trekkie604
Feb 19, 11:53 PM
I like the wall paper... Which Orbiter and where'd ya get it? :)
It's Discovery and the image is a combination of 2 photos from NASA's HSF Gallery. You can get it on my dA: http://trekkie604.deviantart.com/art/Shuttle-into-the-Blue-138883539
How do you like the Dash? Saw one on woot the other day.
Not bad, I have it displaying Twitter feeds, NHL scores and weather mostly. If I hadn't have got it for a discount, I'd say the MSRP isn't worth it for the features it has.
It's Discovery and the image is a combination of 2 photos from NASA's HSF Gallery. You can get it on my dA: http://trekkie604.deviantart.com/art/Shuttle-into-the-Blue-138883539
How do you like the Dash? Saw one on woot the other day.
Not bad, I have it displaying Twitter feeds, NHL scores and weather mostly. If I hadn't have got it for a discount, I'd say the MSRP isn't worth it for the features it has.
aross99
Apr 2, 08:19 PM
That's exactly how I feel and why I use Apple products. Great commercial.
My thoughts exactly...
My thoughts exactly...
Rodimus Prime
Apr 12, 06:07 PM
He's young. 16 if I read his other post correctly about the wedding. So his attitude towards driving is expected. I used to streetrace after I got my license and held similar disdain for autos and people driving autos (including my dad). Experience and age mellows attitudes..... sometimes.... hehe.....
That explains a lot. being 16 means he has very little real experience in driving and a pure rookie at it. The joy of driving is still in his system. Now days most of the time driving for me is a way to get from A to B.
Driving in traffic every day like i said really made me consider going Automatic. hard to do a low speed crawl in a manual.
That explains a lot. being 16 means he has very little real experience in driving and a pure rookie at it. The joy of driving is still in his system. Now days most of the time driving for me is a way to get from A to B.
Driving in traffic every day like i said really made me consider going Automatic. hard to do a low speed crawl in a manual.
rezenclowd3
Jan 28, 01:07 PM
I like the idea of a pop-up navigation system!
Less chance of theft or break-in
And one more motor/slider mechanism to fail. I will stick with vehicles that don't have fancy shmancy electronics. Besides....its more weight ;-)
Less chance of theft or break-in
And one more motor/slider mechanism to fail. I will stick with vehicles that don't have fancy shmancy electronics. Besides....its more weight ;-)
scottlinux
Oct 23, 02:06 PM
I don't know if this update is imminent. apple.com store still shows macbooks and mbp as shipping within 24 hours....
jamesryanbell
Mar 24, 01:19 PM
That's really, really good news!!
Tmelon
Mar 31, 05:02 PM
The top of it just does not look like it was meant to be a desktop app. makes me think of all the windows software you get how they over do the look of it.
I wonder if they'll give an option to change it. Or they could possibly scrap the new look completely if all of the developers give negative feedback. It personally doesn't bother me, but I do think they could have made it look at least a bit better.
I wonder if they'll give an option to change it. Or they could possibly scrap the new look completely if all of the developers give negative feedback. It personally doesn't bother me, but I do think they could have made it look at least a bit better.
timerollson
Nov 26, 12:05 PM
Bought this today on a whim. I ****ing love it!:
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4131/5209638998_fe2eaf5b2c.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4089/5209659858_9e4b8ab4af.jpg
Took advantage of Amazon's DVD sales and bought these:
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51%2By8xib7UL._SL500_AA300_.jpg
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51Ak7iiEAlL._SL500_AA300_.jpghttp://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41EDIanxpWL._SL500_AA300_.jpghttp://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41DsibIifuL._SL500_AA300_.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4131/5209638998_fe2eaf5b2c.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4089/5209659858_9e4b8ab4af.jpg
Took advantage of Amazon's DVD sales and bought these:
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51%2By8xib7UL._SL500_AA300_.jpg
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51Ak7iiEAlL._SL500_AA300_.jpghttp://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41EDIanxpWL._SL500_AA300_.jpghttp://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41DsibIifuL._SL500_AA300_.jpg
Lord Blackadder
Mar 22, 12:41 AM
Well, personally I would consider "loyalists" part of military assets. And I'm sure most generals do as well because that's the way they talk about killing soldiers. Thus inflicting "material" damage should include the people who operate the weapons via command.
And one would figure that since there are a huge number of "defectors", some of these loyalists must be pretty hard-core and you'll have to kill them to prevent them from picking up a simple AK and IED later on and blow up things from the shadows. This might seem harsh, but the reality of it is that if they pick a side, they accept their fate as a loser.
The UN mandate calls for a no-fly zone. Under current military doctrine that requires that the opponent's air defense network be degraded. Some military personnel will inevitably die when their air defense installations come under attack. Other than that, we don't have the authority to attack loyalists unless they are threatening the safety of civilians by bombarding rebel cities or some such, and then only if they can be clearly identified and attacked without risking civilian lives. Loyalist units that are simply surrounding a rebel strongholds are not legitimate targets at this stage.
However, in light of the situation, I would understand the need to leave some "real warriors" alive and hope they join the new administration because looking at these rebels, they are mostly a bunch of city slickers or something that found a gun, see smoke, run toward the front lines all exited...to come right back carrying their dead in a bedsheet. It's a real joke how they handle this rebelion. If this is how it is, we're going to need troops on the ground to get these guys in shape...if not during...then after the supplanting of Quadafi.
This is pretty much how any irregular force has behaved at any time in history (see the beginnings of the American and French revolutions for example) It's not something we can control. Some rebel units are made up of defected regular army units, they will undoubtedly form the core of any rebel advance and show better cohesion. By merely existing as a force in being the, the irregular units (or more correctly, loose bands) legitimize the opposition, and they've proven somewhat effective in defense.
As for troops on the ground - this is a Libyan civil war. The UN's mission is to prevent Gaddafi from murdering his own people in his attempt to maintain power. The Libyans must do the rest.
I honestly wouldn't be surprised if the end result of all this is not at all dissimilar to the goings-on in Iraq.
As long as we don't invade, this is unlikely to be as bad as Iraq. We are aiding a popular uprising against hated autocrat, not invading a foreign country with plans of occupation and prolonged rooting out of insurgents. There are still many potential pitfalls and I am not arguing that the situation is necessarily a good one, but it is certainly less risky than the 2003 Iraq invasion.
And one would figure that since there are a huge number of "defectors", some of these loyalists must be pretty hard-core and you'll have to kill them to prevent them from picking up a simple AK and IED later on and blow up things from the shadows. This might seem harsh, but the reality of it is that if they pick a side, they accept their fate as a loser.
The UN mandate calls for a no-fly zone. Under current military doctrine that requires that the opponent's air defense network be degraded. Some military personnel will inevitably die when their air defense installations come under attack. Other than that, we don't have the authority to attack loyalists unless they are threatening the safety of civilians by bombarding rebel cities or some such, and then only if they can be clearly identified and attacked without risking civilian lives. Loyalist units that are simply surrounding a rebel strongholds are not legitimate targets at this stage.
However, in light of the situation, I would understand the need to leave some "real warriors" alive and hope they join the new administration because looking at these rebels, they are mostly a bunch of city slickers or something that found a gun, see smoke, run toward the front lines all exited...to come right back carrying their dead in a bedsheet. It's a real joke how they handle this rebelion. If this is how it is, we're going to need troops on the ground to get these guys in shape...if not during...then after the supplanting of Quadafi.
This is pretty much how any irregular force has behaved at any time in history (see the beginnings of the American and French revolutions for example) It's not something we can control. Some rebel units are made up of defected regular army units, they will undoubtedly form the core of any rebel advance and show better cohesion. By merely existing as a force in being the, the irregular units (or more correctly, loose bands) legitimize the opposition, and they've proven somewhat effective in defense.
As for troops on the ground - this is a Libyan civil war. The UN's mission is to prevent Gaddafi from murdering his own people in his attempt to maintain power. The Libyans must do the rest.
I honestly wouldn't be surprised if the end result of all this is not at all dissimilar to the goings-on in Iraq.
As long as we don't invade, this is unlikely to be as bad as Iraq. We are aiding a popular uprising against hated autocrat, not invading a foreign country with plans of occupation and prolonged rooting out of insurgents. There are still many potential pitfalls and I am not arguing that the situation is necessarily a good one, but it is certainly less risky than the 2003 Iraq invasion.
spencers
Jan 10, 10:08 AM
I was finally able to take my own pics of my just acquired '88 BMW 325is with M50B25TU engine swap. Darn this car is quick and handles so very well.
Don't mind my nerdy self, It's who I am and I have come to accept it over a decade ago:D
I love the german-colored motorsport emblem!
some better pics of my 135i...
Gorgeous 1-er!
I cannot believe BMW is still putting MYRTLE WOOD in these cars. :p
Don't mind my nerdy self, It's who I am and I have come to accept it over a decade ago:D
I love the german-colored motorsport emblem!
some better pics of my 135i...
Gorgeous 1-er!
I cannot believe BMW is still putting MYRTLE WOOD in these cars. :p
Gatesbasher
Apr 3, 01:23 PM
Are you kidding me?!
The 'pathology of people like me'? Who do you think you are? Facts are that I've neither held, or used either device, so I'll wait until I have until I make my decision. What's so controversial about that? How am I talking about the iPad in any kind of disadvantageous way? I'm just saying I want to try both and have not made up my mind yet. Rational.
The Playbook does exist too, no matter how much you say it doesn't. What on earth are you basing you assumption on? Where did I ever promote the Playbook over the iPad? Please retract your comments.
The Playbook does NOT exist, until people can buy it and compare it with an existing product. You "Haven't made up your mind yet?" On what conceivable basis could you make up your mind between an actual shipping product and pie-in-the-sky vaporware? How is that rational? It used to be Apple products were only sneered at in comparison with existing competitors. Now they have to compete with every imaginary device anybody can dream up, from the HP Slate to next years "100 x as fast" Tegra 3 barn-burner.
The 'pathology of people like me'? Who do you think you are? Facts are that I've neither held, or used either device, so I'll wait until I have until I make my decision. What's so controversial about that? How am I talking about the iPad in any kind of disadvantageous way? I'm just saying I want to try both and have not made up my mind yet. Rational.
The Playbook does exist too, no matter how much you say it doesn't. What on earth are you basing you assumption on? Where did I ever promote the Playbook over the iPad? Please retract your comments.
The Playbook does NOT exist, until people can buy it and compare it with an existing product. You "Haven't made up your mind yet?" On what conceivable basis could you make up your mind between an actual shipping product and pie-in-the-sky vaporware? How is that rational? It used to be Apple products were only sneered at in comparison with existing competitors. Now they have to compete with every imaginary device anybody can dream up, from the HP Slate to next years "100 x as fast" Tegra 3 barn-burner.
barkomatic
Apr 21, 12:48 PM
I could see this as a concern for politicians and celebrities whose locations might be used as fodder for tabloid gossip. Maybe a couple going through a divorce could use the data to substantiate an affair.
A.Fairhead
Jul 18, 04:11 AM
I hope the rental thing is true--I don't want to own. I'm not with Steve Jobs on this one (assuming the rumors are true that he opposes rentals).
Owning music downloads fits my habits/needs. Owning movie downloads does NOT. The vast majority of movies I watch I never see again. And I don't want to store big movie files long-term. And I don't want to pay a higher price! Lower the price and make it short-term. I like that better.
For the few movies/shows I'd want to own, I want the discs (Blu-Ray preferred :) ) and the ability to take them to a friends' house.
Also, if it's a rental model, I can be more forgiving on quality. They'd have to be better than iPod 320x240 (except, obviously, when played ON an iPod), but if they're a little bit short of DVD quality, I'd still be bored enough to seek instant gratification and rent some. The price would have to be right, of course. Netflix rentals cost about $2.50 each on my plan. For slightly-sub-DVD quality and near-instant delivery, I'd pay maybe $2. For FULL DVD quality I'd certainly be willing to match Netlflix's price, or even pay a little more (for iTunes convenience/speed).
I agree; I watch movies a lot more than I buy movies. When I go to the cinema, I pay to watch the film, not to own it. Most people do this - owning films is something of an impulse post-viewing, in my experience. If iTMS can provide a rental service, that's great. If they end up providing purchases too, then, that's great too. Apple will be able to target 'viewing' markets as well as 'purchase' markets, if the difference is easy enough to see there.
I guess my thoughts are to not rule out rentals - I'm sure many of you work with films like I've just described :p
Owning music downloads fits my habits/needs. Owning movie downloads does NOT. The vast majority of movies I watch I never see again. And I don't want to store big movie files long-term. And I don't want to pay a higher price! Lower the price and make it short-term. I like that better.
For the few movies/shows I'd want to own, I want the discs (Blu-Ray preferred :) ) and the ability to take them to a friends' house.
Also, if it's a rental model, I can be more forgiving on quality. They'd have to be better than iPod 320x240 (except, obviously, when played ON an iPod), but if they're a little bit short of DVD quality, I'd still be bored enough to seek instant gratification and rent some. The price would have to be right, of course. Netflix rentals cost about $2.50 each on my plan. For slightly-sub-DVD quality and near-instant delivery, I'd pay maybe $2. For FULL DVD quality I'd certainly be willing to match Netlflix's price, or even pay a little more (for iTunes convenience/speed).
I agree; I watch movies a lot more than I buy movies. When I go to the cinema, I pay to watch the film, not to own it. Most people do this - owning films is something of an impulse post-viewing, in my experience. If iTMS can provide a rental service, that's great. If they end up providing purchases too, then, that's great too. Apple will be able to target 'viewing' markets as well as 'purchase' markets, if the difference is easy enough to see there.
I guess my thoughts are to not rule out rentals - I'm sure many of you work with films like I've just described :p
shawnce
Nov 17, 11:27 AM
Will consider a Mac Pro if it gets 8 cores and they drop the FB-DIMMs. Don't want FB-DIMMs, they have the definite feel of an overcomplicated solution to a problem. FB-DIMM are likely the future... it will truly start to will shine when they make available more channels out of the memory controllers allowing bandwidth to scale and it hides memory specifics from the memory controller allowing advancements in DIMMs to remain compatible with existing systems.
edtorious
Apr 2, 07:52 PM
did you see the backlight bleeding?!? :rolleyes:
mulze22
Aug 16, 11:16 AM
It seems like there is so many iPod ideas floating around. Full video iPod, wireless iPod, iPhone. Why not put it all into one machine. I mean it is Apple. They can do what they want.
Mal
Mar 24, 01:43 PM
Apple writes all the drivers for the cards. It supports, so that will probably never happen.
Huh? That doesn't make any sense. If Apple's writing drivers for these cards, then doesn't that make the chances of them being supported 100%? Obviously it doesn't indicate that retail (PC) versions would be supported, but I can't make any sense out of your comment.
jW
Huh? That doesn't make any sense. If Apple's writing drivers for these cards, then doesn't that make the chances of them being supported 100%? Obviously it doesn't indicate that retail (PC) versions would be supported, but I can't make any sense out of your comment.
jW
calcvita
May 3, 03:46 AM
apple needs to do something about this whole uninstallation process. apps like appcleaner exist and they do exist for a very good reason. if i uninstall an app, i want it to completely be gone.
and what if you have a corrupted .plist file which causes the application to misbehave? by simply drag & drop the app into the trashcan leaves its associated files untouched and re-installing the app won't fix the problem.
on many troubleshooting guides a very common suggestion is to remove the preference file, located in the user (in most cases) library folder, but in lion this folder is hidden and if you ask me, this will confuse newbies even more. i'm sure there will be comments like "but i don't have a library folder" and so on.
and what if you have a corrupted .plist file which causes the application to misbehave? by simply drag & drop the app into the trashcan leaves its associated files untouched and re-installing the app won't fix the problem.
on many troubleshooting guides a very common suggestion is to remove the preference file, located in the user (in most cases) library folder, but in lion this folder is hidden and if you ask me, this will confuse newbies even more. i'm sure there will be comments like "but i don't have a library folder" and so on.
milo
Sep 7, 07:27 AM
It's a nice idea, but WAY too pricey. I don't know what makes them think people will be willing to pay these prices when the DVD is available for just a little bit more (in some cases the same or less) and includes special features, probably better quality, and no DRM.
If the studios insist on this kind of pricing for all download services, it will just drive people to bittorrent and netflix. It's just silly to insist that pricing be as much as DVD when you don't get as much for your money.
The rumors also haven't addressed picture quality. I assume it will be an improvement, and it DEFINITELY won't be HD...but will it be even DVD quality? I'd say that's the bare minimum for something like this to even be considered by most consumers.
I don't think rental is that big a deal. It would be nice (and may be added later), but it's a completely separate market from sales. I think people are going overboard saying lack of rentals would kill it.
If the studios insist on this kind of pricing for all download services, it will just drive people to bittorrent and netflix. It's just silly to insist that pricing be as much as DVD when you don't get as much for your money.
The rumors also haven't addressed picture quality. I assume it will be an improvement, and it DEFINITELY won't be HD...but will it be even DVD quality? I'd say that's the bare minimum for something like this to even be considered by most consumers.
I don't think rental is that big a deal. It would be nice (and may be added later), but it's a completely separate market from sales. I think people are going overboard saying lack of rentals would kill it.
Mr-Stabby
Apr 12, 09:10 PM
Is there anybody actually filming this? From what the tweets are describing, the audience are loving it, i'd like to see this keynote.
macrumors12345
Apr 19, 12:30 PM
Please to have Thunderbolt.
crashnburn
Mar 26, 03:51 PM
Awesome news, I recomend the ATI 5870. It can be found for only $200 and it more than holds it's own against the latest and greatest from Nvidia and ATI. It's only 6 percent slower than a 6950. The 6950 on the other hand can be flashed to a 6970 quite easily but it costs abot $260.
Where can I see a comparative of all cards? Or do a comparison of select cards?
Um, I believe credit for this should actually go to netkas:
http://netkas.org/?p=679
He (with rominator) reported over a week ago that the 10.6.6 build with the ThunderBook Pro's can drive PC Radeon 6xxx cards as is.
Is this confirmed or still ...?
this is AWESOME news for all the hackintosh people out there.
Although, my Radeon HD5570 isn't on this 'supported' list, I still got it to work... all resolutions including quartz extreme enabled. :D:D:D
Nice :) What version of OS are you using?
Where I see ThunderBolt being useful is in scenarios where you want to use it at your desk and have all the advantages of a desktop machine. So you put your MBP on your desk and connect via ThunderBolt:
* A drive array with several 3.5" drives, possibly in RAID configuration
* An external video card that is driving a 30" 2560x1600 display with two 1200 x 1920 displays (rotated) on each side of the 30"
You wouldn't bother to use the laptop display for this configuration (I wouldn't at least).
Though, ThunderBolt supposedly allows for daisy-chaining at least 2 monitors, in which case you could run off the laptop's internal video card, but then you need compatible monitors that allow daisy-chaining.
Personally I'd love to see external video cards compatible with ThunderBolt (I use my laptop mostly at my desk), or possibly an enclosure you can put a regular desktop video card in.
I'd like external video cards as well :)
Macrumors needs to seriously consider using this tonymacx86 as a reliable source. As I stated before he gets info from other sources, and this is often highlighted by others
See this quote ex Netkas...
6950 AND 6970 DO NOT WORK IN ANY CURRENTLY AVAILABLE VERSION OF OSX FOR MACS OR HACKS !!!!
THE NEWS STORIES THAT WERE LIFTED FROM HERE ARE INCORRECT !!!!!
DON'T BUY A 69XX CARD UNLESS YOU CAN AFFORD TO WAIT A FEW WEEKS (OR MONTHS) TO USE IT IN OSX !!!!!
OK, done my part. And if you still think they work, go ask your buddy "Tony" how to make them work.
Sad but macrumors - please take more care.
Hmm.. Interesting conflict of information.
Where can I see a comparative of all cards? Or do a comparison of select cards?
Um, I believe credit for this should actually go to netkas:
http://netkas.org/?p=679
He (with rominator) reported over a week ago that the 10.6.6 build with the ThunderBook Pro's can drive PC Radeon 6xxx cards as is.
Is this confirmed or still ...?
this is AWESOME news for all the hackintosh people out there.
Although, my Radeon HD5570 isn't on this 'supported' list, I still got it to work... all resolutions including quartz extreme enabled. :D:D:D
Nice :) What version of OS are you using?
Where I see ThunderBolt being useful is in scenarios where you want to use it at your desk and have all the advantages of a desktop machine. So you put your MBP on your desk and connect via ThunderBolt:
* A drive array with several 3.5" drives, possibly in RAID configuration
* An external video card that is driving a 30" 2560x1600 display with two 1200 x 1920 displays (rotated) on each side of the 30"
You wouldn't bother to use the laptop display for this configuration (I wouldn't at least).
Though, ThunderBolt supposedly allows for daisy-chaining at least 2 monitors, in which case you could run off the laptop's internal video card, but then you need compatible monitors that allow daisy-chaining.
Personally I'd love to see external video cards compatible with ThunderBolt (I use my laptop mostly at my desk), or possibly an enclosure you can put a regular desktop video card in.
I'd like external video cards as well :)
Macrumors needs to seriously consider using this tonymacx86 as a reliable source. As I stated before he gets info from other sources, and this is often highlighted by others
See this quote ex Netkas...
6950 AND 6970 DO NOT WORK IN ANY CURRENTLY AVAILABLE VERSION OF OSX FOR MACS OR HACKS !!!!
THE NEWS STORIES THAT WERE LIFTED FROM HERE ARE INCORRECT !!!!!
DON'T BUY A 69XX CARD UNLESS YOU CAN AFFORD TO WAIT A FEW WEEKS (OR MONTHS) TO USE IT IN OSX !!!!!
OK, done my part. And if you still think they work, go ask your buddy "Tony" how to make them work.
Sad but macrumors - please take more care.
Hmm.. Interesting conflict of information.
Hellhammer
Apr 21, 03:50 PM
I'd welcome HellHammer's thoughts on this as he generally has a well informed perspective on these things.
I have made my predictions and I still stand behind them. I don't really follow this thread though so if someone has me a question, you may be better off PMing me.
1199$ 21.5" iMac
Intel Core i3-2100 (3.1GHz)
AMD 6490M with 256MB GDDR5
500GB HD
2x2GB RAM; option for 4x2GB
1499$ 21.5" iMac
Intel Core i5-2400S (2.5/3.3GHz); option for Core i5-2500S (2.7/3.7GHz)
AMD 6750M with 512MB GDDR5
1TB HD; option for 2TB
2x2GB RAM: option for 4x2GB
1699$ 27" iMac
Intel Core i5-2400 (3.1/3.4GHz)
AMD 6750M with 512MB GDDR5; option for AMD 6950M with 1024MB GDDR5
1TB HD; option for 2TB
2x2GB RAM; options for 4x2GB, 2x4GB and 4x4GB
1999$ 27" iMac
Intel Core i7-2600 (3.4/3.8GHz)
AMD 6950M with 1024MB GDDR5
1TB HD; option for 2TB
2x4GB RAM; option for 4x4GB
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=11688279&postcount=26
I'm sure it's been done to death, but I spent some time actually thinking about realistic-ish speculations of what the new line could look like. I think they're going to get rid of one SKU ( the step up 27" without the quad i7), because it's kind of redundant, and for the $100 price difference, I can't imagine anyone NOT spending the extra modey to get the quad core). The only spec that is more of a wishful thinking piece is the inclusion of the HD6800M 1GB card in the 27" quad i7. THAT would be a beast!
Common Upgrades
1. Thunderbolt port
2. HDMI out
3. Sandybridge
Now, here's the model breakdown:
21.5" (1920x1080) display
3.2 GHz i3 processor
4 GB RAM
500 GB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 4870 (256MB)
HDMI out
$1199.99
21.5" (1920x1080) display
3.5 GHz i3 processor
8 GB RAM
1 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 4870 (256MB)
HDMI out
$1499.99
27" (2560x1440) display
2.8 GHz i5 processor
4 GB RAM
1 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 5870 (512MB)
HDMI out
$1699.99
27" (2560x1440) display
3.2 GHz quad i7 processor
8 GB RAM
2 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 6970 (1 GB)
HDMI out
$1999.99
ATI 4870M has TDP of 65W, there is no way it is going to fit in 21.5". Also, it makes absolutely no sense to use three different generations as that, if something, would confuse consumers a big time. The only possibility I see is that the low-end gets ATI 5670 (aka 5730M) like Apple did in previous update. Other models will very likely feature AMD 6000M-series graphics.
I also doubt that Apple will use i3 in other than the low-end iMac. All MBPs have i5 or better, even the 1199$ one. Using i3 in 1499$ iMac sounds stupid because in the end, the consumer thinks that i5 is better because 5 is greater than 3, even though that doesn't really mean that when comparing desktop and mobile CPUs. Moreover, there is no 3.5GHz i3 either.
HDMI doesn't sound too likely, seeing that only Mac Mini has it. Thunderbolt or mDP can provide the same functionality and much more.
I have made my predictions and I still stand behind them. I don't really follow this thread though so if someone has me a question, you may be better off PMing me.
1199$ 21.5" iMac
Intel Core i3-2100 (3.1GHz)
AMD 6490M with 256MB GDDR5
500GB HD
2x2GB RAM; option for 4x2GB
1499$ 21.5" iMac
Intel Core i5-2400S (2.5/3.3GHz); option for Core i5-2500S (2.7/3.7GHz)
AMD 6750M with 512MB GDDR5
1TB HD; option for 2TB
2x2GB RAM: option for 4x2GB
1699$ 27" iMac
Intel Core i5-2400 (3.1/3.4GHz)
AMD 6750M with 512MB GDDR5; option for AMD 6950M with 1024MB GDDR5
1TB HD; option for 2TB
2x2GB RAM; options for 4x2GB, 2x4GB and 4x4GB
1999$ 27" iMac
Intel Core i7-2600 (3.4/3.8GHz)
AMD 6950M with 1024MB GDDR5
1TB HD; option for 2TB
2x4GB RAM; option for 4x4GB
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=11688279&postcount=26
I'm sure it's been done to death, but I spent some time actually thinking about realistic-ish speculations of what the new line could look like. I think they're going to get rid of one SKU ( the step up 27" without the quad i7), because it's kind of redundant, and for the $100 price difference, I can't imagine anyone NOT spending the extra modey to get the quad core). The only spec that is more of a wishful thinking piece is the inclusion of the HD6800M 1GB card in the 27" quad i7. THAT would be a beast!
Common Upgrades
1. Thunderbolt port
2. HDMI out
3. Sandybridge
Now, here's the model breakdown:
21.5" (1920x1080) display
3.2 GHz i3 processor
4 GB RAM
500 GB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 4870 (256MB)
HDMI out
$1199.99
21.5" (1920x1080) display
3.5 GHz i3 processor
8 GB RAM
1 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 4870 (256MB)
HDMI out
$1499.99
27" (2560x1440) display
2.8 GHz i5 processor
4 GB RAM
1 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 5870 (512MB)
HDMI out
$1699.99
27" (2560x1440) display
3.2 GHz quad i7 processor
8 GB RAM
2 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 6970 (1 GB)
HDMI out
$1999.99
ATI 4870M has TDP of 65W, there is no way it is going to fit in 21.5". Also, it makes absolutely no sense to use three different generations as that, if something, would confuse consumers a big time. The only possibility I see is that the low-end gets ATI 5670 (aka 5730M) like Apple did in previous update. Other models will very likely feature AMD 6000M-series graphics.
I also doubt that Apple will use i3 in other than the low-end iMac. All MBPs have i5 or better, even the 1199$ one. Using i3 in 1499$ iMac sounds stupid because in the end, the consumer thinks that i5 is better because 5 is greater than 3, even though that doesn't really mean that when comparing desktop and mobile CPUs. Moreover, there is no 3.5GHz i3 either.
HDMI doesn't sound too likely, seeing that only Mac Mini has it. Thunderbolt or mDP can provide the same functionality and much more.
RebootD
Apr 12, 09:28 PM
"People are gasping at this demo" looks like the early hints weren't lies. Apple is delivering the goods. (from @fcpsupermeet twitter)