MacRumors
Apr 6, 01:20 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/06/motorola-xoom-tablet-sales-approximately-100000-units-so-far/)
Business Insider reports (http://www.businessinsider.com/motorola-xoom-sales-2011-4) on a research note from Deutsche Bank estimating sales of Motorola's Android-based Xoom tablet at only about 100,000 units since its late February launch, based on Android developer statistics (http://developer.android.com/resources/dashboard/platform-versions.html) showing that only 0.2% of Android devices accessing the Android Market during the second half of March had the Android 3.0 "Honeycomb" operating system installed. The Xoom is currently the only device on the market running Honeycomb.
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/06/141346-android_platform_breakdown_040111_500.jpg
lood circulation.
Infrared lood circulation
Circulation of lood to the
the circulation of lood,
Blood Circulation in the
types of lood vessel in
Blood Circulation Massager
Blood Circulation Machine
Blood circulation machine
circulation. The lood
improve lood circulation
the general circulation.
the circulation of lood,
circulation
Blood Circulation Massager
Circulation of the Blood
the circulation of lood,
Blood Circulation Massager
Business Insider reports (http://www.businessinsider.com/motorola-xoom-sales-2011-4) on a research note from Deutsche Bank estimating sales of Motorola's Android-based Xoom tablet at only about 100,000 units since its late February launch, based on Android developer statistics (http://developer.android.com/resources/dashboard/platform-versions.html) showing that only 0.2% of Android devices accessing the Android Market during the second half of March had the Android 3.0 "Honeycomb" operating system installed. The Xoom is currently the only device on the market running Honeycomb.
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/06/141346-android_platform_breakdown_040111_500.jpg
Multimedia
Jul 27, 01:55 PM
Well it's back to the future for all of us. Remember when the Mac was going 64-bit with the introduction of the G5 PowerMac on June 23, 2003? :rolleyes: Only more than three years later and we're doing it all over again thanks to Yonah's 7 month retrograde.
bigwig
Aug 8, 01:54 AM
I wonder if Time Machine will work correctly with FileVault? Saving file alterations to an unencrypted backup defeats the purpose of using FileVault in the first place.
Stridder44
Jul 20, 02:27 PM
I disagree. I think Apple will use Core 2 Duo (Conroe) in the iMac, and Merom in the MBP. The iMac could hold a G5, why not Conroe?
On top of that, you'll notice that a 2.16 GHz Conroe costs $70 less than the 1.83 GHz Yonah that's in the iMac now, $70 less than a 2 GHz Merom, and $200 less than a 2.16 GHz Merom, increasing Apple's profit margins on the iMac considerably or allowing a price drop- plus they can advertise it as a desktop processor.
In fact, even if Conroe was too hot (which I highly doubt, since the iMac had a G5), a 2.16 GHz Conroe underclocked to 2 GHz still saves $70 over a 2 GHz Merom.
But what about the MacBook!! *weeps*
On top of that, you'll notice that a 2.16 GHz Conroe costs $70 less than the 1.83 GHz Yonah that's in the iMac now, $70 less than a 2 GHz Merom, and $200 less than a 2.16 GHz Merom, increasing Apple's profit margins on the iMac considerably or allowing a price drop- plus they can advertise it as a desktop processor.
In fact, even if Conroe was too hot (which I highly doubt, since the iMac had a G5), a 2.16 GHz Conroe underclocked to 2 GHz still saves $70 over a 2 GHz Merom.
But what about the MacBook!! *weeps*
jmbear
Nov 29, 12:39 PM
See, that's the catch-22 for new artists. The labels are the ones that get tunes played on the radio. In the 50's and 60's they would strong-arm their stuff in, but I'm sure even nowadays they provide incentives (read: bribes) to get new stuff on the air. Especially if they think the band is really good and will make it in the long run. And don't fool yourself into thinking a new band can get huge without radio.
The internet can become the new radio. I am quite fond of looking for pre-made playlists, I will get the songs on LimeWire, listen to them, the ones I like, I buy legally, the ones I don�t I delete them. You don�t get commercials, just music. I am not saying that radio is going to dissapear completely. TV didn�t kill it. But its importance will diminish.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend..
iTMS could potentially change this. There are some people that will do all the research for you (as in what is good music), then ratings will allow you to get the good songs! It�s similar (and somebody will flame me for saying this) to researching a product on Amazon or CNET, you usually look for a LCD screen, all the results pop, and you will go for the ones with the highest ratings, read the comments and eventually make up your mind. Some day you will look up for electronic music (which I love), all the DJ�s will pop, you will pick the highest rated songs or playlists (because most people like a song because other people like it), listen to their songs for free (yeah, just like radio), and then buy them if you want.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label..
I agree record labels + good music = superstars like Calpton, Floyd, U2 etc... But these bands became popular in a different time (before the internet). Internet is changing the record labels� business model, and that is what they afraid of. The new wait of creating bands and distributing their music is not as profitable for them as it used to.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
Internet is offering them exposure. Right now MTV and VH1 are still popular. But YouTube, Yahoo!, MSN could become the new MTV and VH1.
Not really relevant, but interesting to think about is that most of you have probably seen the video of the ruma ruma guy (I can�t link it because I am at work and the proxie does not allow me to visit YouTube). But how many have actually seen the video for the song? YouTube made that fat kid a star, and most people probably know his face better than the guys that sing the song. Exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
I agree, they won�t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
The internet can become the new radio. I am quite fond of looking for pre-made playlists, I will get the songs on LimeWire, listen to them, the ones I like, I buy legally, the ones I don�t I delete them. You don�t get commercials, just music. I am not saying that radio is going to dissapear completely. TV didn�t kill it. But its importance will diminish.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend..
iTMS could potentially change this. There are some people that will do all the research for you (as in what is good music), then ratings will allow you to get the good songs! It�s similar (and somebody will flame me for saying this) to researching a product on Amazon or CNET, you usually look for a LCD screen, all the results pop, and you will go for the ones with the highest ratings, read the comments and eventually make up your mind. Some day you will look up for electronic music (which I love), all the DJ�s will pop, you will pick the highest rated songs or playlists (because most people like a song because other people like it), listen to their songs for free (yeah, just like radio), and then buy them if you want.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label..
I agree record labels + good music = superstars like Calpton, Floyd, U2 etc... But these bands became popular in a different time (before the internet). Internet is changing the record labels� business model, and that is what they afraid of. The new wait of creating bands and distributing their music is not as profitable for them as it used to.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
Internet is offering them exposure. Right now MTV and VH1 are still popular. But YouTube, Yahoo!, MSN could become the new MTV and VH1.
Not really relevant, but interesting to think about is that most of you have probably seen the video of the ruma ruma guy (I can�t link it because I am at work and the proxie does not allow me to visit YouTube). But how many have actually seen the video for the song? YouTube made that fat kid a star, and most people probably know his face better than the guys that sing the song. Exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
I agree, they won�t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
yoak
Apr 12, 09:28 AM
http://applecritictv.blogspot.com/20...l-cut-pro.html
This was posted by another member, relaytv in another thread.
Interesting read while we wait
This was posted by another member, relaytv in another thread.
Interesting read while we wait
zacman
Apr 19, 02:22 PM
So the interesting fact is:
Verizon iPhone release didn't help Apple to stop losing marketshare although everyone said the deal will quadruple iPhone sales. :rolleyes:
iPhone Q1/11: 19 million (+ 2.5 million)
Android Q1/11: 38 million (+8 million)
Ouch. No wonder they are now sueing HTC and Samsung. If you can't beat them in the market, beat them in court. Apple must have learned that from Nokia (like they learned the choppy animations when you start third party apps in iOS 4.3.2 from Symbian).
Verizon iPhone release didn't help Apple to stop losing marketshare although everyone said the deal will quadruple iPhone sales. :rolleyes:
iPhone Q1/11: 19 million (+ 2.5 million)
Android Q1/11: 38 million (+8 million)
Ouch. No wonder they are now sueing HTC and Samsung. If you can't beat them in the market, beat them in court. Apple must have learned that from Nokia (like they learned the choppy animations when you start third party apps in iOS 4.3.2 from Symbian).
shamino
Jul 20, 11:11 AM
However, many apps today won't see that much improvement either way (like a simple calculator, or solitare and word processing).
If that's all your requirements are, then you would be able to get by very nicely on an old G3 system (assuming you can cram enough RAM into it.)
We have long since exceeded the amount of CPU power needed for things like basic Office apps, and are several orders of magnitude more powerful than what's needed for a calculator or solitare program!
But this really should not come as a surprise to anybody. For basic word processing (without any embedded objects), my old Apple //c with AppleWorks is more than powerful enough. And that's with a 1MHz 6502 processor, 128K of RAM and two floppy drives!
People are so used to bloatware and insane amounts of eye-candy, that they start thinking they actually need supercomputer power in order to write a memo or send a fax.
If that's all your requirements are, then you would be able to get by very nicely on an old G3 system (assuming you can cram enough RAM into it.)
We have long since exceeded the amount of CPU power needed for things like basic Office apps, and are several orders of magnitude more powerful than what's needed for a calculator or solitare program!
But this really should not come as a surprise to anybody. For basic word processing (without any embedded objects), my old Apple //c with AppleWorks is more than powerful enough. And that's with a 1MHz 6502 processor, 128K of RAM and two floppy drives!
People are so used to bloatware and insane amounts of eye-candy, that they start thinking they actually need supercomputer power in order to write a memo or send a fax.
BaldiMac
Mar 22, 03:38 PM
The iPad two does have some shortcomings, few of which are worth going to to here. However, the OS of these devices IS crucial and we are beginning to see iOS creaking slightly. In terms of looks and notifications, for me, Apple is lagging. I like how the Playbook looks and potentially, should operate. Will I make a snap judgement? No. I'll try the damn thing first before making a judgement.
Why are you comparing the Playbook that is coming out this summer to iOS 4? Chances are it will be competing with iOS 5. If you want to be fair and all.
Why are you comparing the Playbook that is coming out this summer to iOS 4? Chances are it will be competing with iOS 5. If you want to be fair and all.
noahtk
Apr 6, 01:55 PM
WE CAN ONLY HOPE!!! A price drop would be nice too.
ryanx27
Aug 27, 10:30 PM
Hey for what its worth, i understand where you're coming from Zadillo BUT some people still find the joke funny and therefore it deserves to be told.
You know what, I found it funny before going into this thread, and now I don't. :rolleyes:
You know what, I found it funny before going into this thread, and now I don't. :rolleyes:
raymondso
Sep 19, 08:51 AM
the apple store is still going very healthy now
does that mean no update today?
does that mean no update today?
Bill McEnaney
Mar 1, 04:47 AM
"Homosexuality," Plato wrote, "is regarded as shameful by barbarians and by those who live under despotic governments just as philosophy is regarded as shameful by them, because it is apparently not in the interest of such rulers to have great ideas engendered in their subjects, or powerful friendships or passionate love-all of which homosexuality is particularly apt to produce." This attitude of Plato's was characteristic of the ancient world, and I want to begin my discussion of the attitudes of the Church and of Western Christianity toward homosexuality by commenting on comparable attitudes among the ancients.
Dr. Josiah B. Gould, the Plato scholar who taught me Ancient Philosophy, told us that, that although homosexuality was common among Greek aristocrats in ancient Greece, to them, sodomy was repugnant.
Dr. Josiah B. Gould, the Plato scholar who taught me Ancient Philosophy, told us that, that although homosexuality was common among Greek aristocrats in ancient Greece, to them, sodomy was repugnant.
Nuvi
Apr 12, 09:27 AM
The SuperMeet stage show aka FCP (or if **** hits the fan then iMovie Pro) preview begins at 7 pm.
Willis
Sep 13, 07:37 PM
One could run a Folding@Home process on each core :D
ooooor.... use multiple cores to do one fold... 4 days like my g5 would cut down to like 16 hours... thats mental. awesome... but god damn mental!!
ooooor.... use multiple cores to do one fold... 4 days like my g5 would cut down to like 16 hours... thats mental. awesome... but god damn mental!!
CaoCao
Mar 1, 04:11 PM
You know how stupid that argument is? You are comparing physical defects to a different mental state. Physiologically, gay people are not any bit different from straight people. (IE one identical twin gay, one not cases...)
Here is a much closer analog to your view:
"I hate you for liking the color yellow. Your views are sick and your practice of having yellow things in your home is sick and wrong and immoral. A three thousand year old book written by some uneducated shepperds told me that people who like the color yellow are going to burn in Hell because someone hates them."
Do you see just how stupid this whole thing is?
Well my other options were paedophilia, incest, bestiality etc.
Your analogy does not make sense because I do not hate homosexuals.
I made it quite clearly. If you don't get it, I can't help you any further.
Good to hear. Can we now assume you support marriage rights for gay people?
You have made it quite clear you suffer from a dearth of cogency.
That is their problem, not yours.
You could say the same about the Catholic church. My link was specifically in reply to being asked for evidence - actually proof - that Plato was a homosexual. As for supporting bad stuff, the US Constitution was once quite content to support slavery and the subordination of women, and so were many of the founding fathers, both of the early church and the USA.
What absolute bollocks! Homosexuality does not need treatment, since it is not a disease.
Ah, let us define slavery, does: "slavery is the condition of involuntary servitude in which a human being is regarded as no more than the property of another, as being without basic human rights; in other words, as a thing rather than a person" work for you?
Why not? Whether gays are treated equally under the Constitution has absolutely nothing to do with how you feel about them. Whether you grant them the human dignity of being treated equally has absolutely nothing to do with your Catholic dogma. You are making excuses.
Another red herring: nobody is asking you to be a caregiver, simply to stop pontificating about something you clearly know very little about. You are simply broadcasting your prejudices to no useful effect: you are not going to make anyone heterosexual by trashing their feelings and their very nature, you are just going to add to their discomfiture.
What a pity you did not learn from her to keep your own counsel.
Feeble. Do you pontificate about sky-diving too?
I have read many of Plato's dialogues, in Greek, and studied - and continue to study - Ancient Greek culture in depth. Your Dr Gould is bringing his own prejudices to the table. He should know better.
Homosexual friendship. Right.
But they are treated equal, any gay man can marry a woman and any lesbian woman can marry a man just as any heterosexual man can marry a woman and any heterosexual woman can marry a man
@CoCo & Bill: Please, just stop arguing with bogus reasons. The Catholic Church has everything wrong and upside down and only to control its followers. You two are a perfect example thereof.
CoCo, heterosexuality is not the norm, at least not outside our social understanding. In ancient Greece and Rome, sexuality wasn't even up for discussion. You followed a certain social conduct and explored your sexuality as you saw fit and didn't question it or that of others. When Christianity started taking over the laws and moral standards, they made it so they could control everything people do. Your reasoning comes from the same source as those who wrote the medical journals that condemn homosexuality as a mental illness. They did so out of fear of the unknown - the very essence th the Catholic Church uses to control its followers.
And Bill, please go out and live a little. Get a nice girlfriend and explore your and her sexuality a little and see how much more relaxed your attitude about the world can be. There's more to life than waiting for God's instructions. He certainly wouldn't want you to waste your life on such trivial things like analyzing other people's sexuality.
You two need to expand your world view and accept that there are plenty of things that make you uncomfortable, but there is no reason to condemn them so exhaustingly. You cannot reverse progress and you certainly cannot control the lives of other people.
There are plenty of folks in Northern Africa that can vouch for that.
Nay, the Romans and Greeks failed, they are retrogress
Here is a much closer analog to your view:
"I hate you for liking the color yellow. Your views are sick and your practice of having yellow things in your home is sick and wrong and immoral. A three thousand year old book written by some uneducated shepperds told me that people who like the color yellow are going to burn in Hell because someone hates them."
Do you see just how stupid this whole thing is?
Well my other options were paedophilia, incest, bestiality etc.
Your analogy does not make sense because I do not hate homosexuals.
I made it quite clearly. If you don't get it, I can't help you any further.
Good to hear. Can we now assume you support marriage rights for gay people?
You have made it quite clear you suffer from a dearth of cogency.
That is their problem, not yours.
You could say the same about the Catholic church. My link was specifically in reply to being asked for evidence - actually proof - that Plato was a homosexual. As for supporting bad stuff, the US Constitution was once quite content to support slavery and the subordination of women, and so were many of the founding fathers, both of the early church and the USA.
What absolute bollocks! Homosexuality does not need treatment, since it is not a disease.
Ah, let us define slavery, does: "slavery is the condition of involuntary servitude in which a human being is regarded as no more than the property of another, as being without basic human rights; in other words, as a thing rather than a person" work for you?
Why not? Whether gays are treated equally under the Constitution has absolutely nothing to do with how you feel about them. Whether you grant them the human dignity of being treated equally has absolutely nothing to do with your Catholic dogma. You are making excuses.
Another red herring: nobody is asking you to be a caregiver, simply to stop pontificating about something you clearly know very little about. You are simply broadcasting your prejudices to no useful effect: you are not going to make anyone heterosexual by trashing their feelings and their very nature, you are just going to add to their discomfiture.
What a pity you did not learn from her to keep your own counsel.
Feeble. Do you pontificate about sky-diving too?
I have read many of Plato's dialogues, in Greek, and studied - and continue to study - Ancient Greek culture in depth. Your Dr Gould is bringing his own prejudices to the table. He should know better.
Homosexual friendship. Right.
But they are treated equal, any gay man can marry a woman and any lesbian woman can marry a man just as any heterosexual man can marry a woman and any heterosexual woman can marry a man
@CoCo & Bill: Please, just stop arguing with bogus reasons. The Catholic Church has everything wrong and upside down and only to control its followers. You two are a perfect example thereof.
CoCo, heterosexuality is not the norm, at least not outside our social understanding. In ancient Greece and Rome, sexuality wasn't even up for discussion. You followed a certain social conduct and explored your sexuality as you saw fit and didn't question it or that of others. When Christianity started taking over the laws and moral standards, they made it so they could control everything people do. Your reasoning comes from the same source as those who wrote the medical journals that condemn homosexuality as a mental illness. They did so out of fear of the unknown - the very essence th the Catholic Church uses to control its followers.
And Bill, please go out and live a little. Get a nice girlfriend and explore your and her sexuality a little and see how much more relaxed your attitude about the world can be. There's more to life than waiting for God's instructions. He certainly wouldn't want you to waste your life on such trivial things like analyzing other people's sexuality.
You two need to expand your world view and accept that there are plenty of things that make you uncomfortable, but there is no reason to condemn them so exhaustingly. You cannot reverse progress and you certainly cannot control the lives of other people.
There are plenty of folks in Northern Africa that can vouch for that.
Nay, the Romans and Greeks failed, they are retrogress
AhmedFaisal
Apr 27, 10:29 PM
I'm seriously beginning to lose my patience with idiots. Is anyone else completely sick of these fools?
I lost it a long time ago. Trump is an asshat that should just shut the **** up and go back to diddling eastern european models and building casinos (is that christian right compliant I wonder?).
The truth is if Barack Obama was instead Piers Morgan or Simon Cowell and a republican candidate, there would have been an uproar if anyone had dared to ask if they were actually Americans by birth. Its racism, period. The right doesn't want a liberool n***** in the white house. That is it in the ****ing list. Anyone saying that's not what this is about is a ****ing liar.
I lost it a long time ago. Trump is an asshat that should just shut the **** up and go back to diddling eastern european models and building casinos (is that christian right compliant I wonder?).
The truth is if Barack Obama was instead Piers Morgan or Simon Cowell and a republican candidate, there would have been an uproar if anyone had dared to ask if they were actually Americans by birth. Its racism, period. The right doesn't want a liberool n***** in the white house. That is it in the ****ing list. Anyone saying that's not what this is about is a ****ing liar.
chatin
Aug 16, 11:58 PM
This poor cache design will kill off the G5's fast in rendering intensive workspaces.
The G5 has only 1MB of cache and it's per core not per cpu. If one core needs to cache 3.5MB of data it's possible on the Mac Pro becauce the CPU cache is fully unified.
I just ran Cinebench 9.5 on my Mac Pro and got 4 Cpu's Showing and a healthy 3.5 Ratio. (That means the CPU's are working together very well, thanks to the Intel Smart Cache.)
:) :p
The G5 has only 1MB of cache and it's per core not per cpu. If one core needs to cache 3.5MB of data it's possible on the Mac Pro becauce the CPU cache is fully unified.
I just ran Cinebench 9.5 on my Mac Pro and got 4 Cpu's Showing and a healthy 3.5 Ratio. (That means the CPU's are working together very well, thanks to the Intel Smart Cache.)
:) :p
MacRumors
Jul 20, 08:05 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
While Apple hasn't yet released its first Intel-based professional model desktop machine, many users are actively watching Intel's future roadmap for hints as to what may next appear in Apple's second revision Mac Pro and XServe machines. CNet News.com reported yesterday afternoon (http://news.com.com/2100-1006_3-6096192.html) that Intel's quad-core desktop chip (Kentsfield) and Xeon-class chip (Cloverton) have been bumped up and should arrive before year's end.
Educated speculation would therefore indicate that Apple's second revision Mac Pro workstation will feature 8 cores, and other models will all become "Quad" machines. Most recent rumors (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060711225142.shtml) have indicated that the Mac Pro will use Apple's Xeon-class chips over "desktop" models such as Core 2 Duo "Conroe" and Kentsfield. With Conroe perhaps landing in a future iMac, further speculation would indicate that iMacs down the pipe will feature the 4-core Kentsfield processor.
While Apple hasn't yet released its first Intel-based professional model desktop machine, many users are actively watching Intel's future roadmap for hints as to what may next appear in Apple's second revision Mac Pro and XServe machines. CNet News.com reported yesterday afternoon (http://news.com.com/2100-1006_3-6096192.html) that Intel's quad-core desktop chip (Kentsfield) and Xeon-class chip (Cloverton) have been bumped up and should arrive before year's end.
Educated speculation would therefore indicate that Apple's second revision Mac Pro workstation will feature 8 cores, and other models will all become "Quad" machines. Most recent rumors (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060711225142.shtml) have indicated that the Mac Pro will use Apple's Xeon-class chips over "desktop" models such as Core 2 Duo "Conroe" and Kentsfield. With Conroe perhaps landing in a future iMac, further speculation would indicate that iMacs down the pipe will feature the 4-core Kentsfield processor.
Mammoth
Jul 15, 10:14 AM
Looking at PC product offerings by ATI (http://www.ati.com/products/workstation/fireglmatrix.html), you can see that they also offer video cards with two dual-link DVI ports on a single card. You can even get this on a Radeon X1900 series card (http://www.ati.com/products/radeonx1900/radeonx1900xtx/specs.html).
I believe you are wrong (http://www.ati.com/designpartners/media/images/RX1900_Board_lg.jpg).
(Believe)
I believe you are wrong (http://www.ati.com/designpartners/media/images/RX1900_Board_lg.jpg).
(Believe)
Macnoviz
Jul 20, 08:17 AM
I wonder what they're going to call them, Quad sounds cool but "Octa or Octo" just sounds a bit silly.
MacPro8?
The Mactopus??
ByteCore
MacPro8?
The Mactopus??
ByteCore
jclardy
Mar 22, 01:27 PM
Blackberry playbook = The IPad 2 killer - you heard it here first.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Yeah sure, a business tablet with a screen too small to type on. Rim's marketing for this thing seems to be all over the place, they say business tablet, but the picture shows Need For Speed?
Out of the 7" tablets the playbook looks the best, but it is still a 7" tablet. Combined with it's wider display the keyboard will be way to small. If they come out with some kind of awesome keyboard accessory then it may stand a chance. BB's success had a lot to do with its comfortable keyboard.
Samsung's new tablets might do well, as long as they do some decent marketing.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Yeah sure, a business tablet with a screen too small to type on. Rim's marketing for this thing seems to be all over the place, they say business tablet, but the picture shows Need For Speed?
Out of the 7" tablets the playbook looks the best, but it is still a 7" tablet. Combined with it's wider display the keyboard will be way to small. If they come out with some kind of awesome keyboard accessory then it may stand a chance. BB's success had a lot to do with its comfortable keyboard.
Samsung's new tablets might do well, as long as they do some decent marketing.
rockthecasbah
Jul 27, 01:35 PM
This means that Apple could easily upgrade the existing Intel-based Macs to the newer processor with no design changes.
Not many people seem to be making too much of a deal about this, but i don't like the sound of that. It's great for upgrading a Mini or iMac, but i really want fresh new designs for the Mac Pro and MacBook Pro. If that is the case, Apple may just wait longer for a design change just because they can! It's not like i'd turn one away, but the current designs are tiring... Oh well i'll still be excited if my "fears" are true, but i really want a fresh design.
Am i the only one that seems to think that WWDC is getting clogged up with TOO many things? I mean sure the more Apple products released/updated the better, but this keynote seems to be taking a lot of emphasis off of Leopard previews (according to the rumors) to focus more on new products. iPods galore, Mac Pros, MBPs, Mac Mini (maybe), whatever at this point, i mean where are we really fitting in Leopard other than a quick flash!?!
Not many people seem to be making too much of a deal about this, but i don't like the sound of that. It's great for upgrading a Mini or iMac, but i really want fresh new designs for the Mac Pro and MacBook Pro. If that is the case, Apple may just wait longer for a design change just because they can! It's not like i'd turn one away, but the current designs are tiring... Oh well i'll still be excited if my "fears" are true, but i really want a fresh design.
Am i the only one that seems to think that WWDC is getting clogged up with TOO many things? I mean sure the more Apple products released/updated the better, but this keynote seems to be taking a lot of emphasis off of Leopard previews (according to the rumors) to focus more on new products. iPods galore, Mac Pros, MBPs, Mac Mini (maybe), whatever at this point, i mean where are we really fitting in Leopard other than a quick flash!?!
Vegasman
Apr 27, 08:40 AM
Apple's solution is fine by me. They wouldn't have done anything if there wasn't so much press about it, but I guess that's a good reason (one of the only ones) for the press to exist.
Interestingly, this behavior of waiting for things to blow up in the press before they are addressed will only lead to MORE things getting blown up in the press. Maybe Apple likes that? I dunno.
Interestingly, this behavior of waiting for things to blow up in the press before they are addressed will only lead to MORE things getting blown up in the press. Maybe Apple likes that? I dunno.