joeboy_45101
Aug 4, 09:05 AM
Where does this leave Conroe and Allendale? Apple's marketing strategy has always been that the PowerBooks (MacBook Pro) have faster processers then any of the iMac offerings. The Conroe and Allendale (Desktop) chips run faster then the Merom (Mobile) chips.
So when Apple does ugrade the iMac is it going to use the desktop processer or the mobile one? If it uses the Conroe and Allendale chips it risks breaking it's arbitrary rule of keeping the iMac slower than the PowerBook (MacBook); on the other hand, if Apple decides to use the Merom chips in the iMac then the iMac will be slow compared to offerings by other companies, who would be using the faster Conroe or Allendale chips.
I think Apple should ditch it's old, worn-out marketing strategies. Who cares if the iMac is faster than the MacBook, it's not like I can carry around an iMac or sit it on my lap. The MacBook is portable power, the iMac is affordable power!
So when Apple does ugrade the iMac is it going to use the desktop processer or the mobile one? If it uses the Conroe and Allendale chips it risks breaking it's arbitrary rule of keeping the iMac slower than the PowerBook (MacBook); on the other hand, if Apple decides to use the Merom chips in the iMac then the iMac will be slow compared to offerings by other companies, who would be using the faster Conroe or Allendale chips.
I think Apple should ditch it's old, worn-out marketing strategies. Who cares if the iMac is faster than the MacBook, it's not like I can carry around an iMac or sit it on my lap. The MacBook is portable power, the iMac is affordable power!
Raineer
Apr 18, 04:46 PM
They have patents but they HAVE to pursue infringers or they can lose the rights to the patents. That's why you see so many patent lawsuits. Unfortunately, that's just how the system works (in very basic terms).
8 pages and no quotes of this. That's all there is to this, folks...
8 pages and no quotes of this. That's all there is to this, folks...
Piggie
Apr 25, 09:08 AM
I never understand these things.
It's like asking a burger "did you steal anything?"
The answer will either be silence or it will be no.
Even if Apple were using and collecting tracking locations to build up databases of customer movements, they are not going to shout "YES WE ARE TRACKING PEOPLE"
It's just a silly question to ask, what do you think they will say?
If Apple want to be seen to be squeaky they have a simple answer, put a setting in the iDevices options to turn off location tracking/storage.
Simple.
It's like asking a burger "did you steal anything?"
The answer will either be silence or it will be no.
Even if Apple were using and collecting tracking locations to build up databases of customer movements, they are not going to shout "YES WE ARE TRACKING PEOPLE"
It's just a silly question to ask, what do you think they will say?
If Apple want to be seen to be squeaky they have a simple answer, put a setting in the iDevices options to turn off location tracking/storage.
Simple.
NY Guitarist
Apr 21, 03:36 PM
The rack mount format is just for that: to mount in a standard 19" rack, along with other equipment and even a rack-mount UPS. That's not the realm of a Mac Pro. It's the realm of servers. I like the current, and brilliant, case design very much. It's an example of form follows function and great industrial design.
I know many professional situations where a Mac Pro would be ideal as a rack mountable unit.
Recording studio, on location video production (DIT), and studio based post-production rigs, basically places where other equipment is racked, may need to be secured, cooled, power conditioned, or in mobile racks. Rack mounting in not only for servers.
Having said that, I love the current Mac Pro towers, brilliant industrial design both inside and outside, unlike the G5 Quad 2.5.
I know many professional situations where a Mac Pro would be ideal as a rack mountable unit.
Recording studio, on location video production (DIT), and studio based post-production rigs, basically places where other equipment is racked, may need to be secured, cooled, power conditioned, or in mobile racks. Rack mounting in not only for servers.
Having said that, I love the current Mac Pro towers, brilliant industrial design both inside and outside, unlike the G5 Quad 2.5.
Kwill
Apr 18, 03:56 PM
Don't bite the hand that screws you. :eek:
rovex
May 6, 03:38 AM
Going British was Jonathan Ive's plan. :p
Diode
Apr 20, 08:04 AM
Just give me LTE so I can switch to Verizon please :rolleyes:
surf2snow1
Mar 28, 11:31 AM
Not cool. Coming from an iPhone 3GS, I seriously don't want to wait.
Same here, my wife wanted to upgrade her phone so she got the iPhone 4. I wanted to hold out for the white then decided to wait until the iPhone 5 came out. Guess I gotta wait a little while longer and HOPE the 5 is worth it!
Same here, my wife wanted to upgrade her phone so she got the iPhone 4. I wanted to hold out for the white then decided to wait until the iPhone 5 came out. Guess I gotta wait a little while longer and HOPE the 5 is worth it!
Makosuke
May 6, 05:10 AM
I'm not so much joining in the discussion as publicly recording what I think is going to happen in a few years based not really on this prediction, but the way things are going in general, so that I can point to this post in a few years and either say "I told you so" or "look how clueless I was."
I think this prediction is right, at least in general terms, and while to hardcore geeks it may sound like a terrible idea, I doubt it is, and it makes a great deal of sense to Apple. That said, I expect Apple will continue to sell "pro" systems of some sort based on Intel chips for the foreseeable future, to cover the developer/Photoshop-jockey/video-editor market. They're just not going to sell all that many of them.
This is why the ARM transition will not be like the Intel transition (and remember we're not talking about something happening tomorrow):
For one thing, two years is a lot of time at the rate the ARM architecture has been advancing. Predicting anything about how fast the chips will be in 2013 (or how much Intel will have advanced by then) is difficult.
In the quarter the G5 Power Mac first shipped, back in Apple earned $44M on $1.7B in sales, and shipped 787K Macs. In the quarter the first Intel iMacs shipped, in Apple earned $410M on $4.36B, and sold 1.1M Macs.
In the most recent quarter, Apple's profit was $6B--more than their gross in and almost as much as the entire company's gross for all of 2003--on gross income of close to $25B. They sold 3.76M Macs, and more notably 4.69M iPads and well over 20M small-screen iOS devices. They also have something like $65 billion sitting in the bank, which is ridiculous.
Contrast this with Intel, which in the last quarter was doing extremely well, with gross of $12.8B and net of $3.16B. Or, for that matter, IBM, which had revenue of $24B and earnings of $2.9B.
In Apple was a relatively small-time player that got IBM to design a wicked-fast custom desktop CPU. In 2006 they were a somewhat larger company mostly on account of selling a lot of iPods, and weren't in a strong enough position to get IBM to do what they needed with the PPC architecture to the point it could compete with Intel's upcoming Core architecture. Today their Mac business alone is three times what it was then, it's the only segment of the PC industry actually expanding, and the company is HUGE--twice the size of Intel, in terms of financials. Heck, they could buy a controlling stake in Intel based purely on that company's market cap with cash on hand.
Further, of all those 25M+ iOS devices last quarter, every single one was running an ARM processor. While nearly 4 million Macs is nothing to sneeze at, Apple's bread and butter is iOS and ARM-based systems. They know them, they control the whole package, and they have an in-house CPU team for the architecture. One that, based on performance comparisons with the Xoom, is doing its job quite well. They've also managed to sell these devices at prices so low other companies are having serious trouble matching them, while maintaing very healthy profit margins.
As far as Apple is concerned--and with good reason--iOS on ARM is their future. There's no reason to stop selling Macs, but the market for console-style computers is not likely limited to handhelds and tablets--there's almost certainly a lot of demand in the bigger-laptop-with-a-keyboard space as well as large-screen desktops. With the rate of CPU power increase in ARM chips, within a couple of years they're likely to be powerful enough to comfortably handle desktop tasks, particularly considering that the average user really doesn't have any use for anything more than a basic dual-core system--everything else is for pros and bragging rights.
So, by way of prediction, I'd assume that Apple will continue to beef up its in-house ARM team, and once the desktop-grade chips are in place leverage that to replace what we currently think of as consumer Macs with beefier, larger-screen iOS based devices (or perhaps some iOS/MacOS hybrid thing to better handle indirect input, since pointing at a 27" touchscreen is ridiculous for more than a few minutes).
After all, Apple could--and very will might--dump a few billion dollars of their hoard into advancing the ARM architecture in some way that competitors can't match, and/or building out chip fab capabilities to keep prices low and availability high. Intel's entire R&D budget for 2010 was in the range of $6B, AMD's wasn't much over $1B, and Apple likes to control their own destiny, so it's not out of the question if they can hire good enough people.
I also bet that they will keep some "pro" machines--perhaps even those that'll keep the "Mac" moniker--in the lineup, for people who want more traditional workstation software, since there's still a lucrative market for that. These will presumably use Intel chips, but then who knows--even Microsoft is working on a version of Windows for ARM.
And outside the gamer market or the relatively small number of people who need or want a virtualized Windows environment, I seriously doubt most people will care. After all, it hasn't stopped them from lining up to buy iPads, and I have NEVER heard even the most ardent Windows fanboy rant about Windows with the same fervor as a half-dozen non-technical people I know personally who love their iPad.
Geeks and old-school Macheads like myself will wail and moan, and Apple won't care. If they did, the iPad would have run the MacOS.
In related news, Microsoft is in trouble.
I think this prediction is right, at least in general terms, and while to hardcore geeks it may sound like a terrible idea, I doubt it is, and it makes a great deal of sense to Apple. That said, I expect Apple will continue to sell "pro" systems of some sort based on Intel chips for the foreseeable future, to cover the developer/Photoshop-jockey/video-editor market. They're just not going to sell all that many of them.
This is why the ARM transition will not be like the Intel transition (and remember we're not talking about something happening tomorrow):
For one thing, two years is a lot of time at the rate the ARM architecture has been advancing. Predicting anything about how fast the chips will be in 2013 (or how much Intel will have advanced by then) is difficult.
In the quarter the G5 Power Mac first shipped, back in Apple earned $44M on $1.7B in sales, and shipped 787K Macs. In the quarter the first Intel iMacs shipped, in Apple earned $410M on $4.36B, and sold 1.1M Macs.
In the most recent quarter, Apple's profit was $6B--more than their gross in and almost as much as the entire company's gross for all of 2003--on gross income of close to $25B. They sold 3.76M Macs, and more notably 4.69M iPads and well over 20M small-screen iOS devices. They also have something like $65 billion sitting in the bank, which is ridiculous.
Contrast this with Intel, which in the last quarter was doing extremely well, with gross of $12.8B and net of $3.16B. Or, for that matter, IBM, which had revenue of $24B and earnings of $2.9B.
In Apple was a relatively small-time player that got IBM to design a wicked-fast custom desktop CPU. In 2006 they were a somewhat larger company mostly on account of selling a lot of iPods, and weren't in a strong enough position to get IBM to do what they needed with the PPC architecture to the point it could compete with Intel's upcoming Core architecture. Today their Mac business alone is three times what it was then, it's the only segment of the PC industry actually expanding, and the company is HUGE--twice the size of Intel, in terms of financials. Heck, they could buy a controlling stake in Intel based purely on that company's market cap with cash on hand.
Further, of all those 25M+ iOS devices last quarter, every single one was running an ARM processor. While nearly 4 million Macs is nothing to sneeze at, Apple's bread and butter is iOS and ARM-based systems. They know them, they control the whole package, and they have an in-house CPU team for the architecture. One that, based on performance comparisons with the Xoom, is doing its job quite well. They've also managed to sell these devices at prices so low other companies are having serious trouble matching them, while maintaing very healthy profit margins.
As far as Apple is concerned--and with good reason--iOS on ARM is their future. There's no reason to stop selling Macs, but the market for console-style computers is not likely limited to handhelds and tablets--there's almost certainly a lot of demand in the bigger-laptop-with-a-keyboard space as well as large-screen desktops. With the rate of CPU power increase in ARM chips, within a couple of years they're likely to be powerful enough to comfortably handle desktop tasks, particularly considering that the average user really doesn't have any use for anything more than a basic dual-core system--everything else is for pros and bragging rights.
So, by way of prediction, I'd assume that Apple will continue to beef up its in-house ARM team, and once the desktop-grade chips are in place leverage that to replace what we currently think of as consumer Macs with beefier, larger-screen iOS based devices (or perhaps some iOS/MacOS hybrid thing to better handle indirect input, since pointing at a 27" touchscreen is ridiculous for more than a few minutes).
After all, Apple could--and very will might--dump a few billion dollars of their hoard into advancing the ARM architecture in some way that competitors can't match, and/or building out chip fab capabilities to keep prices low and availability high. Intel's entire R&D budget for 2010 was in the range of $6B, AMD's wasn't much over $1B, and Apple likes to control their own destiny, so it's not out of the question if they can hire good enough people.
I also bet that they will keep some "pro" machines--perhaps even those that'll keep the "Mac" moniker--in the lineup, for people who want more traditional workstation software, since there's still a lucrative market for that. These will presumably use Intel chips, but then who knows--even Microsoft is working on a version of Windows for ARM.
And outside the gamer market or the relatively small number of people who need or want a virtualized Windows environment, I seriously doubt most people will care. After all, it hasn't stopped them from lining up to buy iPads, and I have NEVER heard even the most ardent Windows fanboy rant about Windows with the same fervor as a half-dozen non-technical people I know personally who love their iPad.
Geeks and old-school Macheads like myself will wail and moan, and Apple won't care. If they did, the iPad would have run the MacOS.
In related news, Microsoft is in trouble.
LagunaSol
Apr 18, 05:13 PM
What would you and Leguna have Samsung do to the Galaxy Tab to make it less "identical"?
Do what every other Android hardware manufacturer has done and come up with their own industrial design.
Do what every other Android hardware manufacturer has done and come up with their own industrial design.
grahamperrin
Dec 24, 01:11 AM
Kaspersky …is a lot heavier on system resources.
With Sophos, users may find heaviness in different ways.
The default number of WorkerThreads seems to make the system unusable for some users of the current version of Sophos. That's heaviness of one sort.
A higher number of WorkerThreads, for which there's no GUI, will use resources in a different way. That's heaviness of a different sort.
A system that's consistently usable is a must, so for as long as there's uncertainty around http://openforum.sophos.com/t5/Sophos-Anti-Virus-for-Mac-Home/Unable-to-complete-login-after-reboot/m-p/1027#M599 I should recommend approaching SAV with caution, and with readiness to work around things from the command line.
With Sophos, users may find heaviness in different ways.
The default number of WorkerThreads seems to make the system unusable for some users of the current version of Sophos. That's heaviness of one sort.
A higher number of WorkerThreads, for which there's no GUI, will use resources in a different way. That's heaviness of a different sort.
A system that's consistently usable is a must, so for as long as there's uncertainty around http://openforum.sophos.com/t5/Sophos-Anti-Virus-for-Mac-Home/Unable-to-complete-login-after-reboot/m-p/1027#M599 I should recommend approaching SAV with caution, and with readiness to work around things from the command line.
pcharles
Apr 25, 09:29 AM
So much excitement over yet another fake email from Steve Jobs!
Kensai
Apr 20, 08:40 AM
Three initials: NFC
Come on, Apple, reinvent the market yet again! :cool:
Come on, Apple, reinvent the market yet again! :cool:
pizzafunghi
May 7, 03:45 PM
Then they better improve the performance first. If they offered it free then more users would really bog down the current MobileMe
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDXSSi1qStA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDXSSi1qStA
osxtasy
Apr 5, 01:38 PM
"Toyota had agreed to do so to "maintain their good relationship with Apple," "
Toyota has a relationship with Apple, good or bad? Why? I don't see the connection.
Well, to be honest, BOTH of there "Quality Assurance" (or rather lack thereof) has gone severly downhill in the last couple years. Oh yea, I say this as an owner of BOTH companies products....sadly:(:(
Now "HOW YA LIKE THEM APPLES STEVE JOBS??"
Toyota has a relationship with Apple, good or bad? Why? I don't see the connection.
Well, to be honest, BOTH of there "Quality Assurance" (or rather lack thereof) has gone severly downhill in the last couple years. Oh yea, I say this as an owner of BOTH companies products....sadly:(:(
Now "HOW YA LIKE THEM APPLES STEVE JOBS??"
JAT
Mar 29, 01:38 PM
I'd pay a premium for products manufactured in the US.
Products might be more expensive, but there would be more Americans employed. As much are there is a downside to producing here, there is also an upside.
Quality would probably go down.
Products might be more expensive, but there would be more Americans employed. As much are there is a downside to producing here, there is also an upside.
Quality would probably go down.
milo
May 4, 03:22 PM
Since when is an operating system an "app"?
Since when does the App Store have to be limited to selling "apps"?
The App Store (unless they change things) wouldn't allow that.
Since this will be the first time they're selling the OS itself via the app store, they most certainly ARE changing things. I find it baffling that people can even imagine a scenario where they do a download like this but make no other changes to their terms or functionality.
Great... just have to download 3+ gigabytes every time I want to install it.
Why? You don't have to do that now with apps, right?
Since when does the App Store have to be limited to selling "apps"?
The App Store (unless they change things) wouldn't allow that.
Since this will be the first time they're selling the OS itself via the app store, they most certainly ARE changing things. I find it baffling that people can even imagine a scenario where they do a download like this but make no other changes to their terms or functionality.
Great... just have to download 3+ gigabytes every time I want to install it.
Why? You don't have to do that now with apps, right?
HiRez
Aug 4, 04:39 AM
WWDC is a developer confernce, so Leopard and the Mac Pro. I'd be surprised if he even mentions Merom.Tons of Mac developers use PowerBooks (*cough* I mean MacBook Pros). so I wouldn't be at all surprised to see it mentioned. In fact I'd venture to say PB/MBP are becoming the machine of choice for coders. In fact I'm planning on completely replacing both my dual G5 and my G4 PowerBook with a new MacBook Pro as soon as they revise them with Meron chips. Also, "developers" means hardware developers as well as software, and software developers have to know about the chips they're coding for too, so talking details about a processor is not at all unusual for WWDC (The G5 was discussed in great detail there, for example). But if I had to guess, I'll say they will not revise the MB Pros at WWDC, it will be all about the new Mac Pros, Merom chips, and Leopard. Possibly Xserve will be announced as well but it might be too early for that.
Tailpike1153
Apr 21, 02:36 PM
I want to believe! (X-files reference). The death of the xServe made me a little sad. Glad to see that Apple is trying to work out alternatives. I realize that MacPro isn't a "proper" server but it does have more expansion capablities than the xServe. Perhaps the MacPro Serve 2011/2012 will give us faith in Apple.
MacAddict1978
Apr 25, 10:42 AM
And with the patriot act the telecos let the government move in and access data without warrants. Yet everyone seems fine with this. However, the instant your phone has a database of cell phone towers it is something nefarious. Sigh. It really would be nice if the real privacy concerns were addressed and not this low hanging fruit of a cache on your phone.
Agreed. Google's darling Android doesn't just track cell towers. They've found it recording wi-fi networks near the user as well and transmitting that data... like every couple of minutes. (No wonder the batteries don't last on droid for more than 3-5 hours). I wish I could find the link to the article I read that in. It's certain models that have been found to do it.... right down to your GPS coordinates. Why does Google need to know this? And their users are now inadvertently spying on other people. Google has no rights to info on my wi-fi network just because someone drove past my house with an Android phone in the car.
Yet I use Google every day, but I at least know they're watching me.
http://youtu.be/7YvAYIJSSZY
Agreed. Google's darling Android doesn't just track cell towers. They've found it recording wi-fi networks near the user as well and transmitting that data... like every couple of minutes. (No wonder the batteries don't last on droid for more than 3-5 hours). I wish I could find the link to the article I read that in. It's certain models that have been found to do it.... right down to your GPS coordinates. Why does Google need to know this? And their users are now inadvertently spying on other people. Google has no rights to info on my wi-fi network just because someone drove past my house with an Android phone in the car.
Yet I use Google every day, but I at least know they're watching me.
http://youtu.be/7YvAYIJSSZY
Sedrick
Mar 30, 11:47 AM
So let me understand this. You pay to buy your music, you pay to store it 'in the cloud' and you pay data charges (with ever decreasing unlimited data plans) to listen to it.
This has got to be the stupidest thing I've ever heard of.
This has got to be the stupidest thing I've ever heard of.
PCMacUser
Aug 7, 06:40 PM
Well it's certainly good to see new computers, but they really are aimed at high level tasks. These machines use server technology, rather than technology developed for the retail sector.
Interesting points I see are the use of ECC RAM (this is not at all unusual for servers, but very expensive because it's usually paid for by a company's server budget), and I didn't see any mention of onboard hardware RAID, which is a bit disappointing when you've got all of this other fancy stuff going on.
I'd also be interested to see, from an environmental perspective, how its power consumption levels compare with an equivalent consumer PC.
Interesting points I see are the use of ECC RAM (this is not at all unusual for servers, but very expensive because it's usually paid for by a company's server budget), and I didn't see any mention of onboard hardware RAID, which is a bit disappointing when you've got all of this other fancy stuff going on.
I'd also be interested to see, from an environmental perspective, how its power consumption levels compare with an equivalent consumer PC.
gnasher729
Aug 7, 02:01 PM
Suppose it'd be a bit heretic to buy one of these solely for Windows, right?
I'd not get a quad Xeon Woodcrest anywhere else for less, and my Athlon 64 just doesn't cut it...
If that is what you want, Apple won't mind at all if you buy a Macintosh to run Windows.
I'd not get a quad Xeon Woodcrest anywhere else for less, and my Athlon 64 just doesn't cut it...
If that is what you want, Apple won't mind at all if you buy a Macintosh to run Windows.
ChickenSwartz
Aug 12, 08:54 AM
I wouldn't hold my breath, the Back to School iPod promo has always been a bait to help clear out old inventory. They won't make it available to buy, online or off, until after the promo ends.
This promo isn't to clear out Mac inventory, if anything it is to clear out iPod stock. If they hold back the Merom MBP just so I can't the free iPod I would be pissed and they would hear about it.
This promo isn't to clear out Mac inventory, if anything it is to clear out iPod stock. If they hold back the Merom MBP just so I can't the free iPod I would be pissed and they would hear about it.