteful and offensive than the App you've mentioned.
As has been pointed out, its up to the user to decide if he or she wants to download an app.
IMO, the Fart and Porn/ Pin Up apps are more distasteful and offensive than the App you've mentioned.
WeegieMac
Apr 1, 02:21 PM
Folders animation when opening/closing is a little improved, but still looks like a bottom range PC trying to run Half Life 2 on full settings. :D
cube
Mar 25, 11:40 AM
Because the Sandy Bridge IGP was not designed to do any sort of GPGPU work, point blank. We will have to wait for Ivy Bridge(next major release from Intel after Sandy Bridge) for GPGPU/OpenCL support on Intel's IGP.
The SB documentation says it supports Compute Shader 4, a subset of the DirectX 11 level Compute Shader 5.
What that means in terms of OpenCL, I don't know.
Intel said they'll continue to evaluate OpenCL during 2011.
The SB documentation says it supports Compute Shader 4, a subset of the DirectX 11 level Compute Shader 5.
What that means in terms of OpenCL, I don't know.
Intel said they'll continue to evaluate OpenCL during 2011.
cbnsoul
Apr 19, 11:40 AM
What are these "Macs" you speak of?
Awesome. :)
And please, dear God, let there be new Minis - I've been checking MacRumors multiple times per day lately hoping for any Mini rumors.
Awesome. :)
And please, dear God, let there be new Minis - I've been checking MacRumors multiple times per day lately hoping for any Mini rumors.
Porco
Sep 6, 09:01 AM
Dude, the MBP was updated in late April of this year, why would you think it'll be updated four and a half months later??
Yeah, next thing you know people will saying machines could have their processors upgraded before they're even released!! Oh, wait... :p
Seriously, I think it's been widely stated that with the move to intel chips, processors are likely to be updated more regularly... don't know when the MBP will get upgraded, but if the chips are there, they need to be going in the machines ASAP for Apple to maintain a competitive line-up compared with otherwise-similarly specced PCs.
Yeah, next thing you know people will saying machines could have their processors upgraded before they're even released!! Oh, wait... :p
Seriously, I think it's been widely stated that with the move to intel chips, processors are likely to be updated more regularly... don't know when the MBP will get upgraded, but if the chips are there, they need to be going in the machines ASAP for Apple to maintain a competitive line-up compared with otherwise-similarly specced PCs.
EagerDragon
Nov 16, 12:21 PM
How can this get negative votes? In fact, how do a lot of perfectly benign threads get negative votes? Are there just members out there who vote negative on everything?
Redmond is doing the negative voting becuase their copy machines are in the fritz.
Redmond is doing the negative voting becuase their copy machines are in the fritz.
cwerdna
Dec 5, 01:55 AM
According to http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9595_22-6140649.html "SanDisk tied Apple Computer, with 39 percent of all MP3 players sold for the week, but the similarities end there. iPods led all manufacturers with 66 percent of dollars spent in the category, while SanDisk had 18 percent...
Those figures do not include iPods sold directly from Apple, which does not release sales figures from Apple.com or Apple stores...
Microsoft's much-ballyhooed MP3 player, the Zune, captured 2.1 percent of units sold, tying with Disney and coming in behind Apple, SanDisk, Creative and Memorex."
Those figures do not include iPods sold directly from Apple, which does not release sales figures from Apple.com or Apple stores...
Microsoft's much-ballyhooed MP3 player, the Zune, captured 2.1 percent of units sold, tying with Disney and coming in behind Apple, SanDisk, Creative and Memorex."
Gav2k
Feb 24, 05:52 AM
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) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
It's funny because neither GM nor Ford in Europe use their own Diesel engines, instead GM use Fiat engines and Ford use a Peugeot-Citroen engine.
Wonder if this will be the case in this? Chevy in Europe is a very cheap and nasty brand of car, much like Kia (they are re-branded Daewoo's).
I also wonder if Auto's v's Manual gears make a difference seeing as 90% of cars in Europe are manual v's the opposite in USA.
Adanvtages of diesel here are: Better mileage, longer range on a tank, lower tax due to lower CO2 emissions, higher resale value, longer life.
IMO European manufacturers have had much longer to perfect the technology (i.e. Common Rail Injected Diesel) so GM are up against it here.
I wonder how it will fare against the likes of the VW Golf's Blumotion that gets 74mpg! Much more than the crappy Japanese cars.
Take it you've never been down south where ford makes it's own engines?
It's funny because neither GM nor Ford in Europe use their own Diesel engines, instead GM use Fiat engines and Ford use a Peugeot-Citroen engine.
Wonder if this will be the case in this? Chevy in Europe is a very cheap and nasty brand of car, much like Kia (they are re-branded Daewoo's).
I also wonder if Auto's v's Manual gears make a difference seeing as 90% of cars in Europe are manual v's the opposite in USA.
Adanvtages of diesel here are: Better mileage, longer range on a tank, lower tax due to lower CO2 emissions, higher resale value, longer life.
IMO European manufacturers have had much longer to perfect the technology (i.e. Common Rail Injected Diesel) so GM are up against it here.
I wonder how it will fare against the likes of the VW Golf's Blumotion that gets 74mpg! Much more than the crappy Japanese cars.
Take it you've never been down south where ford makes it's own engines?
aiqw9182
Mar 24, 02:38 PM
AMD Fusion is a better CPU because it does true OpenCL in the GPU, not like Intel's alpha OpenCL which runs on the CPU side.
Fusion is DirectX 11 class. Intel is DirectX 10.1 class.
Uhh, no bro. The CPU and GPU are two separate things, and Sandy Bridge smokes Fusion on the CPU side. If you want to argue OpenCL for all of the zero current day applications it currently has then be my guest and do so. Fusion is DX11? Wow, more vaporware that rarely gets added in modern games due to wanting to be backwards compatible, how exciting!
Once again, run Sandy Bridge and a discrete GPU if you are really looking for performance. There's your OpenCL and DX11 support that you need so badly. It will smoke anything AMD has to offer.
Fusion is DirectX 11 class. Intel is DirectX 10.1 class.
Uhh, no bro. The CPU and GPU are two separate things, and Sandy Bridge smokes Fusion on the CPU side. If you want to argue OpenCL for all of the zero current day applications it currently has then be my guest and do so. Fusion is DX11? Wow, more vaporware that rarely gets added in modern games due to wanting to be backwards compatible, how exciting!
Once again, run Sandy Bridge and a discrete GPU if you are really looking for performance. There's your OpenCL and DX11 support that you need so badly. It will smoke anything AMD has to offer.
twoodcc
Apr 16, 09:07 PM
congrats to SciFrog for 6 million points! (with MR team)
narco
Aug 6, 09:06 PM
Hasta la Vista, Vista
classic!! I want to see a pic!
So do I. It should have a picture of the T-800 running Leopard next to it.
Fishes,
narco.
classic!! I want to see a pic!
So do I. It should have a picture of the T-800 running Leopard next to it.
Fishes,
narco.
daneoni
Nov 25, 12:03 AM
Couldn't care less about the movie to be honest, but to avoid being nagged as anti-social(i am)...
utgerger
Jan 12, 04:38 PM
just because they used Air in their banner doesn't mean its called MacBook Air.. Apple is not stupid.. its all about slim and light..
I'll be the one who'll tell you "I told you so" ;) .. enjoy the show!
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=4732961&postcount=94
or this..
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=4733969&postcount=100
:apple:MacBook Lite:apple:
Feb 2008
I'll be the one who'll tell you "I told you so" ;) .. enjoy the show!
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=4732961&postcount=94
or this..
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=4733969&postcount=100
:apple:MacBook Lite:apple:
Feb 2008
iJohnHenry
Apr 17, 08:04 AM
I'm 32, still love driving
Very humorous. :)
Very humorous. :)
encro
Apr 27, 11:41 AM
I can't be the only one that is sick to death with regards to car analogies. Grrr
ILL Robinson
Jan 12, 12:44 PM
*deleted*
Dont Hurt Me
Aug 31, 03:05 PM
Knowing that Apple doesn't pay listed prices, it's not unreasonable to assume that Apple could get the Yonah chips for less than Merom ones.
Also, Apple has historically liked to scale its product lineup to encourage buying then next item up the scale. Some have even referred to it as "crippling" the lower machines.Ahh crippling like using inferior Gpu's like in ProMac & Mini? Both GMA950 & 7300 are bottom tier.
Also, Apple has historically liked to scale its product lineup to encourage buying then next item up the scale. Some have even referred to it as "crippling" the lower machines.Ahh crippling like using inferior Gpu's like in ProMac & Mini? Both GMA950 & 7300 are bottom tier.
andrewbecks
Apr 19, 11:38 PM
While technically correct, you should provide context.
While SSDs DO have a finite number of write available, an SSD that's 256 GB (a modest drive size) with 10,000 writes = 2,560,000 GB of writing capacity (or 2.56 * 10^6 ;))
That means you could write 100 GB of data PER DAY for slightly over 70 YEARS!
Feel free to be amazed. :D
That is amazing. Thanks for putting that whole issue into context. I imagine that, all things considered, some SSDs might even last longer than traditional hard drives. How if we can just bring the price down! :-)
While SSDs DO have a finite number of write available, an SSD that's 256 GB (a modest drive size) with 10,000 writes = 2,560,000 GB of writing capacity (or 2.56 * 10^6 ;))
That means you could write 100 GB of data PER DAY for slightly over 70 YEARS!
Feel free to be amazed. :D
That is amazing. Thanks for putting that whole issue into context. I imagine that, all things considered, some SSDs might even last longer than traditional hard drives. How if we can just bring the price down! :-)
liketom
Jul 18, 01:44 AM
Well about time :eek:
i was starting to think this was not coming at all
i was starting to think this was not coming at all
VanNess
Jul 19, 11:43 PM
Slashdot posted an article today (http://www.theage.com.au/news/technology/hollywood-agrees-to-burning-dvd-issue/2006/07/19/1153166455537.html) that announces the studios have struck a deal with an outfit called CinemaNow (never heard of them) in which the studios have finally agreed to allow users to burn a downloaded movie to a blank DVD. Here's what it says about Apple:
The announcement also previews a likely agreement between the major studios and Apple Computer, which is expected to expand the offerings on its popular iTunes online store to include big-studio movies.
But the article doesn't mention the 800lbs gorilla in the sidelines, namely, connection/download time. Almost every article about the studio's entry into the movie download business flatly ignores this issue, but, imo, it's a real world showstopper (pun intended). Hanging around waiting endlessly while literally gigs of data trickle down your internet pipe isn't going to be anyone's cup of tea.
Instead of jumping the gun, someone needs to think a little harder about all of this in order to make it work in such as way that it's irresistible to the average consumer/movie buff, like iTunes is for music fans now. Hopefully, that someone is Apple.
The announcement also previews a likely agreement between the major studios and Apple Computer, which is expected to expand the offerings on its popular iTunes online store to include big-studio movies.
But the article doesn't mention the 800lbs gorilla in the sidelines, namely, connection/download time. Almost every article about the studio's entry into the movie download business flatly ignores this issue, but, imo, it's a real world showstopper (pun intended). Hanging around waiting endlessly while literally gigs of data trickle down your internet pipe isn't going to be anyone's cup of tea.
Instead of jumping the gun, someone needs to think a little harder about all of this in order to make it work in such as way that it's irresistible to the average consumer/movie buff, like iTunes is for music fans now. Hopefully, that someone is Apple.
illian
Jan 13, 08:29 AM
maybe this banner just refers to all the rumors that have been spread throughout the year:D..you could hear/read about apple's new notebook on the internet, tv and there are even some pictures and a name. so there is something in the air and in 2 days we'll find out what it is :rolleyes:
BenRoethig
Nov 27, 04:58 PM
Do you think such a display would sport a pwning! S-IPS panel as the other Cinema Displays, or would it be throttled down to a Dell style S-PVA panel?:D
I willy, willy hope for:
17" (1680x1050), S-IPS panel, 12 ms, DVI, 600:1, iSight, 400 cd/m2, alu. case, 2xUSB 2.0, 2xFireWire400 - $399.
20" (1920x1200), S-IPS panel, 12 ms, DVI, 700:1, iSight, 500 cd/m2, alu. case, 2xUSB 2.0, 2xFireWire400 - $699.
24" (some res. I can't remember), S-IPS panel, 12 ms, DVI, 700:1, iSight, 500 cd/m2, alu. case, 2xUSB 2.0, 1xFireWire400, 1xFireWire 800 - $999.
30" (some res. I can't remember), S-IPS panel, 12 ms, DVI, 700:1, iSight, 500 cd/m2, alu. case, 2xUSB 2.0, 1xFireWire400, 1xFireWire 800 - $1999.
:D :D :D
Only the most hardcore Mac user would pay those prices. The 17" and 20" models are twice the price of their rivals.
I willy, willy hope for:
17" (1680x1050), S-IPS panel, 12 ms, DVI, 600:1, iSight, 400 cd/m2, alu. case, 2xUSB 2.0, 2xFireWire400 - $399.
20" (1920x1200), S-IPS panel, 12 ms, DVI, 700:1, iSight, 500 cd/m2, alu. case, 2xUSB 2.0, 2xFireWire400 - $699.
24" (some res. I can't remember), S-IPS panel, 12 ms, DVI, 700:1, iSight, 500 cd/m2, alu. case, 2xUSB 2.0, 1xFireWire400, 1xFireWire 800 - $999.
30" (some res. I can't remember), S-IPS panel, 12 ms, DVI, 700:1, iSight, 500 cd/m2, alu. case, 2xUSB 2.0, 1xFireWire400, 1xFireWire 800 - $1999.
:D :D :D
Only the most hardcore Mac user would pay those prices. The 17" and 20" models are twice the price of their rivals.
gnasher729
Nov 15, 09:53 AM
I wonder how Handbrake, iDVD encoding, or Quicktime encoding will take advantage of the extra cores?
For some time, Handbrake didn't use more than two cores - owners of Quad G5s reported CPU usage of exactly 50 percent, then someone changed it and Quad G5s reported 100 percent CPU usage.
What we don't know: Was the code changed to use up to four processors, or as many processors as are available? Developers are usually very unwilling to ship code that they haven't been able to try out, so expect a version using eight cores about two days after the developers have access to an eight core machine.
In the case of Handbrake, encoding to MPEG4 seems already limited by the speed of the DVD drive; you can't encode faster than you can read from the DVD. H.264 is still limited by processor speed. Using eight cores is not too difficult; for example, if you encode 60 minutes of video, just give 7 1/2 minutes to each core.
For some time, Handbrake didn't use more than two cores - owners of Quad G5s reported CPU usage of exactly 50 percent, then someone changed it and Quad G5s reported 100 percent CPU usage.
What we don't know: Was the code changed to use up to four processors, or as many processors as are available? Developers are usually very unwilling to ship code that they haven't been able to try out, so expect a version using eight cores about two days after the developers have access to an eight core machine.
In the case of Handbrake, encoding to MPEG4 seems already limited by the speed of the DVD drive; you can't encode faster than you can read from the DVD. H.264 is still limited by processor speed. Using eight cores is not too difficult; for example, if you encode 60 minutes of video, just give 7 1/2 minutes to each core.