moxxey
Mar 22, 05:25 PM
And if you are looking for specs from unannounced products from Apple, you are going to quickly get used to being disappointed.
Mate I've been following MacRumors for many years. I don't need a description of the website.
You miss the point entirely. The site is all about speculation, fact or fiction, about forthcoming products. However, there's nothing in this "news" piece that's worth speculating. Nothing we can't figure ourselves.
It's still news whether it's classed as a rumor or not. However, there's no substance of worth in this news. That was the point.
Mate I've been following MacRumors for many years. I don't need a description of the website.
You miss the point entirely. The site is all about speculation, fact or fiction, about forthcoming products. However, there's nothing in this "news" piece that's worth speculating. Nothing we can't figure ourselves.
It's still news whether it's classed as a rumor or not. However, there's no substance of worth in this news. That was the point.
aristobrat
Sep 26, 08:07 PM
YES! Finally, I reap benefits from being with Cingular!!!! :D
Meh, I know, bitter doesn't go my shoes, but ... heh
It's the second or third carriers' customers that will benefit from all of the weird things that all of you early adopters will help discover. ;)
Or at least that's how it's worked here at Verizon. By the time RIM gets around to releasing a CDMA BlackBerry version of a device, all of the bugs are pretty well worked out.
Meh, I know, bitter doesn't go my shoes, but ... heh
It's the second or third carriers' customers that will benefit from all of the weird things that all of you early adopters will help discover. ;)
Or at least that's how it's worked here at Verizon. By the time RIM gets around to releasing a CDMA BlackBerry version of a device, all of the bugs are pretty well worked out.
Dont Hurt Me
Sep 4, 03:30 PM
Business channel has had a lot of talk about a Apple Pod video phone but I would rather see a Cube redo. How about Cube squared.
suzerain
Sep 16, 01:44 PM
Well, here's what I'm hoping for. (Crazy, I know, but I think there's a chance, because Apple's a computer company, and they seem to approach everything with the computer as the center of everything.)
I want a GSM phone with VoIP capabilities, so it will work with either Vonage or Skype. That way, I can pay way less money...
(Obviously, it has to have bluetooth and sync-ability, but I don't undersstand why people here even consider that optional...Apple created iSync, after all.)
I want a GSM phone with VoIP capabilities, so it will work with either Vonage or Skype. That way, I can pay way less money...
(Obviously, it has to have bluetooth and sync-ability, but I don't undersstand why people here even consider that optional...Apple created iSync, after all.)
FX120
Apr 16, 12:50 PM
Did you miss the USB to PS2 ports or are you just avoiding that? Are you also avoiding how I said it's too difficult for you to carry around an inch long adapter?
You have a fundamental misunderstanding of how those adapters work. Going from thunderbolt to USB 3 would require active electronics embedded in the adapter. The $6 MDP to HDMI adapter is just copper internally because the signaling is compatible from the source.
LOL, the drive he was using WAS 7200-RPM so I'm not even going to bother reading the rest of this paragraph.
http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?id=10492
Again, you have a fundamental flaw in your argument that you're not addressing. It doesn't matter if the bus is capable of delivering massive speed when the source is incapable of serving data fast enough. Any single-drive enclosure that is currently available will be incapable of maxing out a USB 3 connection.
Your assumption is based on comparing two different technologies and assuming they will fare the same. My assumption was comparing ADAPTER prices. How expensive do you think adapters are? :rolleyes:
You can get them for super cheap if you know where to look.
When they contain active electronics, they get expensive. Apple's own MDP to dual-link DVI adapter is a great example, at $99.00. USB 3 and Thunderbolt are not electrically compatible, and therefore it is impossible to have a simple copper-only dongle that has a TB port on one end, and USB on the other.
Once again, YOU ARE BASING THIS ON PRESENT DAY SPEEDS THAT ARE ACHIEVABLE. This isn't a discussion about current theoretical limits, it's about the limits of the future because that's where these technologies will actually matter. The fact is that when we move to SSD transfer speeds USB 3 will get demolished.
Then why do you keep pointing to that article as proof that USB 3 is incapable of reaching it's theoretical maximum?
I never said it would go away. It said it will be used for the same things USB 2 is used for which is low bandwidth peripherals like mice which you don't need USB 3 for which is why it is essentially a useless upgrade.
USB 2 is the universal standard for high speed devices. If you think otherwise, you must have never used a USB thumb drive.
Yes, believe it or not we are talking about the future and the future for Thunderbolt looks a hell of a lot better than the future of USB 3 since it isn't locked at a certain bandwidth. Technology moves fast. The reason Intel decided to support USB 3 is simply because it is (as they said) complimentary to Thunderbolt. Once again you use Thunderbolt for things that need the speed and you use USB for low bandwidth peripherals.
Thunderbolt in a copper implementation is capped at 10Gbs. For higher speeds, the physical connections become impractical for "normal" devices, which is why Intel designed TB as a transport bus, say for a single cable between a tower and a monitor, which would then break the TB bus back into it's component protocols, including USB 3.
It has USB compatibility, hell it has compatibility with pretty much any IO on the planet. The connector is simply a means to an end and it scales much better for the future when said port is smaller.
Which as I said above, makes it practical for a transport bus. For replacing USB? Not so much. Backwards compatibility alone will likely dictate the continual presence of USB 3 ports on virtually every computer for years to come.
You have a fundamental misunderstanding of how those adapters work. Going from thunderbolt to USB 3 would require active electronics embedded in the adapter. The $6 MDP to HDMI adapter is just copper internally because the signaling is compatible from the source.
LOL, the drive he was using WAS 7200-RPM so I'm not even going to bother reading the rest of this paragraph.
http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?id=10492
Again, you have a fundamental flaw in your argument that you're not addressing. It doesn't matter if the bus is capable of delivering massive speed when the source is incapable of serving data fast enough. Any single-drive enclosure that is currently available will be incapable of maxing out a USB 3 connection.
Your assumption is based on comparing two different technologies and assuming they will fare the same. My assumption was comparing ADAPTER prices. How expensive do you think adapters are? :rolleyes:
You can get them for super cheap if you know where to look.
When they contain active electronics, they get expensive. Apple's own MDP to dual-link DVI adapter is a great example, at $99.00. USB 3 and Thunderbolt are not electrically compatible, and therefore it is impossible to have a simple copper-only dongle that has a TB port on one end, and USB on the other.
Once again, YOU ARE BASING THIS ON PRESENT DAY SPEEDS THAT ARE ACHIEVABLE. This isn't a discussion about current theoretical limits, it's about the limits of the future because that's where these technologies will actually matter. The fact is that when we move to SSD transfer speeds USB 3 will get demolished.
Then why do you keep pointing to that article as proof that USB 3 is incapable of reaching it's theoretical maximum?
I never said it would go away. It said it will be used for the same things USB 2 is used for which is low bandwidth peripherals like mice which you don't need USB 3 for which is why it is essentially a useless upgrade.
USB 2 is the universal standard for high speed devices. If you think otherwise, you must have never used a USB thumb drive.
Yes, believe it or not we are talking about the future and the future for Thunderbolt looks a hell of a lot better than the future of USB 3 since it isn't locked at a certain bandwidth. Technology moves fast. The reason Intel decided to support USB 3 is simply because it is (as they said) complimentary to Thunderbolt. Once again you use Thunderbolt for things that need the speed and you use USB for low bandwidth peripherals.
Thunderbolt in a copper implementation is capped at 10Gbs. For higher speeds, the physical connections become impractical for "normal" devices, which is why Intel designed TB as a transport bus, say for a single cable between a tower and a monitor, which would then break the TB bus back into it's component protocols, including USB 3.
It has USB compatibility, hell it has compatibility with pretty much any IO on the planet. The connector is simply a means to an end and it scales much better for the future when said port is smaller.
Which as I said above, makes it practical for a transport bus. For replacing USB? Not so much. Backwards compatibility alone will likely dictate the continual presence of USB 3 ports on virtually every computer for years to come.
markw10
Sep 14, 10:39 AM
I'd love to see a headless mac, something cheaper than the Mac pro but more expandable and powerful than the Mac Mini.
kanedavid
Apr 29, 07:55 PM
Microsoft is still doing very well. They're making the best products they ever have done and as a customer I am very pleased with all of my Microsoft purchases.
All great products and deserve to be class leaders if they are not already. I can't think of another company (including Apple) that has put out such a fantastic range of very good products.
You forget one thing neiltc13.... not many people seem to share your views:
� Zune Desktop Software.... way more people prefer the iTunes ecosphere (which isn't perfect either mind you).
� Zune Hardware... This is clearly a product flop... just like M$ and it's PlaysForSure DRM. Apple's iPod after 10 years still blitzes the portable music device market.
� Windows Phone 7... Yes, Windows 7 is a significant improvement over any previous boost phone OS from M$... a shame that they had to really copy the whole "multi-touch" concept from someone else. But M$ has a long way to catch up with Apple and Google with their offerings and as yet, it would suggest that Apple and Google are still better than M$.
� Windows 7... It's a LOT better than anything M$ has released in the past. All credit to them on this one. But it's uptake hasn't really been all that good though and Microsoft continues to do the "value-add" model by charging more for greater feature sets across it various Windows editions... Too many choices for people that don't understand. Just make one version and price it at $99 and they'll get a much better uptake.
� Office 2010... Yes, it's WAY better than any offering from other companies (for Excel at least). Not sure that Office 2010 is necessarily better than Office 2007 though.
� Office 2001 for Mac - Yes, especially Outlook 2011 for Mac. There was never any reason why Microsoft could not have upgraded it's old Classic Mac version of Outlook 2001 all along rather than develop it's Entourage product which in my opinion was always Microsofts half-assed way of limiting Mac Support in an attempt to marginalise the Mac platform. Guess what? It hasn't really worked so now Microsoft have realised that the best approach is to try and embrace the fact that Apple's Mac OS isn't going away anytime soon so it might as well support it properly.
� Xbox 360 - It's a pretty good product, but compared to the other two 7th generation Game Consoles (PS3/Wii), XBOX trails in third place in all markets except the US where it is second behind Wii.
� Xbox Live - Still an immature product (along with Sony's and Wii's equivalent!). I don't think ANY of the current offerings are that good really but Microsoft has a LOT more experience in internet technologies so you'd expect that Microsoft should be able to come up with something that is better than it is.
Microsoft's problem is that it struggles to actually invent something that appeals to consumers in a way that allows them to command a higher price until the market matures. Technology is a tough market to be in because most technology products fall in value dramatically when a product matures, and margins become very thin and in many cases unsustainable. The only real way to make a lot of dosh in technology is to continually be innovative and invent something new that captivates people. Simply copying someone else all the time won't cut it.
Apple started it's revolution with the iPod well before most other MP3 players came out and so it commanded a higher price (therefore profits) than conventional music devices of the time (CD Discman, Minidisc etc) had. Then just as all the me-too players jumped on the bandwagon, Apple move onto it's next innovation... iTunes Store... then iPhone... then App Store... and now the iPad.
When Microsoft goes back to it's heyday and starts being innovative like Apple and Google are now, they'll again start making a lot more money again.
All great products and deserve to be class leaders if they are not already. I can't think of another company (including Apple) that has put out such a fantastic range of very good products.
You forget one thing neiltc13.... not many people seem to share your views:
� Zune Desktop Software.... way more people prefer the iTunes ecosphere (which isn't perfect either mind you).
� Zune Hardware... This is clearly a product flop... just like M$ and it's PlaysForSure DRM. Apple's iPod after 10 years still blitzes the portable music device market.
� Windows Phone 7... Yes, Windows 7 is a significant improvement over any previous boost phone OS from M$... a shame that they had to really copy the whole "multi-touch" concept from someone else. But M$ has a long way to catch up with Apple and Google with their offerings and as yet, it would suggest that Apple and Google are still better than M$.
� Windows 7... It's a LOT better than anything M$ has released in the past. All credit to them on this one. But it's uptake hasn't really been all that good though and Microsoft continues to do the "value-add" model by charging more for greater feature sets across it various Windows editions... Too many choices for people that don't understand. Just make one version and price it at $99 and they'll get a much better uptake.
� Office 2010... Yes, it's WAY better than any offering from other companies (for Excel at least). Not sure that Office 2010 is necessarily better than Office 2007 though.
� Office 2001 for Mac - Yes, especially Outlook 2011 for Mac. There was never any reason why Microsoft could not have upgraded it's old Classic Mac version of Outlook 2001 all along rather than develop it's Entourage product which in my opinion was always Microsofts half-assed way of limiting Mac Support in an attempt to marginalise the Mac platform. Guess what? It hasn't really worked so now Microsoft have realised that the best approach is to try and embrace the fact that Apple's Mac OS isn't going away anytime soon so it might as well support it properly.
� Xbox 360 - It's a pretty good product, but compared to the other two 7th generation Game Consoles (PS3/Wii), XBOX trails in third place in all markets except the US where it is second behind Wii.
� Xbox Live - Still an immature product (along with Sony's and Wii's equivalent!). I don't think ANY of the current offerings are that good really but Microsoft has a LOT more experience in internet technologies so you'd expect that Microsoft should be able to come up with something that is better than it is.
Microsoft's problem is that it struggles to actually invent something that appeals to consumers in a way that allows them to command a higher price until the market matures. Technology is a tough market to be in because most technology products fall in value dramatically when a product matures, and margins become very thin and in many cases unsustainable. The only real way to make a lot of dosh in technology is to continually be innovative and invent something new that captivates people. Simply copying someone else all the time won't cut it.
Apple started it's revolution with the iPod well before most other MP3 players came out and so it commanded a higher price (therefore profits) than conventional music devices of the time (CD Discman, Minidisc etc) had. Then just as all the me-too players jumped on the bandwagon, Apple move onto it's next innovation... iTunes Store... then iPhone... then App Store... and now the iPad.
When Microsoft goes back to it's heyday and starts being innovative like Apple and Google are now, they'll again start making a lot more money again.
nlr
Apr 30, 04:59 PM
will we be able to play crysis on bootcamp with the new graphic cards?
bassfingers
Mar 30, 11:52 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
Dear Microsoft, if you want the App Store, then you should have made the App Store
Dear Microsoft, if you want the App Store, then you should have made the App Store
justinLONG
Mar 22, 03:56 PM
I bought a refurbished a month ago. I needed one and couldn't go with out a
computer any longer.
http://store.apple.com/us/product/FC509LL/A?mco=MjEwNTc0ODc
meh.
computer any longer.
http://store.apple.com/us/product/FC509LL/A?mco=MjEwNTc0ODc
meh.
davey-nb
Sep 15, 06:11 PM
the ipod wasn't a ground up design either.
now admittedly, it was apple, jobs and ives' that took a good idea and refined it to being the great product introduced in '03, but the ipod was an interesting break from apple's NIH syndrome. so much so that i question the TS report about apple going for a ground up design.
...I think you'll find.
Yes, check Wiki...
now admittedly, it was apple, jobs and ives' that took a good idea and refined it to being the great product introduced in '03, but the ipod was an interesting break from apple's NIH syndrome. so much so that i question the TS report about apple going for a ground up design.
...I think you'll find.
Yes, check Wiki...
Bomino
Apr 25, 03:34 AM
argue with his neighbors (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=978345&highlight=)
plus parking in a handicapped spot. (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=928429&highlight=)
funny how in these two, hes asking for legal advice, when his uncle is apparantly a judge. yeeaaahh i'm calling BS.
plus parking in a handicapped spot. (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=928429&highlight=)
funny how in these two, hes asking for legal advice, when his uncle is apparantly a judge. yeeaaahh i'm calling BS.
cmaier
Nov 13, 04:10 PM
they are using the OS X API in the context it was meant to be used in. as far as i can tell these images aren't loaded into the iPhone application itself and are rather transmitted over-the-air as the application is being used, thus they are being called by the OS while the application is being run and are merely being displayed through the iPhone application, its like saying you can't see any apple trademark icons through a VPN client.
Or like saying that if my app has a UIWebView, I have to prevent the user from navigating to Apple.com lest he be subjected to seeing Apple's trademarked logos and pictures of Apple computers.
Or like saying that if my app has a UIWebView, I have to prevent the user from navigating to Apple.com lest he be subjected to seeing Apple's trademarked logos and pictures of Apple computers.
myemailisjustin
Apr 20, 11:23 AM
Plug in your iPhone, open iTunes, and in the SUMMARY window check the box related to backup encryption.
This is why the researchers published this, so people take action. Encrypt your data, it's your choice to do so. Encrypted = safe(r) than not.
**EDIT - And I'd be more worried about RFID in your bag of chips or RFID in the all the new tires that go on your car than a file you have the choice to encrypt. RFID in my tires, you can't encrypt that!
This is why the researchers published this, so people take action. Encrypt your data, it's your choice to do so. Encrypted = safe(r) than not.
**EDIT - And I'd be more worried about RFID in your bag of chips or RFID in the all the new tires that go on your car than a file you have the choice to encrypt. RFID in my tires, you can't encrypt that!
growlf
Mar 23, 05:08 PM
This is setting a very dangerous precedent for app removals if it goes through.
Exactly. This made me download Trapster, which warns of flooded roads, construction, etc. Perhaps you (all the people saying it should be pulled) should research the app first.
In addition, I just had the pleasure of going through a sobriety checkpoint a few weeks ago. I rarely drink - gives me an amazing headache, which has earned me the ridicule of college friends for years... it took 20 minutes to get through the checkpoint, and I felt embarrassed and harassed.
Sorry folks, we don't live in a police state. If you want to have police checkpoints everywhere to track your movements, yeah remove this. Otherwise, give those of us who don't feel like having bright lights shined at us and being talked down-to by the cops a way to avoid it.
BTW, can the government demonstrate any impact on law enforcement through the use of websites/apps that display this information? Don't blindly support things that have no data to back them up.
Exactly. This made me download Trapster, which warns of flooded roads, construction, etc. Perhaps you (all the people saying it should be pulled) should research the app first.
In addition, I just had the pleasure of going through a sobriety checkpoint a few weeks ago. I rarely drink - gives me an amazing headache, which has earned me the ridicule of college friends for years... it took 20 minutes to get through the checkpoint, and I felt embarrassed and harassed.
Sorry folks, we don't live in a police state. If you want to have police checkpoints everywhere to track your movements, yeah remove this. Otherwise, give those of us who don't feel like having bright lights shined at us and being talked down-to by the cops a way to avoid it.
BTW, can the government demonstrate any impact on law enforcement through the use of websites/apps that display this information? Don't blindly support things that have no data to back them up.
zwida
Sep 10, 05:44 PM
Then I'll be right back here complaining about how 8 cores isn't enough either.
I'm with you there. Although I don't do video compression but Photoshop, Illustrator, and InDesign work, I'm sure Adobe will manage to deliver a version of CS3 that still feels sluggish under 8 cores.
I'm with you there. Although I don't do video compression but Photoshop, Illustrator, and InDesign work, I'm sure Adobe will manage to deliver a version of CS3 that still feels sluggish under 8 cores.
Kingsly
Oct 27, 12:09 PM
Grrr. Doesn't greenpeace have something better to deal with, like all these diesel Semi-turcks driving up and down the 5 freeway? Doesn't greenpeace have private jets? Boats? Cars, trucks, etc? Those all pollute the environment far more than a MacBook.
I think something should be done for the environment. I care deeply for the children in china who get to dismantle toxic products (notice my location? You're speaking to a big human rights activist here). I just think the changes should be made by someone who is sane.
People don't understand what freedoms truly are. It doesn't mean you get to say and do whatever you want wherever you want - that's anarchy, and anarchy is bad... unless you're the biggest, strongest and most brutal. Freedom of speech really means you can't be jailed or otherwise punished by the government for saying what you want in a pulic arena.
... even then there are instances where you can be jailed or cited for saying something outrageously obscene or otherwise dangerous to public health/safety.
People need to read the constitution (http://www.archives.gov/national-archives-experience/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html) more. The rights guaranteed are surprisingly few, and none of them are absolute.
I think something should be done for the environment. I care deeply for the children in china who get to dismantle toxic products (notice my location? You're speaking to a big human rights activist here). I just think the changes should be made by someone who is sane.
People don't understand what freedoms truly are. It doesn't mean you get to say and do whatever you want wherever you want - that's anarchy, and anarchy is bad... unless you're the biggest, strongest and most brutal. Freedom of speech really means you can't be jailed or otherwise punished by the government for saying what you want in a pulic arena.
... even then there are instances where you can be jailed or cited for saying something outrageously obscene or otherwise dangerous to public health/safety.
People need to read the constitution (http://www.archives.gov/national-archives-experience/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html) more. The rights guaranteed are surprisingly few, and none of them are absolute.
NeroAZ
Apr 4, 12:42 PM
I was born and raised in San Diego, and yes I've been to Chula Vista (Chula Juana), and National City (Nasty City), scummy areas near the Tijuana border. I'm NOT at all surprised by this.
I'm sure some locals of those scummy areas may chime in.
That being said, it really doesn't specify in the article, but a lot of the Apple stores I've been to have off duty cops standing by the doors during business hours, not sure about before they open.
I'm sure some locals of those scummy areas may chime in.
That being said, it really doesn't specify in the article, but a lot of the Apple stores I've been to have off duty cops standing by the doors during business hours, not sure about before they open.
blindzero
Apr 22, 08:02 AM
This is what I've been hoping for. You purchase a "license" and your content is available anywhere on any device. You can download it locally as well, but it's there in the cloud waiting for you. Movies/Music/Games etc. The end to buying on multiple formats, worry about losing/deleting etc. But I'm not sure this model will end up beating out music/movie subscription services.
dante@sisna.com
Sep 19, 02:31 PM
wow! impressive.
I guess people value convenience over quality. That's great for Apple. That confirms it will be a success.
For me I rather buy DVDs or wait for hi definition downloads, but I guess many people out there are satisfy with lower quality.
Can't wait for ITV tough.
Neither -- My download on my 4MB cable connection (real speed) took about 50 minutes AND the quality was outstanding on my 30" cinema display -- looked the same as DVD to me. No defects, no artifacts. Crisp Color.
I will order again. Way nicer than storing DVD's.
I guess people value convenience over quality. That's great for Apple. That confirms it will be a success.
For me I rather buy DVDs or wait for hi definition downloads, but I guess many people out there are satisfy with lower quality.
Can't wait for ITV tough.
Neither -- My download on my 4MB cable connection (real speed) took about 50 minutes AND the quality was outstanding on my 30" cinema display -- looked the same as DVD to me. No defects, no artifacts. Crisp Color.
I will order again. Way nicer than storing DVD's.
peeInMyPantz
Sep 13, 11:41 PM
i think iphone will have aluminium surface to match the new ipods. maybe same colour combi?
Psychic Shopper
Sep 4, 07:20 PM
"This would somewhat explain why the Paris Expo was given the cold shoulder."
Cold shoulder to say the least. The same day as the expo, in London, Apple will hold a press conference. If you are a reporter, where do you go?
Apple distanced itself from the Macworld New York Expo, I wonder if they are doing the same thing with the Paris expo?
Cold shoulder to say the least. The same day as the expo, in London, Apple will hold a press conference. If you are a reporter, where do you go?
Apple distanced itself from the Macworld New York Expo, I wonder if they are doing the same thing with the Paris expo?
Eidorian
Jul 19, 10:50 AM
Hmmm, it's a tough one. But I think the price vs. performance of Conroe being so much better than Merom will mean that Apple will try their best to cram one into the iMac. It would mean a more powerful computer that's cheaper for Apple to produce, and it is a desktop after all.
But you are right that the thermals of Conroe could be a problem. I'm not sure how much of a difference speed-step will make. Although it is the most power-efficient desktop chip out there, it consumes less power under load than Pentium D's at idle:
http://images.tomshardware.com/2006/07/14/power_conroe.png
And it runs much cooler than the chips in the Macbook and Macbook Pro in normal computer cases:
http://images.tomshardware.com/2006/07/14/game_over_core_2_duo_knocks_out_athlon_64/conroe_temp_min.gif
25 degrees celcius with speedstep...
http://images.tomshardware.com/2006/07/14/game_over_core_2_duo_knocks_out_athlon_64/x6800_temp_max.gif
And 45 degrees at max clockspeed. And that's the 75W Conroe, the 65W one should be slightly cooler. Now I know this isn't in the iMac case, but if the chips run that cool in desktops then hopefully they shouldn't run too much hotter in an iMac...Then all we're looking at is cranking up the current 180 watt power supply. I remember my iMac G5 2.0 GHz hitting 75-76º C at 100% load. The Rev. C iMac G5 was whisper quiet compared to my machine using the same 970FX chip. If Conroe doesn't break 45° C then it's not a thermal nightmare to put into the iMac. It's just a pain to power.
But you are right that the thermals of Conroe could be a problem. I'm not sure how much of a difference speed-step will make. Although it is the most power-efficient desktop chip out there, it consumes less power under load than Pentium D's at idle:
http://images.tomshardware.com/2006/07/14/power_conroe.png
And it runs much cooler than the chips in the Macbook and Macbook Pro in normal computer cases:
http://images.tomshardware.com/2006/07/14/game_over_core_2_duo_knocks_out_athlon_64/conroe_temp_min.gif
25 degrees celcius with speedstep...
http://images.tomshardware.com/2006/07/14/game_over_core_2_duo_knocks_out_athlon_64/x6800_temp_max.gif
And 45 degrees at max clockspeed. And that's the 75W Conroe, the 65W one should be slightly cooler. Now I know this isn't in the iMac case, but if the chips run that cool in desktops then hopefully they shouldn't run too much hotter in an iMac...Then all we're looking at is cranking up the current 180 watt power supply. I remember my iMac G5 2.0 GHz hitting 75-76º C at 100% load. The Rev. C iMac G5 was whisper quiet compared to my machine using the same 970FX chip. If Conroe doesn't break 45° C then it's not a thermal nightmare to put into the iMac. It's just a pain to power.
MacinDoc
Sep 9, 11:42 AM
http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/09/09/preview_kentsfield_processor/
Tom's Hardware benchmarks Intel's first quad-core "Kentsfield"
Culver City (CA) - Intel's first quad-core processor "Kentsfield" has found its way into the Tom's Hardware test lab. Several weeks before Intel will provide evaluation processors to the press, Tom's Hardware was able to obtain a qualification sample: The quad-core was sent through the entire test parcours and showed impressive performance.
...
Kentsfield, which industry sources refer to as "Core 2 Quadro," arrived as a 2.67 GHz version with a 266 MHz/1066 MHz FSB. The test engineers were able to adjust the FSB to 1333 MHz - which is still supported by the 975X chipset - and overclock the CPU by about 25%. The benchmarks were conducted with clock speeds ranging from 2.0 GHz to 3.33 GHz.
Kentsfield easily shattered previous benchmarks records and highlighted its horsepower especially in threaded applications such as audio and video processing.
That should put to rest the ridiculous arguments that Apple made a mistake in making the transition to Intel.
Tom's Hardware benchmarks Intel's first quad-core "Kentsfield"
Culver City (CA) - Intel's first quad-core processor "Kentsfield" has found its way into the Tom's Hardware test lab. Several weeks before Intel will provide evaluation processors to the press, Tom's Hardware was able to obtain a qualification sample: The quad-core was sent through the entire test parcours and showed impressive performance.
...
Kentsfield, which industry sources refer to as "Core 2 Quadro," arrived as a 2.67 GHz version with a 266 MHz/1066 MHz FSB. The test engineers were able to adjust the FSB to 1333 MHz - which is still supported by the 975X chipset - and overclock the CPU by about 25%. The benchmarks were conducted with clock speeds ranging from 2.0 GHz to 3.33 GHz.
Kentsfield easily shattered previous benchmarks records and highlighted its horsepower especially in threaded applications such as audio and video processing.
That should put to rest the ridiculous arguments that Apple made a mistake in making the transition to Intel.
No comments:
Post a Comment