heisetax
Aug 2, 04:47 PM
Why is everyone so convinced that there will be significant updates to the Cinema Displays? Remember how long the non-Alu plastic displays were out? It must have been five years, while the Alu displays have been out for less then two years.
I can't see Apple making a bigger screen then 30" for desktop use. And if they were to, it would be for a multimedia center type thing, which not only is unlikely, but would never be released at WWDC. As a 30" display owner, theres no way a screen larger then 30" would be a feasible desktop display. Besides, anything larger then 30" is just too niche of a market.
Regarding a built-in iSight, I think the Pro market is just the wrong market for that. Apple has to be aware of its market, and b/c of security reasons, cameras just aren't feasible at this point.
Hell, who knows, I'm probably 100% wrong :p.
Edit: Perhaps Apple will just bump the display to be HDCP compliant. HDMI is pretty much the same as DVI, for everyone who doesn't know ;).
I agree with you that the 30" display is big. I disagree with you about any larger display as being too big. It may be for you but not for others. When I first starting using my 30" display besides my 23" display I thought it was big. Using it with my 17" PowerBook even makes it seem bigger. But the only thing that could hold me back from purchasing a larger display would be the need of purchasing a new computer to be able to use 2 larger screens at the same time. My 17" PowerBook can only use one. My MDD PowerMac can only use one. But that is really a different question.
Many people seem to have tunnel vision when they use their computers & are or at least think they are happy with one 15" display. Others can see the need & usefulness of a larger display. At least you use a 30". But if Apple would have come out with a 32", 35" or larger display instead would you have purchased it the same as you did your 30" model? Then it would take a 40" or 45" display to be too larger.
With DualLink only able to support 3840 X 2400 & Single Link only able to support up to 1920 X 1200, there will be a natural size limitation until one of the new systems come around. The need probably isn't there yet, but a couple more size and/or reolution increases would change all of that.
How long do you think it will be before someone else says that his 45" display is all the larger anyone would ever need, so why make one larger? Whan I sold computers many thought that the 17" CRT was too larger, why go larger than 15"?
Bill the TaxMan
I can't see Apple making a bigger screen then 30" for desktop use. And if they were to, it would be for a multimedia center type thing, which not only is unlikely, but would never be released at WWDC. As a 30" display owner, theres no way a screen larger then 30" would be a feasible desktop display. Besides, anything larger then 30" is just too niche of a market.
Regarding a built-in iSight, I think the Pro market is just the wrong market for that. Apple has to be aware of its market, and b/c of security reasons, cameras just aren't feasible at this point.
Hell, who knows, I'm probably 100% wrong :p.
Edit: Perhaps Apple will just bump the display to be HDCP compliant. HDMI is pretty much the same as DVI, for everyone who doesn't know ;).
I agree with you that the 30" display is big. I disagree with you about any larger display as being too big. It may be for you but not for others. When I first starting using my 30" display besides my 23" display I thought it was big. Using it with my 17" PowerBook even makes it seem bigger. But the only thing that could hold me back from purchasing a larger display would be the need of purchasing a new computer to be able to use 2 larger screens at the same time. My 17" PowerBook can only use one. My MDD PowerMac can only use one. But that is really a different question.
Many people seem to have tunnel vision when they use their computers & are or at least think they are happy with one 15" display. Others can see the need & usefulness of a larger display. At least you use a 30". But if Apple would have come out with a 32", 35" or larger display instead would you have purchased it the same as you did your 30" model? Then it would take a 40" or 45" display to be too larger.
With DualLink only able to support 3840 X 2400 & Single Link only able to support up to 1920 X 1200, there will be a natural size limitation until one of the new systems come around. The need probably isn't there yet, but a couple more size and/or reolution increases would change all of that.
How long do you think it will be before someone else says that his 45" display is all the larger anyone would ever need, so why make one larger? Whan I sold computers many thought that the 17" CRT was too larger, why go larger than 15"?
Bill the TaxMan
ender land
Apr 10, 01:33 PM
Yes it is, and continually showing me that the right answer is 2 in spite of all evidence to the contrary.
Fixed that for you.
Fixed that for you.
sommer182
Mar 28, 10:39 AM
I could see this happening. It would make sense to me to try and consolidate their iOS devices to one release cycle. iPod and iPhones are fairly close as it is, mid-summer and early fall. Would it be a big shock to move the new kid iPad and it's older siblings into one release? No.
kainjow
Aug 7, 02:14 PM
Hmm... Cinema displays also got a bump.
20" ACD
Brightness: 250 cd/m2 -> 300 cd/m2
Contrast Ratio: 400:1 -> 700:1
23" ACD
Brightness: 270 cd/m2 -> 400 cd/m2
Contrast Ratio: 400:1 -> 700:1
Nice find, thanks. I was hoping they'd update the displays. Now to see when my local Apple Store will have them in stock :p
20" ACD
Brightness: 250 cd/m2 -> 300 cd/m2
Contrast Ratio: 400:1 -> 700:1
23" ACD
Brightness: 270 cd/m2 -> 400 cd/m2
Contrast Ratio: 400:1 -> 700:1
Nice find, thanks. I was hoping they'd update the displays. Now to see when my local Apple Store will have them in stock :p
3N16MA
Mar 28, 12:10 PM
Wow, this has to be bs. I cannot believe Apple won't introduce any hardware in WWDC '11.
They're planning on stretching the iPhone 4? Good job Apple, don't complain about losing customers now. If Apple releases the next iPhone after 2 years, then they are officially going to lose whatever market share they had.
I'm still going to wait for another announcement because every report said that there would be an iPhone 5 this summer, it makes no sense.
So in your world a 'real refresh' is when the externals change? Don't judge a book by it's cover, the 3GS was a massive upgrade.
The iPhone 4 got massive external and internal changes while the 3Gs just got internal changes. iPhone 4 is a bigger refresh than the 3Gs. I never said the 3Gs was not a real refresh I said it was not as big as the iPhone 4.
They're planning on stretching the iPhone 4? Good job Apple, don't complain about losing customers now. If Apple releases the next iPhone after 2 years, then they are officially going to lose whatever market share they had.
I'm still going to wait for another announcement because every report said that there would be an iPhone 5 this summer, it makes no sense.
So in your world a 'real refresh' is when the externals change? Don't judge a book by it's cover, the 3GS was a massive upgrade.
The iPhone 4 got massive external and internal changes while the 3Gs just got internal changes. iPhone 4 is a bigger refresh than the 3Gs. I never said the 3Gs was not a real refresh I said it was not as big as the iPhone 4.
shadowx
Aug 12, 01:04 PM
why does BLACK ANODIZED ALUMINUM sound sooooo good? Tasty, I would say!
:D
Wiki
%IMG_DESC_7%
%IMG_DESC_8%
%IMG_DESC_9%
%IMG_DESC_10%
%IMG_DESC_11%
%IMG_DESC_12%
%IMG_DESC_13%
%IMG_DESC_14%
%IMG_DESC_15%
%IMG_DESC_16%
%IMG_DESC_17%
%IMG_DESC_18%
%IMG_DESC_19%
:D
Wiki
KnightWRX
Apr 24, 11:34 AM
Side Note:
While reading different sites about screen resolution and retina display and different Apple marketing "bluffs", I got into this:
http://twek.wordpress.com/2010/01/19/a-letter-to-steve-jobs-about-6-bit-macbook-pro-displays/
Which models are like this?
Is this real or another Apple hate thing?
That's a limitation of TN panels. To get true 8 bit per channel, you need to either go with PVA or IPS panels. It's not an "Apple hate" thing, it's quite true. It's also the reason that profesionals usually work on expensive IPS displays and not the sub-200$ LCD screens you see at Best Buy.
The 27" iMac uses an IPS display so it is not affected, however, all Apple notebooks use TN displays. Laptops with IPS screens are very, very rare. One model HP Elitebook comes with an optional IPS display that I know of.
While reading different sites about screen resolution and retina display and different Apple marketing "bluffs", I got into this:
http://twek.wordpress.com/2010/01/19/a-letter-to-steve-jobs-about-6-bit-macbook-pro-displays/
Which models are like this?
Is this real or another Apple hate thing?
That's a limitation of TN panels. To get true 8 bit per channel, you need to either go with PVA or IPS panels. It's not an "Apple hate" thing, it's quite true. It's also the reason that profesionals usually work on expensive IPS displays and not the sub-200$ LCD screens you see at Best Buy.
The 27" iMac uses an IPS display so it is not affected, however, all Apple notebooks use TN displays. Laptops with IPS screens are very, very rare. One model HP Elitebook comes with an optional IPS display that I know of.
Don't panic
May 5, 11:49 AM
No reason to split. There is only 1 door.
i agree, and it's not like there are many alternatves so here we go, so I won't waste more time.
R3t2: we move on to the next room
i agree, and it's not like there are many alternatves so here we go, so I won't waste more time.
R3t2: we move on to the next room
lilo777
Apr 26, 04:44 PM
I just don't really see how anyone should be surprised. It should be totally obvious to anyone who watches the smart phone market that Android would easily surpass IOS--they are indeed everywhere and I'm sure when it comes time to get a new phone--those with no preconceived ideas on what they want will walk out of the store with some kind of Android. Most who go in looking for an iPhone will probably leave with one. As long as Apple--and their shareholders are happy, I don't think it really matters.
Phone users will be the first to see feel the impact of these developments as Android ecosystem will see much faster development than iOS. With more and better options, users will overwhelmingly switch to Android. And then, it'll be AAPL shareholders turn to feel the impact.
Phone users will be the first to see feel the impact of these developments as Android ecosystem will see much faster development than iOS. With more and better options, users will overwhelmingly switch to Android. And then, it'll be AAPL shareholders turn to feel the impact.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 18, 02:49 PM
Samsung will come up with actual numbers sold, not shipped, finally. Apple will see how few it is and drop the suit.
Multimedia
Jul 23, 01:53 PM
I was wondering where you heard that there is going to be a 4 core mobile version of Merom coming Fall '07. Any roadmaps i've read for intel, including that one you linked to (and the Tom's Hardware one) don't mention it. In fact, I didn't even read of a desktop 4 core processor being released until let alone 2007 in a laptop.
Desktop 4 core processors with 8 MiB L2 cache - called Kentsfield are now planned for release in 4th quarter of this year 2006. Desktop 8 core processors with 12 MiB L2 cache - called Yorkfield are planned for next Spring 2007.
On the server-worstation front these are the planned processors coming next year and in 2008:
Woodcrest, first eighth-generation server and workstation chip, 65 nm, dual-core, 4 MiB L2 cache (Released on June 26, 2006)
Clovertown, quad-core MCM, consists of two Woodcrests, with 2 × 4 MiB L2
Tigerton, quad-core MCM. MP-capable version of Clovertown.
Harpertown, either a dual-core, 45 nm shrink of Woodcrest, or an eight-core, 45 nm MCM with 12 MiB L2
Dunnington, four to thirty-two cores, successor to Tigerton
I'm wondering where you heard this because I'm getting a MBP for college next summer and if there were quad core MBPs coming out in the fall I would wait.
(Oh, and if I misinterpreted 4 cores to equal Quad core on a single processor, please clarify what you meant.)4 Mobile Cores In One MBP by end of 2007 Is An Expectation Not A Known Fact. Obviously Intel is not going to project that possability until it knows it can do it sometime next year either possibly by end of 2007 or almost certainly by end of 2008. Sorry for the certain tone of my mention. I put a smillie after that sentence to indicate it was sort of a hopeful joke. :)
We will all have to wait for the '07 WWDC next summer to tell what's going on for the mobile Macs then. Way too early to tell now. I would just be as patient as possible before you have to pull the trigger for school in the fall of '07. In other words, don't put any weight into my hopeful expectation for 4 cores in a mobile Mac by two years from now.
I think it will depend on how well the 45nm production process develops as to how soon Intel will feel confident they can put 4 mobile cores with 12-16 MB of L2 cache in one piece of 45nm silicon and still keep it cool and energy efficient. This is a long term hope and dream for me, nothing substantiated by any sources. Not fantasy. But a realistic hopeful expectation that will most likely be fulfilled in 3 years worst case after Core 3 comes to market which will be about 2 years from now. :)
Each of these Core Families has a life expectancy of about two years of reign plus the half year preceeding early deployment and ramp up.
Core 2 - late 2006-2008
Core 3 - late 2008-2010
Core 4 - late 2010-2012
etc.
And each Family represents significant changes in both the processor architecture and the manufacturing process. We will have to see how the Intel long range plan unfolds as planned or not as planned to determine what will be available in long range future. IE - nobody knows for sure. Right now I can't see beyond a 2.33 GHz Merom with the Santa Rosa support set + 802.11n and 10-Gigabit Ethernet next Spring. Can anyone else here see further?
Desktop 4 core processors with 8 MiB L2 cache - called Kentsfield are now planned for release in 4th quarter of this year 2006. Desktop 8 core processors with 12 MiB L2 cache - called Yorkfield are planned for next Spring 2007.
On the server-worstation front these are the planned processors coming next year and in 2008:
Woodcrest, first eighth-generation server and workstation chip, 65 nm, dual-core, 4 MiB L2 cache (Released on June 26, 2006)
Clovertown, quad-core MCM, consists of two Woodcrests, with 2 × 4 MiB L2
Tigerton, quad-core MCM. MP-capable version of Clovertown.
Harpertown, either a dual-core, 45 nm shrink of Woodcrest, or an eight-core, 45 nm MCM with 12 MiB L2
Dunnington, four to thirty-two cores, successor to Tigerton
I'm wondering where you heard this because I'm getting a MBP for college next summer and if there were quad core MBPs coming out in the fall I would wait.
(Oh, and if I misinterpreted 4 cores to equal Quad core on a single processor, please clarify what you meant.)4 Mobile Cores In One MBP by end of 2007 Is An Expectation Not A Known Fact. Obviously Intel is not going to project that possability until it knows it can do it sometime next year either possibly by end of 2007 or almost certainly by end of 2008. Sorry for the certain tone of my mention. I put a smillie after that sentence to indicate it was sort of a hopeful joke. :)
We will all have to wait for the '07 WWDC next summer to tell what's going on for the mobile Macs then. Way too early to tell now. I would just be as patient as possible before you have to pull the trigger for school in the fall of '07. In other words, don't put any weight into my hopeful expectation for 4 cores in a mobile Mac by two years from now.
I think it will depend on how well the 45nm production process develops as to how soon Intel will feel confident they can put 4 mobile cores with 12-16 MB of L2 cache in one piece of 45nm silicon and still keep it cool and energy efficient. This is a long term hope and dream for me, nothing substantiated by any sources. Not fantasy. But a realistic hopeful expectation that will most likely be fulfilled in 3 years worst case after Core 3 comes to market which will be about 2 years from now. :)
Each of these Core Families has a life expectancy of about two years of reign plus the half year preceeding early deployment and ramp up.
Core 2 - late 2006-2008
Core 3 - late 2008-2010
Core 4 - late 2010-2012
etc.
And each Family represents significant changes in both the processor architecture and the manufacturing process. We will have to see how the Intel long range plan unfolds as planned or not as planned to determine what will be available in long range future. IE - nobody knows for sure. Right now I can't see beyond a 2.33 GHz Merom with the Santa Rosa support set + 802.11n and 10-Gigabit Ethernet next Spring. Can anyone else here see further?
bearcatrp
Apr 25, 11:21 AM
IF apple is not collecting the data, then what's the point of the file in the first place. Or, how come there is not a way for users to delete this file on the phone when they see fit. Sure, all the carriers are collecting all data, per patriot act and newer laws enacted since.
Someone should ask steve this question?
Does any government agency collect this data, through apple, or by other means? I'll bet he will hee haw around this question!
This stuff is part of the cloud computing. You will have a advertisement come across your phone when you go into areas that advertise through the phones. All of them will be doing this. Part of the business model. Get used to it as there is nothing we can do about it besides shutting your phone off and getting rid of them.
Someone should ask steve this question?
Does any government agency collect this data, through apple, or by other means? I'll bet he will hee haw around this question!
This stuff is part of the cloud computing. You will have a advertisement come across your phone when you go into areas that advertise through the phones. All of them will be doing this. Part of the business model. Get used to it as there is nothing we can do about it besides shutting your phone off and getting rid of them.
Icaras
Apr 26, 02:54 PM
Unfortunately, only 25% of the US market agrees with you. ;)
Market share and product quality is not always 1:1 relationship.
Market share and product quality is not always 1:1 relationship.
Plutonius
May 4, 04:30 PM
I'm glad we finally started moving :).
We might as well keep moving forward through the door at the end of the hallway.
We might as well keep moving forward through the door at the end of the hallway.
balamw
Apr 10, 06:06 PM
My grammar may be terrible, but I dare say that I can do math. I do lots of it. The divide balamw mentioned really does seem to exist, and is a little disappointing.
It has been mentioned before in the thread, but it bears repeating.
Addition and Subtraction can't have different precedence because they are the same operation. "Subtraction" is just shorthand for adding negative numbers.
Similarly division is just multiplication by the reciprocal. They MUST have the same precedence.
You can't take PEMDAS literally if you know what you are doing.
balamw & dukebound85:
You guys are making too many assumptions.
Following your thought process, the original post is not properly written then?
No we're not, we're using the language of math as we know it. x/y(a+b) has a definite meaning and it is the same as (x/y)*(a+b) not x/(y*(a+b)). You would NEED the extra parentheses to change the meaning.
The * multiplication is assumed if there is no operator provided, though most would probably add it in or rewrite the equation to make it even clearer it's very far from unclear.
B
It has been mentioned before in the thread, but it bears repeating.
Addition and Subtraction can't have different precedence because they are the same operation. "Subtraction" is just shorthand for adding negative numbers.
Similarly division is just multiplication by the reciprocal. They MUST have the same precedence.
You can't take PEMDAS literally if you know what you are doing.
balamw & dukebound85:
You guys are making too many assumptions.
Following your thought process, the original post is not properly written then?
No we're not, we're using the language of math as we know it. x/y(a+b) has a definite meaning and it is the same as (x/y)*(a+b) not x/(y*(a+b)). You would NEED the extra parentheses to change the meaning.
The * multiplication is assumed if there is no operator provided, though most would probably add it in or rewrite the equation to make it even clearer it's very far from unclear.
B
maclaptop
Apr 26, 02:26 PM
Once again, the seperating into 'smartphone' and 'tablet' markets makes little sense.
I'm worried about you.
There's a huge difference between a phone (or at least a device that contains a phone) and a tablet.
But then again, everyone has different tastes. Some can't tell the difference between a Steak and SOS... :eek:
I'm worried about you.
There's a huge difference between a phone (or at least a device that contains a phone) and a tablet.
But then again, everyone has different tastes. Some can't tell the difference between a Steak and SOS... :eek:
bradc
Jul 21, 05:35 PM
Or for the mac zealots with absolutely no perspective and impossible expectations...both!
Hahaha, you said it! Some people are never satisfied:(
Hahaha, you said it! Some people are never satisfied:(
McGiord
Apr 10, 07:19 PM
Parse Error
ender land
Apr 10, 10:29 AM
Mathematics do have rules, and thus will almost certainly yield one answer, this only holds true if there was clear presentation of the facts stated, rather than the reader making inferences from the initial question: which in this case was poorly numbered (worded)
The only way to get 2 as an answer is to make inferences.
If you only use what is explicitly given in the equation it always equals 288.
The only way to get 2 as an answer is to make inferences.
If you only use what is explicitly given in the equation it always equals 288.
jaxstate
Aug 4, 09:53 AM
LOL. You win post of the day.
Give me a break. People voted negative on this because they are waiting on merom MBPs and now think that, contrary to they're hopes and prayers the past few weeks, that the Merom MBP revisions wont be out until september. This is no clandestine PC-clone smear campaign. who's it going to effect? This forum is full of the faithful, messing around here isn't going to change national opinion of Microsoft or apple products. It's not Steve Ballmer twisting his handlebar mustaches as he chortles to himself, going from one article to the next, voting negative at each. Let's get real here.
Give me a break. People voted negative on this because they are waiting on merom MBPs and now think that, contrary to they're hopes and prayers the past few weeks, that the Merom MBP revisions wont be out until september. This is no clandestine PC-clone smear campaign. who's it going to effect? This forum is full of the faithful, messing around here isn't going to change national opinion of Microsoft or apple products. It's not Steve Ballmer twisting his handlebar mustaches as he chortles to himself, going from one article to the next, voting negative at each. Let's get real here.
cirus
Apr 24, 01:54 PM
You contradict yourself here. A 27" iMac is probably already retina, considering the viewing distance should be around 30" away.
As the distance grows, the PPI treshold to achieve the "retina" effect of "Eye can't distinguish the individual pixels" becomes lower. Given enough distance, 48 PPI can be enough to be dubbed "retina display" (your standard 50" 1080p TV).
No, you're not wrong. But I'm not either. I'll let you figure out why (think about the lower case b in Mbps vs MB of RAM ;) ). Unless I'm misinterpreting something, I doubt DP 1.2 can push out 21 gigaBYTES of data per second...
As for the 6990 listing that as max resolution, I'm betting that has more to do with current LCD display limitation (that is the max resolutions you'll find on an LCD monitor) than with actual hardware limitation. The hardware is capable of more than that. Some of these cards with a single GPU have 2-4 DP outputs capable of driving 2-4 of these 2560x1600 monitors. The GPU itself doesn't a problem pushing out these pixels and DP 1.2 makes it so they can push it over a single connection.
Sony was there first with the Vaio Z. 13.3", 1920x1080 baby. If it weren't so expensive it would be mine and I'd be back to running Linux.
Thanks, a 'duh' moment for me.
However, ati does list the 6990 as having a maximum display resolution of 2650 x 1600 per display though it can handle up to 6 displays. There will have to be a change somewhere. (Though you could probably write a program that would allow this resolution). That is still going to max out thunderbolt so you would not be able to drive one of those displays at native with a macbook pro.
As the distance grows, the PPI treshold to achieve the "retina" effect of "Eye can't distinguish the individual pixels" becomes lower. Given enough distance, 48 PPI can be enough to be dubbed "retina display" (your standard 50" 1080p TV).
No, you're not wrong. But I'm not either. I'll let you figure out why (think about the lower case b in Mbps vs MB of RAM ;) ). Unless I'm misinterpreting something, I doubt DP 1.2 can push out 21 gigaBYTES of data per second...
As for the 6990 listing that as max resolution, I'm betting that has more to do with current LCD display limitation (that is the max resolutions you'll find on an LCD monitor) than with actual hardware limitation. The hardware is capable of more than that. Some of these cards with a single GPU have 2-4 DP outputs capable of driving 2-4 of these 2560x1600 monitors. The GPU itself doesn't a problem pushing out these pixels and DP 1.2 makes it so they can push it over a single connection.
Sony was there first with the Vaio Z. 13.3", 1920x1080 baby. If it weren't so expensive it would be mine and I'd be back to running Linux.
Thanks, a 'duh' moment for me.
However, ati does list the 6990 as having a maximum display resolution of 2650 x 1600 per display though it can handle up to 6 displays. There will have to be a change somewhere. (Though you could probably write a program that would allow this resolution). That is still going to max out thunderbolt so you would not be able to drive one of those displays at native with a macbook pro.
charlituna
Apr 7, 01:02 PM
Ha ha! Way to go Apple!!!! Kill the competition any way you can!!
Doubtful that that is what they are up to. They bought what they needed and then this stupid little earthquake happened and the companies are trying to get back into business. And THAT is likely what is screwing with RIMs supply. Not anything Apple has done
Doubtful that that is what they are up to. They bought what they needed and then this stupid little earthquake happened and the companies are trying to get back into business. And THAT is likely what is screwing with RIMs supply. Not anything Apple has done
ergle2
Sep 15, 09:16 PM
I don't really care about the C2D processor, since most reviews are it is a bland chip without the Santa Rosa chip set. Better, sure enough, but not enough to care about.
Santa Rosa isn't a chipset, it's the name of the platform.
It consists of Merom (eventually Penryn?), Crestline (i965 express chipset) and Kedron (802.11n).
Santa Rosa won't affect performance a great deal.
The faster FSB will make a difference of maybe 3-5%. Maybe a little more in bandwidth-sensitive applications (say, some forms of decompression).
Less than than the difference between Yonah and Merom.
The other big differences are the new graphics core -- which the MBP won't use, the 802.11n - for which the spec hasn't yet been ratified, and is something easily added by changing/adding a wifi card, and the Robson flash caching technology, which is probably the biggest difference.
Note that Crestline is currently specced at consuming ~50% more power than the i945 chipset in Napa. Robson, however, should reduce some of that.
It's quite ironic that after years of Powerbooks getting new G4's with tiny clockspeed boosts, something like Merom is considered "bland"(?)
Santa Rosa isn't a chipset, it's the name of the platform.
It consists of Merom (eventually Penryn?), Crestline (i965 express chipset) and Kedron (802.11n).
Santa Rosa won't affect performance a great deal.
The faster FSB will make a difference of maybe 3-5%. Maybe a little more in bandwidth-sensitive applications (say, some forms of decompression).
Less than than the difference between Yonah and Merom.
The other big differences are the new graphics core -- which the MBP won't use, the 802.11n - for which the spec hasn't yet been ratified, and is something easily added by changing/adding a wifi card, and the Robson flash caching technology, which is probably the biggest difference.
Note that Crestline is currently specced at consuming ~50% more power than the i945 chipset in Napa. Robson, however, should reduce some of that.
It's quite ironic that after years of Powerbooks getting new G4's with tiny clockspeed boosts, something like Merom is considered "bland"(?)
Mister Snitch
Apr 5, 02:47 PM
Hey, Toyota HAD to pull the plug. Rumor has it that Apple was going to counter with a 'hijack a Toyota' campaign!