macquariumguy
Mar 23, 04:18 PM
Don't do it Apple!
danielwsmithee
Apr 25, 02:44 PM
But I fear what Apple has in mind is basically an entire range of Macbook Air laptops. The Air is a fine computer, no doubt, but it's not the portable desktop I want and never can be without supporting two drives and discrete graphics in one way or another.That is exactly what I envision for the next Mac Book Pro. Take a MacBook Air make it just thick enough to handle an additional 2.5" Hard Drive, dedicated graphics, and a high performance processor. Ditch the optical drive, make SSD+HD the standard configuration.
yojitani
Sep 13, 12:32 AM
This is probably old news by now, but the new ipods/nanos don't qualify for the $179 return apple is giving students when the buy an ipod with a computer... bummer.
BlindGoldfish
Apr 20, 09:52 AM
So how would I go about encrypting this backup file on my Mac?
sam10685
Sep 10, 08:58 AM
My nano is already on eBay awaiting a nice metal clad 8GB version, I hope they do an andonised black one though to match my other gadgets.
wow. your rather optimistic. hope everything works out for you.
wow. your rather optimistic. hope everything works out for you.
Abstract
Sep 26, 07:54 AM
That artists rendition posted on the front page is pointless. It's not as though that is the actual design. It looks too Nano-ish, and even the Nano look has changed.
Anyway, I'm not excited about an iPhone. It would need to give me at least one neat feature for this to be worth drooling over.
Free Mothers Day Cards for
happy mothers day cards to
Happy Mother#39;s Day, Cards,
happy mothers day cards to
size - Happy Mother#39;s Day
Printable Mother#39;s Day Card
happy mothers day cards to
happy mothers day cards to
happy mothers day cards
Happy Mother#39;s Day Card by
Free Happy Mother#39;s Day Card
Happy Mother#39;s Day Card by
happy mothers day cards for
Anyway, I'm not excited about an iPhone. It would need to give me at least one neat feature for this to be worth drooling over.
Multimedia
Sep 9, 01:11 PM
It also depends if you can run multiple instances of that application. A little help here Multimedia? I know you've used multiple instances of Toast. Care to enlighten us on what other applications we can do the same? Maybe we should make a guide on it...Preemble clarification: I use Toast (http://www.roxio.com/enu/products/toast/titanium/overview.html) in a highly unorthodox way - nothing to do with writing DVDs or CDs. I use it most of the time to write DVD IMAGES that Handbrake (http://handbrake.m0k.org/) understands how to make priistine mp4 files from. I am able to reduce a 4.3GB original EyeTV HD broadcast recording down to 351MB using this method. The result is an excellent, albeit soft, version of the original that can go on an iPod or two on a CD and when played on an analog TV from the iPod looks just like a DVD. On a HD monitor it still looks great. Just a little soft. Sound quality is identical to the original.
I haven't explored what else we can run simultaneously beyond Toast (http://www.roxio.com/enu/products/toast/titanium/overview.html) and Handbrake (http://handbrake.m0k.org/). I can run as many instances of those as I like. But I run out of cores even just running both of them because they will each use more than two cores given the chance to run alone. Running them simultaneously even with a second Handbrake running third, still gets all the jobs done faster than waiting for two to run and then running the third. Handbrake will process up to about 150-160 fps when two copies are running while it will process only about 93-100 fps alone.
Handbrake FPS readings vary a lot between the analysis pass and the writing pass - much slower writing on the second pass than studying-planning the writing scheme on the first pass on both the Quad and the Mac Pro. On the Mac Pro, Toast will use almost all 4 cores given no competition. But so far I'm not convinced it is encoding EyeTV recordings for DVD images much faster than it does on teh Quad - yes 7.1 UB. I need to go back and exact time some encodes on the Mac Pro then compare that here on the Quad to tell.
Just tried to launch a second copy of EyeTV and it's a no go. Maybe if I have another liscense with another tuner like the new hybrid it will work with a second copy - don't know yet. Probably getting an EyeTV hybrid tuner (http://www.elgato.com/index.php?file=products_eyetvhybridna) soon so I can record two HD shows at once.
A Multi-Instance and Multi-Core Usage Guide would be a great help. Does someone with authorization want to start a thread on this subject? I am not authorized to create new threads. But I would be happy to contribute to it. If someone with new thread creation permission does it, please post a link to it here. Thank you.
I haven't explored what else we can run simultaneously beyond Toast (http://www.roxio.com/enu/products/toast/titanium/overview.html) and Handbrake (http://handbrake.m0k.org/). I can run as many instances of those as I like. But I run out of cores even just running both of them because they will each use more than two cores given the chance to run alone. Running them simultaneously even with a second Handbrake running third, still gets all the jobs done faster than waiting for two to run and then running the third. Handbrake will process up to about 150-160 fps when two copies are running while it will process only about 93-100 fps alone.
Handbrake FPS readings vary a lot between the analysis pass and the writing pass - much slower writing on the second pass than studying-planning the writing scheme on the first pass on both the Quad and the Mac Pro. On the Mac Pro, Toast will use almost all 4 cores given no competition. But so far I'm not convinced it is encoding EyeTV recordings for DVD images much faster than it does on teh Quad - yes 7.1 UB. I need to go back and exact time some encodes on the Mac Pro then compare that here on the Quad to tell.
Just tried to launch a second copy of EyeTV and it's a no go. Maybe if I have another liscense with another tuner like the new hybrid it will work with a second copy - don't know yet. Probably getting an EyeTV hybrid tuner (http://www.elgato.com/index.php?file=products_eyetvhybridna) soon so I can record two HD shows at once.
A Multi-Instance and Multi-Core Usage Guide would be a great help. Does someone with authorization want to start a thread on this subject? I am not authorized to create new threads. But I would be happy to contribute to it. If someone with new thread creation permission does it, please post a link to it here. Thank you.
milo
Sep 5, 04:51 PM
Only one problem with that..
You can already do it with iTunes.
And it would be hard to go to one room and start the movie then go to the other room and start watching it.
If there is a media device it will be set-top box or Mini style that sits next to the main TV.
Did you read the post? iTunes doesn't do that, right now apple doesn't have an airport with *video* output. And look at the picture again, that mockup has a remote that talks to the airport, you don't have to leave the room.
You miss the whole point of this. Why would you want to have an expensive box next to the TV when you could just have a tiny airport, and let your computer do the heavy lifting from another room?
isn't the resolution going to be terrible. I don't see these movie downloads working with a hi-def TV. The television shows are pretty pathetic on my old 42" panasonic. 320x240 is going to look terrible on a beautiful sony 1080p television...
You're assuming they won't up the resolution when they start doing movies. What makes you so sure they'll do that?
You can already do it with iTunes.
And it would be hard to go to one room and start the movie then go to the other room and start watching it.
If there is a media device it will be set-top box or Mini style that sits next to the main TV.
Did you read the post? iTunes doesn't do that, right now apple doesn't have an airport with *video* output. And look at the picture again, that mockup has a remote that talks to the airport, you don't have to leave the room.
You miss the whole point of this. Why would you want to have an expensive box next to the TV when you could just have a tiny airport, and let your computer do the heavy lifting from another room?
isn't the resolution going to be terrible. I don't see these movie downloads working with a hi-def TV. The television shows are pretty pathetic on my old 42" panasonic. 320x240 is going to look terrible on a beautiful sony 1080p television...
You're assuming they won't up the resolution when they start doing movies. What makes you so sure they'll do that?
malnar
Apr 20, 01:53 PM
Oh, my God! Somebody will know that I took the train! (If, of course, they are security researchers or police officers or vengeful wives who hire a tech detective). So what? Apple does what a responsible corporation must: it won't give out your location without your permission, each and every time.
You're not getting it. You are looking at a sunny-sky situation where nothing bad ever happens. Let's look at it from my perspective, a real-world perspective: my Macbook, which was used to sync my iPhone and my wife's iPhone, was stolen last fall. So who has all of this supposedly "safe" data now? Whoever has that Macbook. Probably nothing will ever happen, but now I have that little thing in the back of my mind thinking, "Hmm, if that guy happens to read about this and happens to still have it, he could theoretically track our normal daily movements." In other words, he'd know our daily routine - you know, most people have a routine and stick to it and don't think a second thing about it. Conceivably, he could come back and strike again because he has a good feel of when we're not there. I'd say the likelihood of this happening is extremely low. But it could happen because of this. (And we know the Macbook was used for a long, long time because of Zumocast - had it on our iPhones and her computer and saw him logged in all the time, starting a couple days after he stole it. Was actually able to recover some family videos that way, actually.)
That's what you don't get. People shouldn't even have to worry about this. That kind of data shouldn't be available, period. PERIOD. And don't tell me to encrypt my iPhone backups, that's water under the bridge. Why doesn't iTunes encrypt them automatically, hmm? There's no need for any of this.
You're not getting it. You are looking at a sunny-sky situation where nothing bad ever happens. Let's look at it from my perspective, a real-world perspective: my Macbook, which was used to sync my iPhone and my wife's iPhone, was stolen last fall. So who has all of this supposedly "safe" data now? Whoever has that Macbook. Probably nothing will ever happen, but now I have that little thing in the back of my mind thinking, "Hmm, if that guy happens to read about this and happens to still have it, he could theoretically track our normal daily movements." In other words, he'd know our daily routine - you know, most people have a routine and stick to it and don't think a second thing about it. Conceivably, he could come back and strike again because he has a good feel of when we're not there. I'd say the likelihood of this happening is extremely low. But it could happen because of this. (And we know the Macbook was used for a long, long time because of Zumocast - had it on our iPhones and her computer and saw him logged in all the time, starting a couple days after he stole it. Was actually able to recover some family videos that way, actually.)
That's what you don't get. People shouldn't even have to worry about this. That kind of data shouldn't be available, period. PERIOD. And don't tell me to encrypt my iPhone backups, that's water under the bridge. Why doesn't iTunes encrypt them automatically, hmm? There's no need for any of this.
Rocketman
Sep 5, 03:38 PM
Hi all.
If you look at Apple's iMac site today before the next announcement, you see "consistency" with the expected message of a 23" HDTV iMac and a video streaming enabled AirPort Express.
The product is currently positioned as a hub for your entertainment experience. If you are a leading edge user, you have already hooked a kickin' audio system via hardwire or AirPort Express.
You already have remote control.
You already have, and share internet, printing, and even distributed content to computers in other rooms, presumably some of which are kickin' stereo enabled, all of which have access to your pool of media content.
Therefore in a real way such an announcement would be a relatively small harwdare upgrade while upgrading perception, desire and buzz emmensely.
They need a "significant hardware sales driver". Is this it?
Rocketman
If you look at Apple's iMac site today before the next announcement, you see "consistency" with the expected message of a 23" HDTV iMac and a video streaming enabled AirPort Express.
The product is currently positioned as a hub for your entertainment experience. If you are a leading edge user, you have already hooked a kickin' audio system via hardwire or AirPort Express.
You already have remote control.
You already have, and share internet, printing, and even distributed content to computers in other rooms, presumably some of which are kickin' stereo enabled, all of which have access to your pool of media content.
Therefore in a real way such an announcement would be a relatively small harwdare upgrade while upgrading perception, desire and buzz emmensely.
They need a "significant hardware sales driver". Is this it?
Rocketman
flyakite
Oct 12, 07:00 PM
Who cares what color an iPod is. Shouldn't really matter. Color does not affect funtionality. What matters is what is on the inside.
Yeah, where are all the camo colored MacBook Pro's and magenta Mac Pro towers huh? Come on Apple! :p
Yeah, where are all the camo colored MacBook Pro's and magenta Mac Pro towers huh? Come on Apple! :p
cirus
Apr 19, 07:45 PM
Sometimes I laugh when I read this website.
Look up the thread "Your perfect 2012 Macbook pro," (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1122404) pretty much everyone who mentions USB wants USB 3.0. There is no reason not to include it. People don't want their peripherals to be useless several years down the road. Or have to buy an adapter.
I've heard so many people justify the price of a mac on the "you get what you pay for" well a cheap adapter is going to crap out on you sooner of later. And really, people buy high end devices to lug a bag of adapters around lets see (minidisplay port to DVI, HDMI, digital; Thunderbolt to USB 3.0, e-sata, other ports such as audio ports) That's 5 adapters, that needs a bag (and no these things are more than an inch).
I personally think that Thunderbolt will become popular (just as minidisplay is) but that it will take a while. I wish I had in on my computer. If its supported natively then it is very likely that it will become more common.
If you seriously think that they will deliberately not put USB 3.0 on their Ivy Bridge computers then there is no sense arguing with you. Why would they not? Its not that they have anything to lose?
Personally, I think that the reason they did not put in the refreshed Macbook pros is that it would require a separate PCI slot and take up space that they do not have.
As for future proofing, thunderbolt more than USB but there will always be a demand for USB. Currently the fastest SSD drives are way more than enough for the average user who does not need gigabyte files in 2 seconds. Speed is limited to the slowest component in the data chain which for many will be the hard drive. I mean most back up their data to a mechanical drive and not a SSD simply because of the cost, external SSD will become popular but these speeds aren't going to be needed for a while.
USB 2.0 is still being used and is adequate for many.
Really, the connector on your motherboard is capped at 6 gbps (sata 3), you are never going to get a faster speed than this on your hard drive on the new macbook pros. 10 gbps becomes sort of meaningless if you can only use a fraction.
So where is you 10 gbps going to go? Hard drive cannot deal with this. Wireless, you'll be lucky to get over 20 MB/s. Ethernet is only 1 gbps and that is assuming that the connection is being used fully, providers may limit this in reality to far less. Of course you could have 2 SSD drives but I don't think many are going to use this much data, at least in the usable life of the system.
Why have 1 when you can have both? Apple won't cut off the nose to spite the face. Of course they did do this with blu-ray (why not make it an option, don't justify this as "people don't want it" cause some do and not making it an option seems as a waste on those beautiful screens). Options are not going to hurt anyone.
Look up the thread "Your perfect 2012 Macbook pro," (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1122404) pretty much everyone who mentions USB wants USB 3.0. There is no reason not to include it. People don't want their peripherals to be useless several years down the road. Or have to buy an adapter.
I've heard so many people justify the price of a mac on the "you get what you pay for" well a cheap adapter is going to crap out on you sooner of later. And really, people buy high end devices to lug a bag of adapters around lets see (minidisplay port to DVI, HDMI, digital; Thunderbolt to USB 3.0, e-sata, other ports such as audio ports) That's 5 adapters, that needs a bag (and no these things are more than an inch).
I personally think that Thunderbolt will become popular (just as minidisplay is) but that it will take a while. I wish I had in on my computer. If its supported natively then it is very likely that it will become more common.
If you seriously think that they will deliberately not put USB 3.0 on their Ivy Bridge computers then there is no sense arguing with you. Why would they not? Its not that they have anything to lose?
Personally, I think that the reason they did not put in the refreshed Macbook pros is that it would require a separate PCI slot and take up space that they do not have.
As for future proofing, thunderbolt more than USB but there will always be a demand for USB. Currently the fastest SSD drives are way more than enough for the average user who does not need gigabyte files in 2 seconds. Speed is limited to the slowest component in the data chain which for many will be the hard drive. I mean most back up their data to a mechanical drive and not a SSD simply because of the cost, external SSD will become popular but these speeds aren't going to be needed for a while.
USB 2.0 is still being used and is adequate for many.
Really, the connector on your motherboard is capped at 6 gbps (sata 3), you are never going to get a faster speed than this on your hard drive on the new macbook pros. 10 gbps becomes sort of meaningless if you can only use a fraction.
So where is you 10 gbps going to go? Hard drive cannot deal with this. Wireless, you'll be lucky to get over 20 MB/s. Ethernet is only 1 gbps and that is assuming that the connection is being used fully, providers may limit this in reality to far less. Of course you could have 2 SSD drives but I don't think many are going to use this much data, at least in the usable life of the system.
Why have 1 when you can have both? Apple won't cut off the nose to spite the face. Of course they did do this with blu-ray (why not make it an option, don't justify this as "people don't want it" cause some do and not making it an option seems as a waste on those beautiful screens). Options are not going to hurt anyone.
firsttube
Sep 13, 10:03 PM
Your first point is intriguing and has me thinking too, however your 2nd is not too far from being "Apple". Apple has used code names for years. It is a known fact and something that is well documented throughout the web at credible sites like folklore.org and the likes run by former Apple employees.
Unless you were actually commenting on the "pre-announcement™" itself and not the codename
Yeah, I think they want people to download content starting today knowing that they'll be able to watch it on their nice big flat screen tv in the living room soon.
Steve jobs said "nice big flat screen tv" a lot during the itv intro, didn't he?
Unless you were actually commenting on the "pre-announcement™" itself and not the codename
Yeah, I think they want people to download content starting today knowing that they'll be able to watch it on their nice big flat screen tv in the living room soon.
Steve jobs said "nice big flat screen tv" a lot during the itv intro, didn't he?
kurtsayin
Oct 12, 11:08 PM
Education to teach how to prevent the spread of AIDS costs money too.
Agreed
Agreed
wizard
Sep 9, 11:04 AM
I see no reason why the new C2D iMacs can't run 64 bit code. Heck I've had a AMD 64 running Linux fro a couple of years now and it runs 64 bit code fine on 1 Gig or RAM. The 64 bit instructions are not part of the addressing scheme for the most part.
Now how well an application will run addressing more that 2 Gig of ram on these machines is another question. In part it will depend on how well virtual memory works. Performance wise it is always best to have all data in RAM, there is little doubt there, so you would not want to run large databases on a 64 bit machine with limited memory on a daily basis. It is simply a poor way to leverage the hardware. However not all 64 bit applications are data bound so one can still make serious use of the 64 bit capabilities.
The system is no more a hybrid than older machines of days pass that had 32 bit processors and could only address a small fraction of the available address space. All of the above being said though Apple is the one that writes the OS and they ultimately determine the capabilities on any one platform. I can't see them not enabling 64 bit when it is ready.
Dave
The fact that the new iMacs can't address more than 3Gb of memory and are therefore operating on a 32bit logic-board makes me doubtful as to whether or not these systems are really 64-bit capable... It seems like some kind of hybrid 32/64bit system.
Will the C2D iMacs be able to run 64bit code, despite not having the 64bit address space (and being able to access over 4Gb or RAM)?
Now how well an application will run addressing more that 2 Gig of ram on these machines is another question. In part it will depend on how well virtual memory works. Performance wise it is always best to have all data in RAM, there is little doubt there, so you would not want to run large databases on a 64 bit machine with limited memory on a daily basis. It is simply a poor way to leverage the hardware. However not all 64 bit applications are data bound so one can still make serious use of the 64 bit capabilities.
The system is no more a hybrid than older machines of days pass that had 32 bit processors and could only address a small fraction of the available address space. All of the above being said though Apple is the one that writes the OS and they ultimately determine the capabilities on any one platform. I can't see them not enabling 64 bit when it is ready.
Dave
The fact that the new iMacs can't address more than 3Gb of memory and are therefore operating on a 32bit logic-board makes me doubtful as to whether or not these systems are really 64-bit capable... It seems like some kind of hybrid 32/64bit system.
Will the C2D iMacs be able to run 64bit code, despite not having the 64bit address space (and being able to access over 4Gb or RAM)?
cube
Apr 22, 07:10 PM
- Thunderbolt is not replacing USBs, it's a supplement to DisplayPort (and can connect to both display and peripherals simultaneously)
Thunderbolt is not a supplement to DisplayPort. It is a downgrade to DisplayPort.
Thunderbolt is not a supplement to DisplayPort. It is a downgrade to DisplayPort.
munkery
Apr 12, 07:15 PM
Can anybody running Leopard confirm what users/groups have write privileges to Safari, Mail, & etc.
Just want to clarify if the permissions on that Leopard system have been modified?
Just want to clarify if the permissions on that Leopard system have been modified?
zeiter
Apr 19, 12:25 PM
if samsung stops providing displays to apple, it would be the best thing ever..NO MORE YELLOW TINT ISSUES!!!
pezmannen
Apr 11, 09:38 AM
Finally!
Now I will be able to send Spotify from my ipad to my stereo connected mac-mini!
Now I will be able to send Spotify from my ipad to my stereo connected mac-mini!
fblack
Sep 11, 07:34 AM
OK, Who knows where to buy a MXM GPU?
If it's not PCI Extreme, then it's not upgradeable.
Yes, but I can dream cant I ? :D
If it's not PCI Extreme, then it's not upgradeable.
Yes, but I can dream cant I ? :D
Bernard SG
Apr 28, 09:09 PM
That can be viewed another way. Apple is too cheap to bother risking anything that is not a sure bet.
MS willing to risk R&D and a lot of R&D on things that might be a dead end.
MS R&D is more like a university Research compared to Apple R&D that is only about profit.
Guess which one adds more better for the people. Correct answer is not Apple
Man, if those success stories were sure bets, how come nobody went for it long before Apple?
MS willing to risk R&D and a lot of R&D on things that might be a dead end.
MS R&D is more like a university Research compared to Apple R&D that is only about profit.
Guess which one adds more better for the people. Correct answer is not Apple
Man, if those success stories were sure bets, how come nobody went for it long before Apple?
asxtb
Sep 5, 07:56 AM
I really doubt that Apple will put a TV tuner in this thing (if it's real). Think about it -
Point 1 - If Apple puts a tuner in then they have to deal with the myriad of different types of TV.
Point 2 - THEY SELL TV SHOWS!
Does Steve want you to Tivo the new episode of "The Office" on your "MediaMac/Airport Express Video/Super iPod" or does he want you to come to the iTunes store and download it for $2? Apple, despite most of our (including my own) beliefs is a business and they have to think of the $$$ first.
Why give something away when you can make money off it? That's still my theory as to why the mini didn't have a tuner from the start.
As you said, Apple is a business and they have to think of the money first. Let's say they sell a media center for $300. That's $300. Upfront. They put it in the bank and turn it into $400. Taking that initial $300, that is 150 TV shows. That's a lot of TV shows. And that money will be gradually trickling in. Being a business, Apple wants your money now, not a couple bucks here and a couple bucks there. Plus there will be a lot of people that won't buy the media center and will continue buying the shows from iTunes.
Point 1 - If Apple puts a tuner in then they have to deal with the myriad of different types of TV.
Point 2 - THEY SELL TV SHOWS!
Does Steve want you to Tivo the new episode of "The Office" on your "MediaMac/Airport Express Video/Super iPod" or does he want you to come to the iTunes store and download it for $2? Apple, despite most of our (including my own) beliefs is a business and they have to think of the $$$ first.
Why give something away when you can make money off it? That's still my theory as to why the mini didn't have a tuner from the start.
As you said, Apple is a business and they have to think of the money first. Let's say they sell a media center for $300. That's $300. Upfront. They put it in the bank and turn it into $400. Taking that initial $300, that is 150 TV shows. That's a lot of TV shows. And that money will be gradually trickling in. Being a business, Apple wants your money now, not a couple bucks here and a couple bucks there. Plus there will be a lot of people that won't buy the media center and will continue buying the shows from iTunes.
notabadname
Apr 19, 12:47 PM
Apple keeps burning bridges and eventually it's going to come back to bite them in the ass. Samsung is holding all the cards here. Apple needs Samsung but Samsung doesn't need Apple. I wouldn't be surprised if Sammy has some unexpected production issues with ipad parts here shortly.
Yeah, because Samsung doesn't have a huge interest in Apple buying it's product. If you think being dropped as a vendor for Apple's consumption of 40 + million iPad screens and iPhone screens, per year, wouldn't hurt, you're delusional.
Yeah, because Samsung doesn't have a huge interest in Apple buying it's product. If you think being dropped as a vendor for Apple's consumption of 40 + million iPad screens and iPhone screens, per year, wouldn't hurt, you're delusional.
retrorichie
Apr 22, 11:46 AM
I think the building consensus is that PC gaming is wearing. Intel's graphic chip shouldn't detour many with the much improved CPU to boot. I'm totally happy I skipped the 2010 refresh.
PC gaming corners you into a constant cycle of bleeding your checking account dry; console gaming is infinitely more cost-effective. Once you start to appreciate this dynamic, you'll find yourself upgrading all your toys a lot less often and having money to take vacations and such :)
PC gaming corners you into a constant cycle of bleeding your checking account dry; console gaming is infinitely more cost-effective. Once you start to appreciate this dynamic, you'll find yourself upgrading all your toys a lot less often and having money to take vacations and such :)
No comments:
Post a Comment