faroZ06
Apr 27, 08:46 AM
Did you read ANY of the news articles.
With location services turned off, this data was still be collected. And Apple says this was a "bug"
So you're wrong.
Ok then show me where it says that turning location services off will not stop the tracking. I've scanned the articles and did not find anything that said that. If it does still track when you turn it off, I'd like to know.
With location services turned off, this data was still be collected. And Apple says this was a "bug"
So you're wrong.
Ok then show me where it says that turning location services off will not stop the tracking. I've scanned the articles and did not find anything that said that. If it does still track when you turn it off, I'd like to know.
p0intblank
Aug 16, 10:43 PM
Photoshop actually runs faster than I thought it would. :D
If only I could afford a Mac Pro... :(
If only I could afford a Mac Pro... :(
Evangelion
Sep 19, 06:17 AM
Key word being DESKTOPS.
Again: NT was widely used on desktops. Maybe not by your Average Joe, but LOTS of people used it on the desktop. I used NT-workstation back when I studied, my friend used NT on his PC, lots and lots of companies ran NT, the list goes on. Hell, there were propably an order of magnitude more NT-desktops out there that there were Macs of any type!
I still don't know personally anyone who uses OS X. Does that mean that no-one uses it?
MP machines were server based long before they were included in desktops. I'd like to see where people had dual Xeon based DESKTOPS 'cause I've never seen it.
There were plenty of people running SMP-systems. I personally knew two guys who had SMP-PC's. Just because you haven't seen anyone use one, does not mean that they weren't there.
Again: NT was widely used on desktops. Maybe not by your Average Joe, but LOTS of people used it on the desktop. I used NT-workstation back when I studied, my friend used NT on his PC, lots and lots of companies ran NT, the list goes on. Hell, there were propably an order of magnitude more NT-desktops out there that there were Macs of any type!
I still don't know personally anyone who uses OS X. Does that mean that no-one uses it?
MP machines were server based long before they were included in desktops. I'd like to see where people had dual Xeon based DESKTOPS 'cause I've never seen it.
There were plenty of people running SMP-systems. I personally knew two guys who had SMP-PC's. Just because you haven't seen anyone use one, does not mean that they weren't there.
Ja Di ksw
Aug 25, 05:15 PM
I would just like to say that every time I have dealth with Apple's help (blue line on screen, crack on trackpad, melted power brick cord, ordering, etc), they have been superb. Very professional, very helpful, and very quick. Does this add much to the discussion? No, but too often we only hear the bad, so I wanted to put in some good as well.
ZildjianKX
Sep 19, 01:53 AM
If all MBPs came with a gig of RAM standard, DL DVD drives, and a better graphics card (and Merom CPU), I would be thrilled.
WillMak
Aug 7, 05:36 PM
Will those of us with 32 bit Yonah processors not have access to 100% of leopards features?
Object-X
Aug 26, 05:44 PM
Anyone know of benchmarks comparing the core duo with the core 2 duo?
notjustjay
Sep 19, 08:38 AM
All you people who keep whining about "But I want 64 bit!!!" need to step back and think about what possible benefit a 64-bit system will give you. Those of you who need to address more than 4 gigs of RAM are excused. The rest of you, tell me WHY you need 64-bit computing.
When they go Merom I want the MBP's and MB's to have useful, practical features. More ports, user-removable hard drive, better battery life, better video card, stuff like that. I'm waiting just as impatiently as everyone else, but the hype needs to be toned way down.
When they go Merom I want the MBP's and MB's to have useful, practical features. More ports, user-removable hard drive, better battery life, better video card, stuff like that. I'm waiting just as impatiently as everyone else, but the hype needs to be toned way down.
hyperpasta
Aug 5, 04:50 PM
I'd be willing to bet that there will be at least two major surprises on Monday, one to do with some fab capability in Leopard that Apple has succeeded in keeping us in the dark about, and one fab piece of consumer hardware. By the second, I don't mean something we all expect like Mac Pros or Meroms in the MBPs. I mean something radical. Something that will make some real headlines.
They can't do things according to their old schedules now that they are on with Intel. Get used to new patterns. Apple is coming out of the shadows now, with sales and mindshare building at a strong pace. Waiting until January to annouce big new consumer pushes because WWDC is for developers won't do anymore. Welcome to the new Apple.
Think big. It's okay. Apple won't disappoint.
I will remember you said that when the announcements are dissapointing :)
Maybe they will and maybe they won't. But in the mean time, it's best to be conservative and hope we might be surprised.
They can't do things according to their old schedules now that they are on with Intel. Get used to new patterns. Apple is coming out of the shadows now, with sales and mindshare building at a strong pace. Waiting until January to annouce big new consumer pushes because WWDC is for developers won't do anymore. Welcome to the new Apple.
Think big. It's okay. Apple won't disappoint.
I will remember you said that when the announcements are dissapointing :)
Maybe they will and maybe they won't. But in the mean time, it's best to be conservative and hope we might be surprised.
rayz
Aug 8, 02:08 AM
From the Apple website...
Backup Disk: Change the drive or volume you�re backing up to. Or back up to a Mac OS X server computer.
Ouch .... :eek:
Backup Disk: Change the drive or volume you�re backing up to. Or back up to a Mac OS X server computer.
Ouch .... :eek:
phatpat88
Jul 15, 12:43 AM
So excited... How come no FW800 infront? thats a little crazy no?
Right now the only device I use for FW800 are Hard drives... I would rather have a 2nd USB 2.0 in front than the 800
Right now the only device I use for FW800 are Hard drives... I would rather have a 2nd USB 2.0 in front than the 800
ryanx27
Aug 27, 11:01 AM
The current Yonah MacBook is more powerful than any G5 - even dual core G5's. So why would you even make a fake joke about a weak mobile G5 coming? It's a joke that was only briefly funny two years ago. :rolleyes:
It isn't the G5 part that's funny about it. The whole point of the joke is to make fun of the Rumor Article --> Wild Speculation --> Guessing the Specific Release Date cycle.
It isn't the G5 part that's funny about it. The whole point of the joke is to make fun of the Rumor Article --> Wild Speculation --> Guessing the Specific Release Date cycle.
amin
Aug 18, 10:28 PM
Obviously, inherently the iMac design is inferior to the Mac Pro/Powermac.
It may be obvious, but based on your earlier statement that a Conroe iMac would be "able to crunch through" apps faster than a Mac Pro, the obvious seemed worth identifying.
But I think there's a bigger reason why Apple chose to go all quad with the Mac Pro: Apple chose all quad because a duo option would have had the same performance in professional apps (again, excluding handbrake and toast which are the only two examples touted about). A single processor Woodcrest or Conroe option will have the same obtainable CPU power for 90-95% of the professional market for another 6-12 months at the very least.
So you think they put an extra processor in across the line just to be able to say they had a quad? Even the AnandTech article you used as a source showed here (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2816&p=18) that PS took advantage of quad cores in Rosetta
Here's some data regarding the Mac Pro's FSB:
*snip*
What can we take from this? Because of the use of FB-DIMMs, the Mac Pro's effective FSB is that of ~640MHz DDR2 system.
And how does it fare in memory latency?
*snip*
Your points about latency and FSB are not separate negatives as you have made them. They are redundant theoretical concerns with implications of unclear practical significance.
As for bandwidth, although the Mac Pro has a load of theoretical bandwidth, the efficiency is an abysmal 20%. In real use a DDR2 system has 72% more usable bandwidth. (source here (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2816&p=11))
I don't know bout you, but if I were a heavy user of memory intensive apps such as Photoshop, I'd be worried. Worried in the sense that a Conroe would be noticeably faster.
I am not worried. Everything anyone has come up with on this issue are taken from that same AnandTech article. Until I see more real-world testing, I will not be convinced. Also, I expect that more pro apps such as PS will be able to utilize quad cores in the near future, if they aren't already doing so. Finally, even if Conroe is faster, Woodcrest is fast enough for me ;).
Memory issues aside, Woodcrests are faster than Conroes, 2.4% on average (source here (http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2795&p=6))
I think you misread that. They were comparing Core 2 Extreme (not Woodcrest) and Conroe to see whether the increased FSB of the former would make much difference.
It may be obvious, but based on your earlier statement that a Conroe iMac would be "able to crunch through" apps faster than a Mac Pro, the obvious seemed worth identifying.
But I think there's a bigger reason why Apple chose to go all quad with the Mac Pro: Apple chose all quad because a duo option would have had the same performance in professional apps (again, excluding handbrake and toast which are the only two examples touted about). A single processor Woodcrest or Conroe option will have the same obtainable CPU power for 90-95% of the professional market for another 6-12 months at the very least.
So you think they put an extra processor in across the line just to be able to say they had a quad? Even the AnandTech article you used as a source showed here (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2816&p=18) that PS took advantage of quad cores in Rosetta
Here's some data regarding the Mac Pro's FSB:
*snip*
What can we take from this? Because of the use of FB-DIMMs, the Mac Pro's effective FSB is that of ~640MHz DDR2 system.
And how does it fare in memory latency?
*snip*
Your points about latency and FSB are not separate negatives as you have made them. They are redundant theoretical concerns with implications of unclear practical significance.
As for bandwidth, although the Mac Pro has a load of theoretical bandwidth, the efficiency is an abysmal 20%. In real use a DDR2 system has 72% more usable bandwidth. (source here (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2816&p=11))
I don't know bout you, but if I were a heavy user of memory intensive apps such as Photoshop, I'd be worried. Worried in the sense that a Conroe would be noticeably faster.
I am not worried. Everything anyone has come up with on this issue are taken from that same AnandTech article. Until I see more real-world testing, I will not be convinced. Also, I expect that more pro apps such as PS will be able to utilize quad cores in the near future, if they aren't already doing so. Finally, even if Conroe is faster, Woodcrest is fast enough for me ;).
Memory issues aside, Woodcrests are faster than Conroes, 2.4% on average (source here (http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2795&p=6))
I think you misread that. They were comparing Core 2 Extreme (not Woodcrest) and Conroe to see whether the increased FSB of the former would make much difference.
zelet
Aug 25, 02:46 PM
dotMac support is horrible! There have been a ton of problems with their email service being labeled as a spam source lately. They aren't fixing the problem and there is no way of contacting support besides some worthless email form that only gets you canned responses in reply. They have no phone support either.
So, for a $100 a year service you get a blacklisted email address and no support. Yay for Apple!
So, for a $100 a year service you get a blacklisted email address and no support. Yay for Apple!
BaldiMac
Apr 19, 04:00 PM
I'm speaking about estimated Q1/11 to Q4/10 numbers (the est. Q1/11 numbers is what that news was about...). And what about reading the graphs I posted yourself? :rolleyes:
Well that's a pretty disingenuous comparison for a device on an annual release schedule. Year over year would be more appropriate.
I saw the table you posted. It doesn't prove what you said.
You said "Apple is losing marketshare for over 2 years now." Apple has increased their market share by more than 50% over the last two years.
Well that's a pretty disingenuous comparison for a device on an annual release schedule. Year over year would be more appropriate.
I saw the table you posted. It doesn't prove what you said.
You said "Apple is losing marketshare for over 2 years now." Apple has increased their market share by more than 50% over the last two years.
rdowns
Apr 27, 09:38 AM
I wish these people would just be honest and tell the American people their real motivation; we don't want a n***** in the White House.
Lesser Evets
Apr 6, 03:45 PM
Should be called XOOSH: the sound of a toilet flushing.
Endow
Aug 27, 03:35 PM
Can someone tell me in what Santa Rosa is all about and how much of a difference it is (as far as Merom is concerned) ??:)
�algiris
Mar 31, 03:27 PM
Android > iOS.
I was blind, but now i see. Oh wait ...
I was blind, but now i see. Oh wait ...
chatin
Aug 22, 09:08 PM
The Woodcrest processors have been put through their paces pretty well on the supercomputing lists, and their Achille's heal is the memory subsystem. Current generation AMD Opterons still clearly outscale Woodcrest in real-world memory bandwidth with only two cores. Unless Intel pulls a rabbit out of their hat with their memory architecture issues when the quad core is released, AMDs quad core is going to embarrass them because of the memory bottleneck. And AMD is already starting to work on upgrading their already markedly superior memory architecture.
This is one of the drawbacks of using a server CPU on the desktop. In lights-off Xserve this would not matter as most of the data is already cached in memory.
I think there might be lights out for future MacPro Xeons if AMD where to catch up in the race.
:rolleyes:
This is one of the drawbacks of using a server CPU on the desktop. In lights-off Xserve this would not matter as most of the data is already cached in memory.
I think there might be lights out for future MacPro Xeons if AMD where to catch up in the race.
:rolleyes:
bushido
Apr 11, 11:33 AM
"analyst" needs a new meaning in the dictionary right next to "source"
i'm now an analyst and say it'll come out at some point before iPhone 6
i'm now an analyst and say it'll come out at some point before iPhone 6
kdarling
Apr 19, 04:04 PM
You made up your mind and you argue accordingly.
No, that's why I used questions. I'd really like to know if anyone thinks a normal buyer would think the Galaxy is made by Apple.
Consider this: Many people know the name "iPhone" and the way it looks, they may even know the name "Macintosh", but not the name "Apple".
They might have talked to someone who used an iPhone and was very happy with it, were convinced to buy one, and go to a shop and pick up the phone that looks exactly like the one they wanted to buy.
And end up with a Samsung phone when they actually wanted an iPhone.
So your argument is that someone would be familiar with the iPhone UI but not know it's made by Apple?
And that therefore when they went to buy an iPhone, they'd totally ignore the words Samsung Galaxy on the box simply because... what? some of the icons look similar?
Well, who knows. It's certainly happened with Chinese knockoffs!
No, that's why I used questions. I'd really like to know if anyone thinks a normal buyer would think the Galaxy is made by Apple.
Consider this: Many people know the name "iPhone" and the way it looks, they may even know the name "Macintosh", but not the name "Apple".
They might have talked to someone who used an iPhone and was very happy with it, were convinced to buy one, and go to a shop and pick up the phone that looks exactly like the one they wanted to buy.
And end up with a Samsung phone when they actually wanted an iPhone.
So your argument is that someone would be familiar with the iPhone UI but not know it's made by Apple?
And that therefore when they went to buy an iPhone, they'd totally ignore the words Samsung Galaxy on the box simply because... what? some of the icons look similar?
Well, who knows. It's certainly happened with Chinese knockoffs!
gregarious119
Jul 14, 02:34 PM
To charge $1800 for a system that only has 512MB is a real disappoitment. 1GB RAM oughta be standard, especially with Leopard being on the horizon.
Unless the Xeon is that expensive (which I can't see how it would be), I don't see that as anything except creating some seperation between the configurations.
Unless the Xeon is that expensive (which I can't see how it would be), I don't see that as anything except creating some seperation between the configurations.
Gatesbasher
Mar 31, 08:26 PM
This is where the Android "community" is going to split.
The ones we've heard from today don't give a crap about "open" or "closed" or Google or anything else other than the fact that Android is not Apple and is stealing some sales from Apple. They'll defend whatever Google does, because all they want is a platform that's not by Apple to take over the mobile space.
The true believers in the "open" propaganda, as ridiculous as it is and as untrue as it's always been, are probably still in a state of shock. By tomorrow they'll split into two warring camps. One will defend everything Google does because they perceive—wrongly of course—that Android is still in some indefinable way more open than iOS, and they'll blow that little invisible kernel of "openness" up until that's all they can see.
The other camp will be viciously angry at Google's betrayal of the True Religion™ and will be flailing around for some other messiah to deliver them from the "Walled Garden" of Apple and now, Android. These are the people who were saying the other day that "Motorola could rot" with their own OS.
Any suggestions on who the zealots will turn to in their hour of despair? I honestly can't think of a candidate, but then I'm not nuts—at least not that way.
The ones we've heard from today don't give a crap about "open" or "closed" or Google or anything else other than the fact that Android is not Apple and is stealing some sales from Apple. They'll defend whatever Google does, because all they want is a platform that's not by Apple to take over the mobile space.
The true believers in the "open" propaganda, as ridiculous as it is and as untrue as it's always been, are probably still in a state of shock. By tomorrow they'll split into two warring camps. One will defend everything Google does because they perceive—wrongly of course—that Android is still in some indefinable way more open than iOS, and they'll blow that little invisible kernel of "openness" up until that's all they can see.
The other camp will be viciously angry at Google's betrayal of the True Religion™ and will be flailing around for some other messiah to deliver them from the "Walled Garden" of Apple and now, Android. These are the people who were saying the other day that "Motorola could rot" with their own OS.
Any suggestions on who the zealots will turn to in their hour of despair? I honestly can't think of a candidate, but then I'm not nuts—at least not that way.