tmofee
Mar 25, 10:44 PM
i wonder if apple will release a version in the app store???
Magrathea
Apr 6, 11:15 PM
Youre aware the newest mbp (high end) 15, and 17 haveva 1gb graphics memory, right?
Yes but not Nvidia so I don't think they can use the CUDA think. correct my if I'm wrong where PP gurus.
Yes but not Nvidia so I don't think they can use the CUDA think. correct my if I'm wrong where PP gurus.
skunk
Apr 28, 04:52 PM
that would disqualify a lot of past presidents, and disqualify Donald Trump.Surely the comb-over is enough?
mkruck
Apr 6, 03:10 PM
Ok ok ok... xoom, ipad, whatever...
you'd rather have a hamburger than a delicious, melty CHEESEBURGER?
Frigging hamburger fanbois... :p
You busted me.
I am a hamburger fanboi, and will turn into a raving lunatic, foam at the mouth and make up opinions based on nothing all to defend my beloved hamburgers. After all they're lighter, slimmer and tastier than cheesburgers!!!
Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk
you'd rather have a hamburger than a delicious, melty CHEESEBURGER?
Frigging hamburger fanbois... :p
You busted me.
I am a hamburger fanboi, and will turn into a raving lunatic, foam at the mouth and make up opinions based on nothing all to defend my beloved hamburgers. After all they're lighter, slimmer and tastier than cheesburgers!!!
Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk
Erasmus
Aug 27, 04:16 AM
This is what we NEED:
1. Computer with no fan. Quiet. Silent. CRITICAL.
2. Modular computer to add a gorgeous Apple Cinema Display.
3. At lesat two FireWire 800 ports.
Then all the rest (power, etc).
How loud is a present day iMac, Mac Pro or Mac Mini? They're not noisy are they? I never hear my dad's 17" Powerbook. I assume it has a fan.
I wouldn't have thought modern macs would be noisy.
And fanless macs, like my Cube are absolutely huge compared to what's in them. The convectin core takes up about half the computer. Fans are good, because they allow a computer to be small. I like fans, and I expect my iMac Ultra to have lots, but still be quiet. Like the Mac Pro.
1. Computer with no fan. Quiet. Silent. CRITICAL.
2. Modular computer to add a gorgeous Apple Cinema Display.
3. At lesat two FireWire 800 ports.
Then all the rest (power, etc).
How loud is a present day iMac, Mac Pro or Mac Mini? They're not noisy are they? I never hear my dad's 17" Powerbook. I assume it has a fan.
I wouldn't have thought modern macs would be noisy.
And fanless macs, like my Cube are absolutely huge compared to what's in them. The convectin core takes up about half the computer. Fans are good, because they allow a computer to be small. I like fans, and I expect my iMac Ultra to have lots, but still be quiet. Like the Mac Pro.
shamino
Jul 20, 05:41 PM
I hate to burst everyone's bubble, but Kentsfield will not be appearing in any of the Pro machines for some time.
Apple will be using them exclusively in the Xserves, at for the most part of 2007. This will finally give Apple another way to distinguish their server line from their pro line.
Do you have any evidence to back this up?
Historically, Apple has always sold a dual-processor model of the Pro systems. When dual-core PPCs became available, they shipped a G5 system with two of these.
In the absence of any other information, it seems pretty darn obvious that the high-end Mac Pro will have two processors, regardless of how many cores are in it. Which means it will have to be something from the Xeon line.
Apple doesn't need to cripple the Mac Pro in order to promote the Xserve. The two products are designed for completely different applications and are not interchangeable for any serious applications. Nobody will ever want to use an Xserve on their desktop, and nobody setting up a compute cluster will want to build it from desktop boxes.
Apple will be using them exclusively in the Xserves, at for the most part of 2007. This will finally give Apple another way to distinguish their server line from their pro line.
Do you have any evidence to back this up?
Historically, Apple has always sold a dual-processor model of the Pro systems. When dual-core PPCs became available, they shipped a G5 system with two of these.
In the absence of any other information, it seems pretty darn obvious that the high-end Mac Pro will have two processors, regardless of how many cores are in it. Which means it will have to be something from the Xeon line.
Apple doesn't need to cripple the Mac Pro in order to promote the Xserve. The two products are designed for completely different applications and are not interchangeable for any serious applications. Nobody will ever want to use an Xserve on their desktop, and nobody setting up a compute cluster will want to build it from desktop boxes.
milo
Aug 17, 04:29 PM
Some people do things called graphic design and video editing for a living. Sometimes, when you want to make money and put food on the table, you want top of the line equipment.:rolleyes:
I guess you missed that he was responding to someone talking about gaming? Less eye rolling, more paying attention.
To make more money faster.Yes. I agree totally. If you are making your living with your Mac doing graphics and video work, every minute saved is another minute you can take on another client or meet a perviously impossible deadline. So in that case the extra $850 is made up in a matter of a few weeks or months at worst. Totally understandable when time is money for the Mac professional. :)
Ditto.
I guess you missed that he was responding to someone talking about gaming? Less eye rolling, more paying attention.
To make more money faster.Yes. I agree totally. If you are making your living with your Mac doing graphics and video work, every minute saved is another minute you can take on another client or meet a perviously impossible deadline. So in that case the extra $850 is made up in a matter of a few weeks or months at worst. Totally understandable when time is money for the Mac professional. :)
Ditto.
bluetorch18
Aug 26, 04:02 PM
Merom MBP on Tuesday? I sure hope so.
Multimedia
Aug 19, 07:18 AM
Darn it ... I just received my crossgrade upgrade yesterday eventhough I only own powerbook and am waiting for merom based laptop. While on the topic of fcp, can I install on my powerbook for now and in install on later on my future intel-laptop? (reading the legal eula it seems install is only allowed for one laptop and desktop... I guess I will have to uninstall first on powerbook .....) I am just not sure if apple will block my serial number or something ...No they won't block your serial number. It's the honor system. Yes you can put it on what you have now and what you get later.
prady16
Sep 13, 07:11 AM
thats a killer system!
Kinda like supercomputers for small businesses!
Kinda like supercomputers for small businesses!
Gugulino
Apr 7, 02:49 PM
There is also IPTV. The VOD offer of our triple pay provider includes also HD titles, which are pretty good in quality (720p and DD 5.1). The OS of the set top box is Windows ME or something. The only Windows in our household :D
kavika411
Feb 28, 08:20 PM
According to the school's website (http://www.chc.edu/News/2011/February/statement_regarding_jim_st_george/), he was not fired as the OP's article suggests. Rather, his contract was not renewed. AFAIK, adjunct instructors do not enjoy the same privileges as tenured professors. If his contract ran out and was simply not renewed, then that's that, unless it can be argued that the college has some legal obligation to offer a new contract.
But threads like this are above further research. Not sure why you'd want to mess up a perfectly good party.
But threads like this are above further research. Not sure why you'd want to mess up a perfectly good party.
milo
Jul 27, 10:57 AM
All of the reviews of the Core 2 Duo say that it crushes AMD in the desktop arena. This is good news, now we just need new iMacs, MacBook Pros, and Mac Pros.
And minis.
I'm guessing we get the towers at WWDC and probably meroms in the macbook. Most if not all the other models will get updates, but they can't do them all at once, I'd bet they'll follow up with separate announcements in a few weeks.
Core 3 will be out before Vista is. I'm going to call it now.
Well, duh. That's already pretty much been announced. Vista will be next year, and quad core intel chips are supposed to be out before the end of the year.
wasn't this announced last friday? (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060721145043.shtml)
Yeah. But today, it happened.
Does anyone know if the chips that are actually shipping are the same as the prototype chips?
YES! That's the whole point of a prototype.
Sorry if i missed it, but at what speeds do these run? Don't they know just because they keep bumping and bumping the chip speed don't really mean they have a faster system. Seem just like yesterday when a better design was more important than a super fast chip. Oh well, everyone is buying into the Mhz myth now. Funny that just a year or so ago, Apple was trying to shoot down the Mhz myth, now they have people cheering for it. I guess power consumption is good though.
You really need to read about this...these chips are just a little higher clock speed. But they have a 20%+ boost at the same clock speed. They ARE making better chip designs instead of just bumping clock speed. Intel/Apple is actually doing pretty much the opposite of what you accuse them of doing.
And minis.
I'm guessing we get the towers at WWDC and probably meroms in the macbook. Most if not all the other models will get updates, but they can't do them all at once, I'd bet they'll follow up with separate announcements in a few weeks.
Core 3 will be out before Vista is. I'm going to call it now.
Well, duh. That's already pretty much been announced. Vista will be next year, and quad core intel chips are supposed to be out before the end of the year.
wasn't this announced last friday? (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060721145043.shtml)
Yeah. But today, it happened.
Does anyone know if the chips that are actually shipping are the same as the prototype chips?
YES! That's the whole point of a prototype.
Sorry if i missed it, but at what speeds do these run? Don't they know just because they keep bumping and bumping the chip speed don't really mean they have a faster system. Seem just like yesterday when a better design was more important than a super fast chip. Oh well, everyone is buying into the Mhz myth now. Funny that just a year or so ago, Apple was trying to shoot down the Mhz myth, now they have people cheering for it. I guess power consumption is good though.
You really need to read about this...these chips are just a little higher clock speed. But they have a 20%+ boost at the same clock speed. They ARE making better chip designs instead of just bumping clock speed. Intel/Apple is actually doing pretty much the opposite of what you accuse them of doing.
skunk
Feb 28, 07:12 PM
2) okay, they can pretend to get marriedNo, you are absolutely wrong., They can get married like any other couple where the laws allow. Marriage is not a special preserve of any religion. You cannot just commandeer it.
No, I'm not kidding. To the Catholic Church sex outside of a valid sacramental marriage is fornicationWho cares what Catholic dogma claims? It's an irrelevance.
Last time I checked when the vast majority of people did such behavior it was with the opposite gender not the same.So what is the problem? Are you against variation?
Do you have proof that Plato was a repressed homosexual?No, not proof
"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.
To a very large extent, Western attitudes toward law, religion, literature and government are dependent upon Roman attitudes. This makes it particularly striking that our attitudes toward homosexuality in particular and sexual tolerance in general are so remarkably different from those of the Romans. It is very difficult to convey to modern audiences the indifference of the Romans to questions of gender and gender orientation. The difficulty is due both to the fact that the evidence has been largely consciously obliterated by historians prior to very recent decades, and to the diffusion of the relevant material.
Romans did not consider sexuality or sexual preference a matter of much interest, nor did they treat either in an analytical way. An historian has to gather together thousands of little bits and pieces to demonstrate the general acceptance of homosexuality among the Romans.
One of the few imperial writers who does appear to make some sort of comment on the subject in a general way wrote, "Zeus came as an eagle to god like Ganymede and as a swan to the fair haired mother of Helen. One person prefers one gender, another the other, I like both." Plutarch wrote at about the same time, "No sensible person can imagine that the sexes differ in matters of love as they do in matters of clothing. The intelligent lover of beauty will be attracted to beauty in whichever gender he finds it." Roman law and social strictures made absolutely no restrictions on the basis of gender. It has sometimes been claimed that there were laws against homosexual relations in Rome, but it is easy to prove that this was not the case. On the other hand, it is a mistake to imagine that anarchic hedonism ruled at Rome. In fact, Romans did have a complex set of moral strictures designed to protect children from abuse or any citizen from force or duress in sexual relations. Romans were, like other people, sensitive to issues of love and caring, but individual sexual (i.e. gender) choice was completely unlimited. Male prostitution (directed toward other males), for instance, was so common that the taxes on it constituted a major source of revenue for the imperial treasury. It was so profitable that even in later periods when a certain intolerance crept in, the emperors could not bring themselves to end the practice and its attendant revenue.
Gay marriages were also legal and frequent in Rome for both males and females. Even emperors often married other males. There was total acceptance on the part of the populace, as far as it can be determined, of this sort of homosexual attitude and behavior. This total acceptance was not limited to the ruling elite; there is also much popular Roman literature containing gay love stories. The real point I want to make is that there is absolutely no conscious effort on anyone's part in the Roman world, the world in which Christianity was born, to claim that homosexuality was abnormal or undesirable. There is in fact no word for "homosexual" in Latin. "Homosexual" sounds like Latin, but was coined by a German psychologist in the late 1 9th century. No one in the early Roman world seemed to feel that the fact that someone preferred his or her own gender was any more significant than the fact that someone preferred blue eyes or short people. Neither gay nor straight people seemed to associate certain characteristics with sexual preference. Gay men were not thought to be less masculine than straight men and lesbian women were not thought of as less feminine than straight women. Gay people were not thought to be any better or worse than straight people-an attitude which differed both from that of the society that preceded it, since many Greeks thought gay people were inherently better than straight people, and from that of the society which followed it, in which gay people were often thought to be inferior to others.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/1979boswell.html
The most celebrated account of homosexual love comes in Plato's Symposium, in which homosexual love is discussed as a more ideal, more perfect kind of relationship than the more prosaic heterosexual variety. This is a highly biased account, because Plato himself was homosexual and wrote very beautiful epigrams to boys expressing his devotion. Platonic homosexuality had very little to do with sex; Plato believed ideally that love and reason should be fused together, while concern over the body and the material world of particulars should be annihilated. Even today, "Platonic love" refers to non-sexual love between two adults.
Behind Plato's contempt for heterosexual desire lay an aesthetic, highly intellectual aversion to the female body. Plato would have agreed with Schopenhauer's opinion that "only a male intellect clouded by the sexual drive could call the stunted, narrow-shouldered, broad-hipped and short-legged sex the fair sex".
http://www.newstatesman.com/199908230009
No, I'm not kidding. To the Catholic Church sex outside of a valid sacramental marriage is fornicationWho cares what Catholic dogma claims? It's an irrelevance.
Last time I checked when the vast majority of people did such behavior it was with the opposite gender not the same.So what is the problem? Are you against variation?
Do you have proof that Plato was a repressed homosexual?No, not proof
"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.
To a very large extent, Western attitudes toward law, religion, literature and government are dependent upon Roman attitudes. This makes it particularly striking that our attitudes toward homosexuality in particular and sexual tolerance in general are so remarkably different from those of the Romans. It is very difficult to convey to modern audiences the indifference of the Romans to questions of gender and gender orientation. The difficulty is due both to the fact that the evidence has been largely consciously obliterated by historians prior to very recent decades, and to the diffusion of the relevant material.
Romans did not consider sexuality or sexual preference a matter of much interest, nor did they treat either in an analytical way. An historian has to gather together thousands of little bits and pieces to demonstrate the general acceptance of homosexuality among the Romans.
One of the few imperial writers who does appear to make some sort of comment on the subject in a general way wrote, "Zeus came as an eagle to god like Ganymede and as a swan to the fair haired mother of Helen. One person prefers one gender, another the other, I like both." Plutarch wrote at about the same time, "No sensible person can imagine that the sexes differ in matters of love as they do in matters of clothing. The intelligent lover of beauty will be attracted to beauty in whichever gender he finds it." Roman law and social strictures made absolutely no restrictions on the basis of gender. It has sometimes been claimed that there were laws against homosexual relations in Rome, but it is easy to prove that this was not the case. On the other hand, it is a mistake to imagine that anarchic hedonism ruled at Rome. In fact, Romans did have a complex set of moral strictures designed to protect children from abuse or any citizen from force or duress in sexual relations. Romans were, like other people, sensitive to issues of love and caring, but individual sexual (i.e. gender) choice was completely unlimited. Male prostitution (directed toward other males), for instance, was so common that the taxes on it constituted a major source of revenue for the imperial treasury. It was so profitable that even in later periods when a certain intolerance crept in, the emperors could not bring themselves to end the practice and its attendant revenue.
Gay marriages were also legal and frequent in Rome for both males and females. Even emperors often married other males. There was total acceptance on the part of the populace, as far as it can be determined, of this sort of homosexual attitude and behavior. This total acceptance was not limited to the ruling elite; there is also much popular Roman literature containing gay love stories. The real point I want to make is that there is absolutely no conscious effort on anyone's part in the Roman world, the world in which Christianity was born, to claim that homosexuality was abnormal or undesirable. There is in fact no word for "homosexual" in Latin. "Homosexual" sounds like Latin, but was coined by a German psychologist in the late 1 9th century. No one in the early Roman world seemed to feel that the fact that someone preferred his or her own gender was any more significant than the fact that someone preferred blue eyes or short people. Neither gay nor straight people seemed to associate certain characteristics with sexual preference. Gay men were not thought to be less masculine than straight men and lesbian women were not thought of as less feminine than straight women. Gay people were not thought to be any better or worse than straight people-an attitude which differed both from that of the society that preceded it, since many Greeks thought gay people were inherently better than straight people, and from that of the society which followed it, in which gay people were often thought to be inferior to others.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/1979boswell.html
The most celebrated account of homosexual love comes in Plato's Symposium, in which homosexual love is discussed as a more ideal, more perfect kind of relationship than the more prosaic heterosexual variety. This is a highly biased account, because Plato himself was homosexual and wrote very beautiful epigrams to boys expressing his devotion. Platonic homosexuality had very little to do with sex; Plato believed ideally that love and reason should be fused together, while concern over the body and the material world of particulars should be annihilated. Even today, "Platonic love" refers to non-sexual love between two adults.
Behind Plato's contempt for heterosexual desire lay an aesthetic, highly intellectual aversion to the female body. Plato would have agreed with Schopenhauer's opinion that "only a male intellect clouded by the sexual drive could call the stunted, narrow-shouldered, broad-hipped and short-legged sex the fair sex".
http://www.newstatesman.com/199908230009
dclocke
Sep 19, 09:41 AM
I don't know how many times we have to go round and round with this here. I've been on MacRumors since '01 and it's always the same-old, same-old. It's not legitimate. It's "I-wantism." You have no basis to believe that a Rev B would be more "stabled and refined." That's a hope, backed by nothing -- and nothing Apple ever comments on, either. The bottom line is that you can hope if you want, and you can wait if you want, but to bash Apple for being slow on the trigger, and to make the argument that Meroms are amazing and Yonahs are crap is, frankly, horse manure. Like I said, 64 bit is pretty irrelevant for most users, and the speed and battery differences are quite negligible. And the argument that Apple is losing tons of sales to PC manufactuers is, frankly, laughable too.
Well, I've been on MacRumors since last week and I'm already tired of posts telling me what I really need. I don't recall seeing posts saying Yonah was crap. Most people just want to feel like they are making a good investment on an expensive piece of equipment that may be around for 3-4+ years. I would like a laptop with a 64-bit processor. Period. I don't care what you think I need. The problem with posts like this are that they waste my time, and the time of other users who are looking for information on the release of the new MBP models.
Edit: I should add, however, that if anyone is willing to donate the money for me to purchase a new MBP, I will gladly accept all advice on said purchase.
Well, I've been on MacRumors since last week and I'm already tired of posts telling me what I really need. I don't recall seeing posts saying Yonah was crap. Most people just want to feel like they are making a good investment on an expensive piece of equipment that may be around for 3-4+ years. I would like a laptop with a 64-bit processor. Period. I don't care what you think I need. The problem with posts like this are that they waste my time, and the time of other users who are looking for information on the release of the new MBP models.
Edit: I should add, however, that if anyone is willing to donate the money for me to purchase a new MBP, I will gladly accept all advice on said purchase.
xsnightclub
Aug 6, 06:11 PM
iPod shuffle-not being updated (because of the nano),but at least Apple gave those owners a volume limit.
and the "One More Thing..." will be -
Leopard print iPod Socks!
and the "One More Thing..." will be -
Leopard print iPod Socks!
anim8or
Sep 19, 06:14 AM
Apple is beyond critique! Omg! :rolleyes:
Its not so much that you criticise apple, hell no company is perfect and they all deserve a little criticism...
...its more how you take the piss out of everyone else's post.
I used to find your posts funny when you were critical but now i cringe whenever i see that you have posted 'cos 9/10 times you will be insulting someone.
Lighten up a little.
Its not so much that you criticise apple, hell no company is perfect and they all deserve a little criticism...
...its more how you take the piss out of everyone else's post.
I used to find your posts funny when you were critical but now i cringe whenever i see that you have posted 'cos 9/10 times you will be insulting someone.
Lighten up a little.
mlayer
Mar 31, 03:12 PM
A big part of each Android OEM partner's strategy has been to differentiate by software, usually through skinning. I'm curious to know what this means for them when Ice Cream comes around. How limited will they be in terms of customization? And if differentiation is curtailed, how can the OEM's stand out? What's to stop some no-name upstart from undercutting all of them and eating their lunch? The era of the commodity smartphone has officially begun and it's a race to the bottom for Android partners. Apple may not win the market share war, but as long as they maintain margins, sell out every unit and maintain customer satisfaction, they'll be in an enviable position.
kretzy
Jul 27, 10:25 AM
Lovely! :)
This time next year I'll be in possession of a flawless Core 2 Duo, Rev C/D MBP, with Leopard. Hopefully
This time next year I'll be in possession of a flawless Core 2 Duo, Rev C/D MBP, with Leopard. Hopefully
Teddy's
Jul 27, 12:32 PM
at last, I may be able to build a system that will run Vista well!
EEEEEEEEEWWWWW!!!!!
EEEEEEEEEWWWWW!!!!!
Pro31
Apr 11, 02:24 PM
This is good for me because I waited forever due to wanting a white iphone, and so I didn't upgrade until the fall time frame. Now I won't have to see how awesome the iphone 5 is while not being able to upgrade! :).
playaj82
Aug 7, 03:37 PM
If the rumor sites were right....
Mac Pro
Leopard
iPhone
Core 2 Duo
iMac
Tablet, etc...
the keynote would have been 6 hours.
I'm glad they took their time with Leopard and highlighted some neat new and much needed additions to tiger.
Mac Pro
Leopard
iPhone
Core 2 Duo
iMac
Tablet, etc...
the keynote would have been 6 hours.
I'm glad they took their time with Leopard and highlighted some neat new and much needed additions to tiger.
WildPalms
Sep 13, 09:12 AM
*sigh* My poor, poor wallet.....may as well call it iWallet for the use it gets buying Apple gear constantly....:o
gnasher729
Aug 17, 09:17 AM
Edit: Please ignore this post, I can't count!!!
If you buy a Xeon 5160 (3.0GHz) at the moment they are �570. Apple are charging �530 to upgrade from Xeon 5150 (2.66GHz) to the Xeon 5160. Bearing in mind that you can probably sell the original 2.66Gz chip for around �300, it would be cheaper to buy the lower spec Mac Pro and upgrade yourself.
It's not something I would do myself, but some enterprising dealer could easily do that. In US prices, difference between two 3.00 GHz and two 2.66 GHz chips is roughly $300, and you could sell the 2.66 GHz ones at a premium because they had "extra burn-in testing" :-)
Seriously, the problem is getting money for the 2.66 chips.
If you buy a Xeon 5160 (3.0GHz) at the moment they are �570. Apple are charging �530 to upgrade from Xeon 5150 (2.66GHz) to the Xeon 5160. Bearing in mind that you can probably sell the original 2.66Gz chip for around �300, it would be cheaper to buy the lower spec Mac Pro and upgrade yourself.
It's not something I would do myself, but some enterprising dealer could easily do that. In US prices, difference between two 3.00 GHz and two 2.66 GHz chips is roughly $300, and you could sell the 2.66 GHz ones at a premium because they had "extra burn-in testing" :-)
Seriously, the problem is getting money for the 2.66 chips.
No comments:
Post a Comment