mrblack927
May 3, 12:43 PM
We were discussing this a few threads down the front page.
Doubt the MacPro will be dead, but the market for it will shrivel up very badly unless some universal need for extreme processing is manufactured. With current processing speeds and ThunderBolt accessories, an iMac can become a full pro machine for all sorts of jobs that don't need to work titanic piles of data.
This Pro I purchased in early 2007 is still excellent. It will last until 2014 or beyond, and by that point I will probably go with an iMac. Today's iMacs are already faster than this tower in most ways.
It's not just about power. I would never buy an iMac because I like being able to actually upgrade my components as they get older. With the form factor of the iMac, you get all of the disadvantages of a notebook (less harddrive bays, less ram slots, no expansion slots) with all of the disadvantages of a desktop (namely, it's not portable). It just seems silly to me.
Additionally, I hate 16:9 displays (16:9 is tv widescreen, 16:10 is computer widescreen) and I would much rather use my own displays (2x dell ultrasharps) than the ones apple makes, so building the display into the computer is a disadvantage to me.
Sigh... It's a shame really, I don't need nearly the kind of power that even the lowest Mac Pro has, but it's the only desktop mac that I could buy at this point.
Doubt the MacPro will be dead, but the market for it will shrivel up very badly unless some universal need for extreme processing is manufactured. With current processing speeds and ThunderBolt accessories, an iMac can become a full pro machine for all sorts of jobs that don't need to work titanic piles of data.
This Pro I purchased in early 2007 is still excellent. It will last until 2014 or beyond, and by that point I will probably go with an iMac. Today's iMacs are already faster than this tower in most ways.
It's not just about power. I would never buy an iMac because I like being able to actually upgrade my components as they get older. With the form factor of the iMac, you get all of the disadvantages of a notebook (less harddrive bays, less ram slots, no expansion slots) with all of the disadvantages of a desktop (namely, it's not portable). It just seems silly to me.
Additionally, I hate 16:9 displays (16:9 is tv widescreen, 16:10 is computer widescreen) and I would much rather use my own displays (2x dell ultrasharps) than the ones apple makes, so building the display into the computer is a disadvantage to me.
Sigh... It's a shame really, I don't need nearly the kind of power that even the lowest Mac Pro has, but it's the only desktop mac that I could buy at this point.
shidoshi
Aug 31, 09:13 PM
these obviosly gonna be optimizd for the full screen ipod, whats wrong with avi format anyway.
The fact that it isn't a "format," for starters.
$10 ~ $15, if that is the price for anything below a 720p encoding of a movie, would be the stupidest thing that Apple has done. (Well, at least in the last 10 years or so.)
If they do 720p encodes - and that would have to be the minimum, as they really should be 1080p - then they might have something worthwhile. The problem is, this will totally clash with the move to Blu-Ray and HD-DVD, so being realistic, my guess would be 480p encodes. Which, of course, then makes purchasing movies this way versus DVD a really stupid decision (IMHO).
I'd love to see Apple get this right, but... I'm really not holding my breath.
The fact that it isn't a "format," for starters.
$10 ~ $15, if that is the price for anything below a 720p encoding of a movie, would be the stupidest thing that Apple has done. (Well, at least in the last 10 years or so.)
If they do 720p encodes - and that would have to be the minimum, as they really should be 1080p - then they might have something worthwhile. The problem is, this will totally clash with the move to Blu-Ray and HD-DVD, so being realistic, my guess would be 480p encodes. Which, of course, then makes purchasing movies this way versus DVD a really stupid decision (IMHO).
I'd love to see Apple get this right, but... I'm really not holding my breath.
kdarling
Apr 20, 09:25 AM
My favorite was a few years ago when Apple tried to stop New York (aka the Big Apple) from using this logo for their "Green New York" environmental project.
Apple claimed it would "seriously injure the reputation which it has established for its goods and services."
.
Apple claimed it would "seriously injure the reputation which it has established for its goods and services."
.
skunk
Apr 11, 01:22 PM
So does a centipede. :oThey would if they had a hundred legs...
Durendal
Oct 27, 11:46 AM
ridiculous
coporate types acting like the aritocracy
let information flow
let freedom reign
Let a bunch of Greenpeace guys go too far at a tradeshow (see above) and get away with it. Read up on the above comments. They violated their contracts and screwed with other vendors' booths. Perhaps you should learn how to think rationally, then learn how to spell.
coporate types acting like the aritocracy
let information flow
let freedom reign
Let a bunch of Greenpeace guys go too far at a tradeshow (see above) and get away with it. Read up on the above comments. They violated their contracts and screwed with other vendors' booths. Perhaps you should learn how to think rationally, then learn how to spell.
nylonsteel
Mar 29, 11:33 AM
i would hate to see msft dominate mobile os
interesting projection from idc
would like to see instead aapl ios and android over msft
interesting projection from idc
would like to see instead aapl ios and android over msft
LightSpeed1
Apr 25, 01:35 PM
Could just be me, but I think the design is perfect. Apple is still way ahead of the competition with the unibody design. How much better can it get?
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.
MattDell
Oct 12, 11:08 PM
Not sure if it's already been pointed out, but GAP is also releasing a Red line of clothes tomorrow to support AIDS in Africa. I wonder if Oprah will be visiting various retail stores supporting the Red thing tomorrow.
I really want the Red SLVR phone, but it's not sold here.
-Matt
I really want the Red SLVR phone, but it's not sold here.
-Matt
DrFrankTM
Sep 9, 10:53 AM
He is talking about reliability data from at least the last 10 years, Aiden...data you must have no clue about, of course...after all, Macs just started doing Windows, right? :rolleyes:
Am I the only one who's starting to find this petty crusade of yours annoying? Seriously, just drop it. The iMac is a great machine. I loved my G5 and I might well buy another iMac when I upgrade from the Mini I have now. A Mac Pro would be nice too, but we'll see. Anyways, the iMac is not the "most powerful desktop" in the world and no one gives a damn: it's an awesome machine regardless. So please, honestly, just drop it. What you said was false and still is. It's ok. Everyone makes mistakes. But drop it. It's starting to annoy me very seriously and I'd be surprised if I was the only one.
And I don't see what your personal attacks on some fine folks here are adding to the discussion. Along with opinions, AidenShaw - among others - brings a lot of technical expertise and hard facts to the table. I, for one, value that greatly, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. Indeed, the reason MacRumors is so awesome is that a fair share of the posters bring more than opinions to the forums: they also bring hard facts and educated guesses. I think that people can discuss respectfully, that people can argue respectfully, and that people can disagree respectfully. Most folks here do, and I'm sure you can do it too if you try even just a little. Thanks.
Am I the only one who's starting to find this petty crusade of yours annoying? Seriously, just drop it. The iMac is a great machine. I loved my G5 and I might well buy another iMac when I upgrade from the Mini I have now. A Mac Pro would be nice too, but we'll see. Anyways, the iMac is not the "most powerful desktop" in the world and no one gives a damn: it's an awesome machine regardless. So please, honestly, just drop it. What you said was false and still is. It's ok. Everyone makes mistakes. But drop it. It's starting to annoy me very seriously and I'd be surprised if I was the only one.
And I don't see what your personal attacks on some fine folks here are adding to the discussion. Along with opinions, AidenShaw - among others - brings a lot of technical expertise and hard facts to the table. I, for one, value that greatly, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. Indeed, the reason MacRumors is so awesome is that a fair share of the posters bring more than opinions to the forums: they also bring hard facts and educated guesses. I think that people can discuss respectfully, that people can argue respectfully, and that people can disagree respectfully. Most folks here do, and I'm sure you can do it too if you try even just a little. Thanks.
jaknudsen
Apr 13, 09:20 AM
Could the "Airplay vs. Sonos" discussion please continue in a separate thread? As different implementations of the RAOP hack will appear, this thread will continue to be worth a subscription.
Renverse
Apr 17, 01:05 PM
McAfee is irrelevant, even for Windows users. They call themselves experts but their software just brings ANY computer to a grinding halt.
Anyone remember this: http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-20003074-83.html ?
Yeah.
Anyone remember this: http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-20003074-83.html ?
Yeah.
nem3015
Sep 1, 12:30 PM
Sept. 12th is a Tuesday in Cupertino.
oppps my bad.
OK then early in the morning so will be evening in Paris. Frenchs anyway like it better in the evening. :p
oppps my bad.
OK then early in the morning so will be evening in Paris. Frenchs anyway like it better in the evening. :p
DVK916
Sep 17, 08:23 PM
ok.. see, i never said TECHNICALLY it was crap. OK, so CDMA can have higher speed than 3G GSM. ITS A MOBILE PHONE. what the hell do you need 14mbps for?
a jet car that goes 300mph on a drag strip is NOT better than a Audi/Merc/BMW/Bentley/etc that only does 250mph, but can drive on a normal road.
for consumers, it (CDMA) is crap. you are so used to having to choose a phone based on what your carrier supports (or vice-versa) that you can't see how that is a problem. GSM (which uses a SIM card) offers so much more flexibility. hell. I can take my phone to any country with a GSM network, put in a sim card, and VOILA i am connected (not that i need to worry anyway, with vodafone global roaming)
WRONG GSM does NOT work in Japan. You can't go to any country and use it. Japan doesn't have GSM.
a jet car that goes 300mph on a drag strip is NOT better than a Audi/Merc/BMW/Bentley/etc that only does 250mph, but can drive on a normal road.
for consumers, it (CDMA) is crap. you are so used to having to choose a phone based on what your carrier supports (or vice-versa) that you can't see how that is a problem. GSM (which uses a SIM card) offers so much more flexibility. hell. I can take my phone to any country with a GSM network, put in a sim card, and VOILA i am connected (not that i need to worry anyway, with vodafone global roaming)
WRONG GSM does NOT work in Japan. You can't go to any country and use it. Japan doesn't have GSM.
BrianMojo
Aug 31, 01:13 PM
Everyone ASSUMES they will make these DVDs available via MP4. Who's to say they dont offer up an ISO file that is the FULL DVD (extra's and all)? Maybe even the full DVD encoded in MP4.
DVD menus as they exist today would be impossible to read on an iPod screen. So there's one reason why, not to mention the fact that it's too complicated to seem 'Apple-like'.
DVD menus as they exist today would be impossible to read on an iPod screen. So there's one reason why, not to mention the fact that it's too complicated to seem 'Apple-like'.
Vegasman
Apr 19, 08:58 AM
I agree. Sometimes I think this kind of lawsuits are a stretch and a bit silly, but not this time. When there's confusion even to me as a geek after a quick glance on these smarthpones, I have to agree that it's gone too far.
For me all phone look relatively the same at a glace so I always look at the buttons first.
1 button - Apple
4 buttons - Android
3 button - Windows Phone
Then I look for a logo to differentiate further.
For me all phone look relatively the same at a glace so I always look at the buttons first.
1 button - Apple
4 buttons - Android
3 button - Windows Phone
Then I look for a logo to differentiate further.
hyperpasta
Aug 31, 12:01 PM
...and 5 years later, with no major innovations since iPod Video...
I'd count the click wheel as an innovation... but you're right, Apple needs to innovate again.
I'd count the click wheel as an innovation... but you're right, Apple needs to innovate again.
Gasu E.
Apr 19, 09:27 AM
So what? They're already getting sued by Apple, so what's another lawsuit? Point is, contract breach or not, Samsung could cripple Apple's whole ecosystem within days by halting all processor shipments. Apple makes the vast majority on iDevices and this would kill Apple's whole economic model. And this doesn't even account for Samsungs components that go into their Macs. As a result, Apple would have no hardware to sell. They would dip into their treasure chest. It could be devastating to Apple.
If Samsung breached the supply contract, they would be sued again. The difference is that in the infringement suit, Apple has a moderate case and the remedy if they win will be $100M-$2B range. In a contract infringment, Apple would have an ironclad case, and the remedy would be $100B-$300B-- in other words, Samsung would become a division of Apple.
If Samsung breached the supply contract, they would be sued again. The difference is that in the infringement suit, Apple has a moderate case and the remedy if they win will be $100M-$2B range. In a contract infringment, Apple would have an ironclad case, and the remedy would be $100B-$300B-- in other words, Samsung would become a division of Apple.
mox358
Sep 13, 09:28 PM
I just posted earlier today about how I was waiting for the Apple iPhone to upgrade my RAZR... but honestly thats it?
I feel like the only one who looks at that design and says "blah". Its a horrible design for a phone. Its a nano with a bigger screen. Thats it. There are 1000 phones out there now that look just like this.
I can't believe this is what we've been waiting for years and god knows how much in R&D for?
I'm a much bigger fan of the iChat Mobile. (I know its fake but its a much better idea than this. Granted it needs some work too...)
http://idisk.mac.com/mox358/Public/ichat_mobile.jpg
I feel like the only one who looks at that design and says "blah". Its a horrible design for a phone. Its a nano with a bigger screen. Thats it. There are 1000 phones out there now that look just like this.
I can't believe this is what we've been waiting for years and god knows how much in R&D for?
I'm a much bigger fan of the iChat Mobile. (I know its fake but its a much better idea than this. Granted it needs some work too...)
http://idisk.mac.com/mox358/Public/ichat_mobile.jpg
Multimedia
Sep 9, 02:16 PM
Heh, that's pretty funny. I have quite a few applications that'll hit one core at 100%. (Q emulator is the best example) Luckily, even though it's not multi-threaded a have another core free to do my work while Q eats up 100% of one.
I run Windows 98 in Q for laughs. I liked Windows 98...Exactly. A perfect example where one application topping out on only one core leaves the entire other one for other stuff. Probably a good thing to have that limit.
In fact, in future, I could see where application developers let the user in preferences tell the application how many cores to be allowed to use. Give the user a choice of how many cores he/she wants a particular process to use. That would be a way cool improvement in all application preferences. Would prevent any one applicaiton from hosing the computer due to core hogging.
I run Windows 98 in Q for laughs. I liked Windows 98...Exactly. A perfect example where one application topping out on only one core leaves the entire other one for other stuff. Probably a good thing to have that limit.
In fact, in future, I could see where application developers let the user in preferences tell the application how many cores to be allowed to use. Give the user a choice of how many cores he/she wants a particular process to use. That would be a way cool improvement in all application preferences. Would prevent any one applicaiton from hosing the computer due to core hogging.
mashny
May 3, 03:00 PM
Wow, over 160 posts, a glossy monitor on the new iMac, and we haven't had a matte vs. glossy fistfight yet.
CrackedButter
Sep 19, 04:29 PM
As I stated in a few posts up I'm not that happy with the pricing of the iTunes Movies, but, if I were to buy any I would quickly run into a huge problem - STORAGE! I have an iBook with 60 GB drive and it's almost full from other stuff.
Apple should come out with a home storage network server with RAID, etc.
Err, buy an external HD or upgrade your iBook HD!
I have a 1Ghz iBook with a 80GB HD (upgraded it myself) and 2 160GB firewire HD's so what was your point?
Apple should come out with a home storage network server with RAID, etc.
Err, buy an external HD or upgrade your iBook HD!
I have a 1Ghz iBook with a 80GB HD (upgraded it myself) and 2 160GB firewire HD's so what was your point?
IJ Reilly
Aug 24, 05:04 PM
This might be a valid point, except that the $100 million payout isn't being charged against profits. Instead, it is being recorded as an asset and ammortized over many years, meaning it will have very minimal impact to the bottom line.
This is really little more than a bookkeeping trick. The books will now report that Apple bought something for $100 million, something they thought they already owned. It's still the same dollar figure, no matter where the accountants put it in the books. The way I understand it, in theory at least, Apple could generate some revenue from this "asset" if Creative obtains more licenses. I'll believe it when I see it. I'm betting we never do see it.
The Microsoft Zune possibilities are interesting. We haven't seen the Zune interface yet, but you can be sure Creative is going to be taking a good, hard look at the device when it finally surfaces (sometime during this decade, almost without a doubt). We'll just have to wait and see. We'll also have to wait and see if Creative dumps their DMP business. If any of these events occur, I'm prepared to change my opinion about this settlement.
This is really little more than a bookkeeping trick. The books will now report that Apple bought something for $100 million, something they thought they already owned. It's still the same dollar figure, no matter where the accountants put it in the books. The way I understand it, in theory at least, Apple could generate some revenue from this "asset" if Creative obtains more licenses. I'll believe it when I see it. I'm betting we never do see it.
The Microsoft Zune possibilities are interesting. We haven't seen the Zune interface yet, but you can be sure Creative is going to be taking a good, hard look at the device when it finally surfaces (sometime during this decade, almost without a doubt). We'll just have to wait and see. We'll also have to wait and see if Creative dumps their DMP business. If any of these events occur, I'm prepared to change my opinion about this settlement.
vitaboy
Aug 24, 04:08 AM
Whoa..
http://www.macminute.com/2006/08/23/apple-creative/
Guess they realized they couldn't win..
Please read my above posts. :-)
The only things I'd like to add is that $100 million is a drop in the bucket for Apple. Apple has $10 billion in cash. That money isn't stuffed in Steve Jobs' mattress, it's being invested in short-term investment vehicles that is producing a good return. Even if Apple stuck it in a plain ol' savings account, the $10 billion would be generating around $300 million a year in interest alone, never mind the fact that Apple is adding $3 billion a year to their cash horde.
Secondly, Apple has sold billions of dollars of iPods over the years. It will sell untold billions of dollars more into the future.
For Creative to settle for a mere $100 million when the iPod is virtually guaranteed to generate tens of billions of dollars going forward is sheer lunancy if Creative was really confident about winning.
In fact, the fact that they settled for such a small sum shows that Creative was sweating bullets about losing it all. Apple was the one dictating the terms here.
Creative pays Apple back as it collects additional licensing fees? Sounds like a loan to me.
Creative joins the "Made for iPod" program and pays Apple a percentage of the revenue for iPod-only products? Doesn't sound like the kind of terms a confident victor would be making. Sounds more like a company trying to kick up a new revenue source in light of the fact that Zune is about to eat up its music player business.
The most interesting part is when Zune launches, and how long it will take Creative to sue Microsoft. Apple just turned a 90-lb weakling into a hired assassin!
http://www.macminute.com/2006/08/23/apple-creative/
Guess they realized they couldn't win..
Please read my above posts. :-)
The only things I'd like to add is that $100 million is a drop in the bucket for Apple. Apple has $10 billion in cash. That money isn't stuffed in Steve Jobs' mattress, it's being invested in short-term investment vehicles that is producing a good return. Even if Apple stuck it in a plain ol' savings account, the $10 billion would be generating around $300 million a year in interest alone, never mind the fact that Apple is adding $3 billion a year to their cash horde.
Secondly, Apple has sold billions of dollars of iPods over the years. It will sell untold billions of dollars more into the future.
For Creative to settle for a mere $100 million when the iPod is virtually guaranteed to generate tens of billions of dollars going forward is sheer lunancy if Creative was really confident about winning.
In fact, the fact that they settled for such a small sum shows that Creative was sweating bullets about losing it all. Apple was the one dictating the terms here.
Creative pays Apple back as it collects additional licensing fees? Sounds like a loan to me.
Creative joins the "Made for iPod" program and pays Apple a percentage of the revenue for iPod-only products? Doesn't sound like the kind of terms a confident victor would be making. Sounds more like a company trying to kick up a new revenue source in light of the fact that Zune is about to eat up its music player business.
The most interesting part is when Zune launches, and how long it will take Creative to sue Microsoft. Apple just turned a 90-lb weakling into a hired assassin!
No comments:
Post a Comment