MartiNZ
Apr 20, 06:08 AM
Hope Apple surprises us... And not just a Sandy Bridge upgrade alongside Thunderbolt.
Agreed. With the big up in GPU they gave the MBPs I am hopeful that they just might. The 27" saw the first desktop CPU in an iMac, right? I wonder if they can't now manage the same with the GPU. If it is decent, I think I'll be pretty tempted; and I've been running on only laptops for ages, so that's saying something!
Agreed. With the big up in GPU they gave the MBPs I am hopeful that they just might. The 27" saw the first desktop CPU in an iMac, right? I wonder if they can't now manage the same with the GPU. If it is decent, I think I'll be pretty tempted; and I've been running on only laptops for ages, so that's saying something!
Bregalad
Apr 19, 11:15 PM
The new CPU ships February 20 and it takes two months for supplies to become constrained. Knowing Apple they'll deliberately hold off another month just to make sure they're a full quarter behind everyone else. After all desktop computers are so last century. Except that "we" need something to plug our iDevices into.
I don't though. My only iDevice is a touch that's now too old to accept the latest OS and there's zero chance that I'll ever buy another one of those. I can't justify the monthly charges for an iPhone and the iPad is pointless if you don't live in coffee shops and carry your life around in a messenger bag.
Part of me is glad Apple is doing well, but I don't see any indications that Apple will ever again make products for me. Guess I need to start learning about "distros".
I don't though. My only iDevice is a touch that's now too old to accept the latest OS and there's zero chance that I'll ever buy another one of those. I can't justify the monthly charges for an iPhone and the iPad is pointless if you don't live in coffee shops and carry your life around in a messenger bag.
Part of me is glad Apple is doing well, but I don't see any indications that Apple will ever again make products for me. Guess I need to start learning about "distros".
Naimfan
Mar 22, 01:06 PM
As for funerals somehow they find out where they are and play music, throw a party, cause a nascence basically to ruin the moment of memory and putting someone to rest. (Emphasis added.)
I reiterate my suggestion you take advantage of the educational opportunities available to you. Your nascent reasoning ability might benefit. ;)
I reiterate my suggestion you take advantage of the educational opportunities available to you. Your nascent reasoning ability might benefit. ;)
macfan70
Nov 27, 01:28 PM
To fit in to the Mac line up, the price for the 17" Widescreen should not be over 399 at which point you might as well get an iMac. I think if it is real, then Apple will fill the product gap and sell them for 299. Still iffy since most 17" LCDs go for at least 50 bucks less. :confused:
reel2reel
Apr 12, 10:22 PM
Well, looks like I was right on the mouche. :D
You're not taking into account that the price is for FCP X alone, not the whole suite of app's
You're not taking into account that the price is for FCP X alone, not the whole suite of app's
jettredmont
Apr 12, 10:25 PM
This all started just because I said I hope Final Cut doesn't turn into iMovie. Somehow that turned into iMovie is pro and Final Cut is the Model T of editing.
No, no one said iMovie was Pro. You said you didn't want FCP to take the same "backward step" iMovie did. The hue and cry here is that, where we stand now, iMovie is a far more capable editor than iMovie HD ever was, and has room to grow where iMovieHD did not. It was NOT a step backwards.
Your rebuttal has been that iMovie is not pro, but that's obvious. iMovie HD was not pro (and was significantly less capable than iMovie today is in terms of precision editing, audio work, etc).
For my hobby work (NOT pro), I went from a die-hard Final Cut Pro user (I worked for Apple and got a hell of a discount on FCStudio) to an iMovie user with the past two revs of iMovie. I tried and simply could not use iMovie HD for what I wanted to do. I hit some barriers with iMovie today, but nothing like the crap that iMovie HD and before gave me.
No, no one said iMovie was Pro. You said you didn't want FCP to take the same "backward step" iMovie did. The hue and cry here is that, where we stand now, iMovie is a far more capable editor than iMovie HD ever was, and has room to grow where iMovieHD did not. It was NOT a step backwards.
Your rebuttal has been that iMovie is not pro, but that's obvious. iMovie HD was not pro (and was significantly less capable than iMovie today is in terms of precision editing, audio work, etc).
For my hobby work (NOT pro), I went from a die-hard Final Cut Pro user (I worked for Apple and got a hell of a discount on FCStudio) to an iMovie user with the past two revs of iMovie. I tried and simply could not use iMovie HD for what I wanted to do. I hit some barriers with iMovie today, but nothing like the crap that iMovie HD and before gave me.
alectheking
Mar 25, 03:42 PM
Can the new GPU even do 1080p?
No, the whole article was a written lie. You obviously didn't watch the video either.
No, the whole article was a written lie. You obviously didn't watch the video either.
szark
Aug 6, 11:15 PM
you know everyone's going mac nuts when it says "update: photo of cloth covered banners".... :)
Or when there are multiple threads analyzing a photograph of a banner with dozens of icons on it, and nobody notices the photo also shows (the same) two covered banners. :)
Or when there are multiple threads analyzing a photograph of a banner with dozens of icons on it, and nobody notices the photo also shows (the same) two covered banners. :)
econgeek
Apr 12, 09:05 PM
http://www.tuaw.com/2010/10/22/timeline-tweak-returns-imovie-11-to-old-school/
The funny thing is, I'd swear you could always do that. I know I was doing that in when I edited a feature using iMovie. (I was fascinated by the little scaling animation Apple does when you switch between layouts... )
The funny thing is, I'd swear you could always do that. I know I was doing that in when I edited a feature using iMovie. (I was fascinated by the little scaling animation Apple does when you switch between layouts... )
Nmx-
Apr 1, 12:56 PM
No, I made sure that it wasn't indexing before i checked.
aswitcher
Jan 11, 08:42 PM
Ok, its looking good to me. I might have buyers remorse when the pro touch version appears but thats likely to be quite expensive and a Rev A with some expensive very new bits that I can probably do without.
Bertmg
Mar 24, 10:47 AM
I have way more than 50,000 songs, and even the worst of them is more necessary than your comment.
Way too narrow minded to think that iPod is only used for music. It is a great place to back up movies and carry then around. not to mention it is an external hard drive!
Way too narrow minded to think that iPod is only used for music. It is a great place to back up movies and carry then around. not to mention it is an external hard drive!
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
TheMacGuy
Aug 7, 12:30 AM
I am buying an iMac very soon, and I just want a 64-bit intel core in it. Cmon merom!
Yeah.... MacBook Pro too,...
"... its the most wonderful time of the year..."
WARNING! off topic - I just hear some wonderful (ole) mac music... look here! - http://davidpogue.com/pogue_unplugged/songspoofs.html
Yeah.... MacBook Pro too,...
"... its the most wonderful time of the year..."
WARNING! off topic - I just hear some wonderful (ole) mac music... look here! - http://davidpogue.com/pogue_unplugged/songspoofs.html
Benjamins
Mar 23, 12:48 AM
Do people seriously have that many songs?!!! seriously?!!!
220gb = 50,000 songs?!!!!! That is totally not necessary.
Apple discontinue that dinosaur! It makes you look bad to just have it on your website.
I think the iPod classic looks beautiful.
220gb = 50,000 songs?!!!!! That is totally not necessary.
Apple discontinue that dinosaur! It makes you look bad to just have it on your website.
I think the iPod classic looks beautiful.
popelife
Jan 3, 06:17 PM
Don't forget the possibility of a 12" MBP. I'm upgrading to a MBP in May, figured I might as well wait until after the release of Leopard, iLife 07, iWork 07 and so on.
Sensible. If you can wait, now is probably a good time to wait. MBP updates are surely somewhere on the horizon.
If a 12" model is available I'd gladly get it as long as it's not under par with current models like Apple did with the Powerbooks.
It may have to be. I'd expect a C2D at 1.6GHz maximum. It's a heat/power/size thing. A 12" MBP would probably also have to use a less power-hungry GPU than the current machines (although something better than Intel graphics).
But for a lot of people, portability will win out over sheer power.
Sensible. If you can wait, now is probably a good time to wait. MBP updates are surely somewhere on the horizon.
If a 12" model is available I'd gladly get it as long as it's not under par with current models like Apple did with the Powerbooks.
It may have to be. I'd expect a C2D at 1.6GHz maximum. It's a heat/power/size thing. A 12" MBP would probably also have to use a less power-hungry GPU than the current machines (although something better than Intel graphics).
But for a lot of people, portability will win out over sheer power.
termite
Nov 15, 11:23 AM
My Wife and I each have a ton-o-spam to process, and leave our Mail.apps open all the time. Mail.app uses up a full core for a few minutes at a time (G5 2.0GHz). So occasionally the computer is fully loaded just from the suckiness of Mail.app. It's very distruptive to doing anything else on the computer -- watching videos becomes very pretty much impossible. The kids sometimes leave their Safaris pointed at some flashy website which, between the two kids, takes another half-core.
Eight cores makes me think seriously of upgrading.
Eight cores makes me think seriously of upgrading.
bdkennedy1
Apr 19, 11:29 AM
It may be overheating. Since you have nothing to lose, get a can of compressed air and blow out the heat vents. One of the fans inside that keeps the processor cool may have failed, the power supply may be failing or the internal battery is dead.
You might find some info here from people with similar problems.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=251638
I can't wait! My G5 iMac has officially died and gone to that big computer desk in the sky. It served me well for 5 years, but it's over. Darn thang won't even turn on anymore. I hear the apple start up chime, but the screen stays black and then the iMac just shuts off. But even if I could fix it, it's so old it can't run the latest OSX or even play HD movies. Yup...it's time to buy a new iMac.
I'm hoping that the next update sees i7s across the line...even the 21.5" models. I expect thunderbolt too since the MacBook pros got it. Other things on my wish list would be for them to include that rumored flash start up drive as standard....but I'm not holding my breath. It would be great if the 21.5" model got the same ability as the 27" to be used as an external monitor. That way in 5 years or more when it becomes unable to run the latest software, you can still use it as a second monitor. :-)
I like the 27" features, it's just a tad too big. Actually the rumor about Apple adding a 24" size back to the iMac lineup would be PERFECT. But again...not gonna count on it.
You might find some info here from people with similar problems.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=251638
I can't wait! My G5 iMac has officially died and gone to that big computer desk in the sky. It served me well for 5 years, but it's over. Darn thang won't even turn on anymore. I hear the apple start up chime, but the screen stays black and then the iMac just shuts off. But even if I could fix it, it's so old it can't run the latest OSX or even play HD movies. Yup...it's time to buy a new iMac.
I'm hoping that the next update sees i7s across the line...even the 21.5" models. I expect thunderbolt too since the MacBook pros got it. Other things on my wish list would be for them to include that rumored flash start up drive as standard....but I'm not holding my breath. It would be great if the 21.5" model got the same ability as the 27" to be used as an external monitor. That way in 5 years or more when it becomes unable to run the latest software, you can still use it as a second monitor. :-)
I like the 27" features, it's just a tad too big. Actually the rumor about Apple adding a 24" size back to the iMac lineup would be PERFECT. But again...not gonna count on it.
GFLPraxis
Aug 29, 01:53 PM
Yonah doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Merom is pin-compatible and costs exactly the same amount. Besides, it would be a PR boost for Apple to have the entire lineup 64-bit and "Leopard ready". The Mac Mini is going to use the 5000 series Meroms and the iMac is going to use the 7000s.
Except now that Merom is out, Intel will be dropping the price on Yonah soon. Which will make Yonah cheaper.
Except now that Merom is out, Intel will be dropping the price on Yonah soon. Which will make Yonah cheaper.
zombierunner
Apr 21, 04:45 AM
Performance and specifications determine whether or not it's a "Pro", not the people who use them. I'm not a professional race car driver, but my car has over 400hp. Does that mean that my car is not the high-performance sports car that the automotive world widely claims it to be?
And besides, how do you know those people aren't using heavy-duty applications? Is a thirty-second observation at Starbucks enough to justify such a statement?
dang .. afrwq just got burned lol
And besides, how do you know those people aren't using heavy-duty applications? Is a thirty-second observation at Starbucks enough to justify such a statement?
dang .. afrwq just got burned lol
eenu
Aug 16, 09:51 AM
Who gives a flying-you-know-what about an iPod with wireless capabilities?
What, so the transfer speeds can be even slower?
So someone can use terrible sounding, cheap bluetooth headphones?
What is the point of wireless in an iPod? These sound like rumors started by technically-inept, idiot investors who are trying to sell Apple stock to their technically-inept, idiot clients.
Macrumors: remember that part of your slogan where it says rumors "you care about"???
Next please.
or possibly so you can purchase music etc whilst out and about or even share your music between you and your friends ipods?
Those two functions alone seem attractive to me.
EDIT: Why couldn't they make ipods with mini solar cells in like calculators?
What, so the transfer speeds can be even slower?
So someone can use terrible sounding, cheap bluetooth headphones?
What is the point of wireless in an iPod? These sound like rumors started by technically-inept, idiot investors who are trying to sell Apple stock to their technically-inept, idiot clients.
Macrumors: remember that part of your slogan where it says rumors "you care about"???
Next please.
or possibly so you can purchase music etc whilst out and about or even share your music between you and your friends ipods?
Those two functions alone seem attractive to me.
EDIT: Why couldn't they make ipods with mini solar cells in like calculators?
iGav
Mar 7, 03:05 PM
It certainly could be significantly higher. Public taste, laziness on the part of manufacturers and other things have all conspired to keep the bar set low on fuel economy.
I think that's probably accurate, general apathy on all sides really isn't it.
By way of a postscript, it's worth pointing out that today's safety and environmental regulations make it more difficult to make a car frugal, small and light than it was when Alec Issigonis designed the Mini.
Indeed, I think you've also inadvertently described the perfect engineering challenge that todays manufacturers really should be embracing, but instead seem so reticent to take up. The most remarkable thing about the original Mini, wasn't its size, it wasn't its cost� it was the whole. And in that respect alone, I cannot think of one car today that is really in anyway comparable whatsoever.
True, and that's a shame, because brand image often matters than a car's actual merits. If the new Jetta is a turd, people will still buy it because the VW badge has cachet here that GM does not, at least in the realm of small cars.
It's entirely possible to turn a brand around of course, as VW demonstrated with �koda, it's only 15 years ago that �koda was still the punchline to almost every joke.
The problem is Chevrolet is in a somewhat unique position in many respects here, it's a known brand, but by name only, usually as the carrier of good ol' boys... to a levy of course, when I think of a Chevy it's either something bright pink, with chrome� lots of chrome, or a pickup truck, not the rebadging of dreadful Daewoo cars. I suspect I'm not alone on that one.
And therein lies the problem. That and the Spark of course.
I'm not going to stand up too much for GM, I've never held a high opinion of most of their products, but I have reasonably read good reviews of the Cruze and I hope they bring the diesel here.
The Cruze is entirely inoffensive, and does the job entirely adequately by all accounts, as it should, after all it does have 4 wheels and an engine. Autocar likened it to the old Mk2 Seat Toledo saloon, and that's probably an apt comparison. Vanilla. Much like the rest of Vauxhall/Opel/Holden/Buick ranges etc actually. And that is a big problem for GM. A very big problem. One that almost sank the ship in the first place in fact. The captain might be different, but there's still no one at the helm.
the Daewoo -> Chevrolet re-branding in europe has been more or less the best business move GM has made perhaps in the last decade
Doesn't say much really does it. ;)
I think you highlight the real issue in the rest of your post. But it doesn't just affect Opel. And that is perhaps GM's biggest problem of all.
which is in a contrast to the japanese/korean brands which in europe over the last few years streamlined a lot: nearly all brands stopped offering premium sedans or upper market offerings and rather concentrated on SUVs/ crossovers and small offroaders and small minivans, compacts or small hatchbacks
It's not really streamlining when you have something like 6 suv/off-roaders in your range a'la Nissan is it? ;)
GM is doing reasonably well in Asia, and they have placed much of their small-car design duties into the capable hands of the Koreans - a wise move in my opinion.
Not if the Spark is anything to go by. Fortunately as the i10 proves, being Korean isn't the problem. ;)
I think blame can be put on both sides.
Yeah, but mainly GM for getting themselves into such a god almighty mess in the first place. ;)
The Buick Regal is the Opel Insignia( I love the US media. Before the Regal came out in the US, they went over to Europe and drove it and they loved it. Then they drive it on US shores, and all of a sudden they start panning it? ).
That'll be the marshmallows they use to replace the springs to make it a little softer for the yanks. :D
it wasn't a bad car.
It wasn't. You really don't want to think what today's hatches would be like if that car never existed. It really was that good. And its impact really was that great.
In typical bad Ford fashion
In typical Ford U.S. fashion you mean, fortunately, the profit making arm of Ford, i.e. the european division, produced the even better Mk2. ;)
I think that's probably accurate, general apathy on all sides really isn't it.
By way of a postscript, it's worth pointing out that today's safety and environmental regulations make it more difficult to make a car frugal, small and light than it was when Alec Issigonis designed the Mini.
Indeed, I think you've also inadvertently described the perfect engineering challenge that todays manufacturers really should be embracing, but instead seem so reticent to take up. The most remarkable thing about the original Mini, wasn't its size, it wasn't its cost� it was the whole. And in that respect alone, I cannot think of one car today that is really in anyway comparable whatsoever.
True, and that's a shame, because brand image often matters than a car's actual merits. If the new Jetta is a turd, people will still buy it because the VW badge has cachet here that GM does not, at least in the realm of small cars.
It's entirely possible to turn a brand around of course, as VW demonstrated with �koda, it's only 15 years ago that �koda was still the punchline to almost every joke.
The problem is Chevrolet is in a somewhat unique position in many respects here, it's a known brand, but by name only, usually as the carrier of good ol' boys... to a levy of course, when I think of a Chevy it's either something bright pink, with chrome� lots of chrome, or a pickup truck, not the rebadging of dreadful Daewoo cars. I suspect I'm not alone on that one.
And therein lies the problem. That and the Spark of course.
I'm not going to stand up too much for GM, I've never held a high opinion of most of their products, but I have reasonably read good reviews of the Cruze and I hope they bring the diesel here.
The Cruze is entirely inoffensive, and does the job entirely adequately by all accounts, as it should, after all it does have 4 wheels and an engine. Autocar likened it to the old Mk2 Seat Toledo saloon, and that's probably an apt comparison. Vanilla. Much like the rest of Vauxhall/Opel/Holden/Buick ranges etc actually. And that is a big problem for GM. A very big problem. One that almost sank the ship in the first place in fact. The captain might be different, but there's still no one at the helm.
the Daewoo -> Chevrolet re-branding in europe has been more or less the best business move GM has made perhaps in the last decade
Doesn't say much really does it. ;)
I think you highlight the real issue in the rest of your post. But it doesn't just affect Opel. And that is perhaps GM's biggest problem of all.
which is in a contrast to the japanese/korean brands which in europe over the last few years streamlined a lot: nearly all brands stopped offering premium sedans or upper market offerings and rather concentrated on SUVs/ crossovers and small offroaders and small minivans, compacts or small hatchbacks
It's not really streamlining when you have something like 6 suv/off-roaders in your range a'la Nissan is it? ;)
GM is doing reasonably well in Asia, and they have placed much of their small-car design duties into the capable hands of the Koreans - a wise move in my opinion.
Not if the Spark is anything to go by. Fortunately as the i10 proves, being Korean isn't the problem. ;)
I think blame can be put on both sides.
Yeah, but mainly GM for getting themselves into such a god almighty mess in the first place. ;)
The Buick Regal is the Opel Insignia( I love the US media. Before the Regal came out in the US, they went over to Europe and drove it and they loved it. Then they drive it on US shores, and all of a sudden they start panning it? ).
That'll be the marshmallows they use to replace the springs to make it a little softer for the yanks. :D
it wasn't a bad car.
It wasn't. You really don't want to think what today's hatches would be like if that car never existed. It really was that good. And its impact really was that great.
In typical bad Ford fashion
In typical Ford U.S. fashion you mean, fortunately, the profit making arm of Ford, i.e. the european division, produced the even better Mk2. ;)
Lord Blackadder
Mar 9, 02:46 PM
Interesting thoughts iGav. The sum total of your criticisms seems to me to indicate that automakers are much more conventional these days (at least when it comes to packaging), making innovation much more difficult. Part of this situation is undoubtedly due to the fact that there are a lot more laws governing the design of cars these days. In the days of the mini, (or DS, or the Traction Avant, or even further back the Model T) there was perhaps less conventional wisdom than there is now - resulting in a proliferation of vastly different designs in terms of overal packaging. Apparently it's up to the Indians to get creative with their Tata Nano.
These days, only the FF layout is considered suitable for an economy car. Everything else is rocking the boat. Perhaps, as with Horatio Nelson's tactics, an innovation eventually becomes hidebound tradition and stifles subesquent development?
As for the Korean flavor of the new Chevy, it may be dull by European standards but we love Hondas over here so tastes are different. Also, anyone who has ever driven a US-market Chevy Cavalier looks in wonder at the level of quality that the Korean cars bring to the party. The Koreans not only sneaked up on the Big Three, they also sneaked up on the Japanese and even some of the Europeans.
And that still makes me wonder what the hell Ford was doing by not building and selling their much better Euro-Fords here in the states. They completely missed the boat on that one - and are arguably still doing so by limiting our engine choices on the Focus and Fiesta and thus reducing the overall economy of the vehicle lineup.
These days, only the FF layout is considered suitable for an economy car. Everything else is rocking the boat. Perhaps, as with Horatio Nelson's tactics, an innovation eventually becomes hidebound tradition and stifles subesquent development?
As for the Korean flavor of the new Chevy, it may be dull by European standards but we love Hondas over here so tastes are different. Also, anyone who has ever driven a US-market Chevy Cavalier looks in wonder at the level of quality that the Korean cars bring to the party. The Koreans not only sneaked up on the Big Three, they also sneaked up on the Japanese and even some of the Europeans.
And that still makes me wonder what the hell Ford was doing by not building and selling their much better Euro-Fords here in the states. They completely missed the boat on that one - and are arguably still doing so by limiting our engine choices on the Focus and Fiesta and thus reducing the overall economy of the vehicle lineup.
timswim78
Aug 30, 09:58 PM
I don't think that is always the case. In this case, specifically, we are likely looking at the high end mini bumping down to the low end price range, and the high end being a new machine. That would meant that the high end mini is basically getting a price drop, which would push the refurb price down: the refurb Core Duo mini is currently MORE than a new Core Solo. I'd definitely expect to see Duos get a price drop in the refurb store if the new mini line up is 1.66 duo and 1.83 duo.
It will be interesting to see how Apple stocks and prices the refurb store once the new chips are in the Intel machines. I have noticed less and less PPC refurbs for iMacs and Minis. I guess that Apple is holding onto them in order to replace PPC machines that go bad while under warranty.
It will be interesting to see how Apple stocks and prices the refurb store once the new chips are in the Intel machines. I have noticed less and less PPC refurbs for iMacs and Minis. I guess that Apple is holding onto them in order to replace PPC machines that go bad while under warranty.