.jpg "dia del ni o para colorear.")
Silentwave
Jul 15, 05:55 PM
Too many people are complaining about rumored information that isn't even reliable, and most likely incorrect.
I agree with you whole-heartedly!
The one question I do have is why is the Mac Pro the last to make this transition, why has it taken so long? Is it simply due to chip availability, is it due to some radical new design, or is it because the Mac Pro is Apple's flagship product and Apple is working long and hard to wedge in some great new technology?
Great new technologies always made their way to the Power Macs first, and then trickled down the line. I have every faith that the Mac Pro will continue this tradition, especially since the Mac Pro will be competing with other high-end Xeon workstations. Apple will need something in the Mac Pro that nobody else has, and it will also need to utilize Intel's fastest chips in order to dispel any notions of the system being weaker than the competition in terms of speed -- this is a dark cloud over the Mac that finally needs to be cleared.
You hit the nail right on the head with the processor availability. Core Duo uses the pentium M architecture and was only in two versions: mobile, codename Yonah with its variants, and a pair of low speed ultra low power server chips- Sossaman- only going up to 2GHz with 2MB L2 and 667 FSB. the other Xeons (Paxville/Dempsey) and high end chips like the Pentium D/Pentium Extreme Edition ( Smithfield/Presler) are all using NetBurst architecutre, which is obsolete and very inefficient plus they are extremely power hungry and hot.The top Pentium Extreme Edition Presler dual core at 3.73GHz was easily outperformed by several of the Conroe cores- I recall one test where it was neck and neck with the 1.83GHz Core 2 Duo.
They wanted the fastest chips possible using the best architecture possible- that is Woodcrest and Conroe with the Core microarchitecture.
I have little doubt that the 3GHz Xeon 5160 will be in the Mac Pros, if not standard, then as a BTO option.
I agree with you whole-heartedly!
The one question I do have is why is the Mac Pro the last to make this transition, why has it taken so long? Is it simply due to chip availability, is it due to some radical new design, or is it because the Mac Pro is Apple's flagship product and Apple is working long and hard to wedge in some great new technology?
Great new technologies always made their way to the Power Macs first, and then trickled down the line. I have every faith that the Mac Pro will continue this tradition, especially since the Mac Pro will be competing with other high-end Xeon workstations. Apple will need something in the Mac Pro that nobody else has, and it will also need to utilize Intel's fastest chips in order to dispel any notions of the system being weaker than the competition in terms of speed -- this is a dark cloud over the Mac that finally needs to be cleared.
You hit the nail right on the head with the processor availability. Core Duo uses the pentium M architecture and was only in two versions: mobile, codename Yonah with its variants, and a pair of low speed ultra low power server chips- Sossaman- only going up to 2GHz with 2MB L2 and 667 FSB. the other Xeons (Paxville/Dempsey) and high end chips like the Pentium D/Pentium Extreme Edition ( Smithfield/Presler) are all using NetBurst architecutre, which is obsolete and very inefficient plus they are extremely power hungry and hot.The top Pentium Extreme Edition Presler dual core at 3.73GHz was easily outperformed by several of the Conroe cores- I recall one test where it was neck and neck with the 1.83GHz Core 2 Duo.
They wanted the fastest chips possible using the best architecture possible- that is Woodcrest and Conroe with the Core microarchitecture.
I have little doubt that the 3GHz Xeon 5160 will be in the Mac Pros, if not standard, then as a BTO option.
ellsworth
Apr 5, 04:48 PM
Would be grand if all this hype was for iMovie. :)
ergle2
Sep 19, 12:56 PM
thx for your reply,
i will go for the mac pro quad know (i'm updating my home computer wich is a G3, but i'm used to work on a dual G5 for my projects) and yeah i will allways be able then to update later, but how about ram, when DDR3 comes out, i read that its going to replace FB-DIMMs so will that be upgradeble too???
cause these FB-DIMMS are so ********** expensive :) thx
DDR and FB aren't mutually exclusive technologies. Current FB-DIMMs use DDR2 chips. Newer FB-DIMMs will use DDR3 chips but due to the way FB-DIMMs work -- the buffer and control hardware essentially sit between the memory and the MCH -- you should still be able to use them in a Mac Pro. Note, should, not will.
You won't be able to use regular DDR3 DIMMs just like you can't use regular DDR2 DIMMs tho'. That's something that'd require a major design change to the motherboard.
So, memory will still be damn' expensive compared to that found in the cheap desktops...
i will go for the mac pro quad know (i'm updating my home computer wich is a G3, but i'm used to work on a dual G5 for my projects) and yeah i will allways be able then to update later, but how about ram, when DDR3 comes out, i read that its going to replace FB-DIMMs so will that be upgradeble too???
cause these FB-DIMMS are so ********** expensive :) thx
DDR and FB aren't mutually exclusive technologies. Current FB-DIMMs use DDR2 chips. Newer FB-DIMMs will use DDR3 chips but due to the way FB-DIMMs work -- the buffer and control hardware essentially sit between the memory and the MCH -- you should still be able to use them in a Mac Pro. Note, should, not will.
You won't be able to use regular DDR3 DIMMs just like you can't use regular DDR2 DIMMs tho'. That's something that'd require a major design change to the motherboard.
So, memory will still be damn' expensive compared to that found in the cheap desktops...
JesterJJZ
Apr 12, 07:52 PM
No, it hasn't.
Yeah no kidding...they should have taken the "New" off the page at least a year ago.
Yeah no kidding...they should have taken the "New" off the page at least a year ago.
ugp
Jun 23, 12:41 PM
If the whole Region down here for Florida only got 139 I doubt Radio Shack got many iPhone 4s at all. Either that or all of them went to the huge Markets like New York and other areas like such.
SevenInchScrew
Aug 12, 11:05 AM
similar genre given racing, but one is a simulator - the other is, a bit more fictional (in a sense).
but anyway, thats a technicality. no doubt that NFS seems to be higher grossing and more popular, as GT targets a pretty acute market. i wonder if GT5 will change that at all.
My point is, he was trying to use GT's high sales as a quantifier of the series greatness. Then, when I showed 2 examples of other racing game series with higher sales, he said they were different types of racing games, and that they don't count. Which is understandable, because they are not the same type of game. But then, ultimately, as I said before, if you don't count those other types of racing games, you're really only comparing GT to Forza, since that is the only other similar game.
But what does that prove? A game series that has been out for almost 13 years has sold more than a similar type of game series that has only been out for a little over 5 years. Big shock there. I'll be the first to admit that Forza isn't even remotely close to as big of a sales hit as the GT series. But, like I've said before, liking a game is a subjective thing, and everyone is entitled to their own choices. But sales are an objective thing, that has no relevance to somethings greatness.
but anyway, thats a technicality. no doubt that NFS seems to be higher grossing and more popular, as GT targets a pretty acute market. i wonder if GT5 will change that at all.
My point is, he was trying to use GT's high sales as a quantifier of the series greatness. Then, when I showed 2 examples of other racing game series with higher sales, he said they were different types of racing games, and that they don't count. Which is understandable, because they are not the same type of game. But then, ultimately, as I said before, if you don't count those other types of racing games, you're really only comparing GT to Forza, since that is the only other similar game.
But what does that prove? A game series that has been out for almost 13 years has sold more than a similar type of game series that has only been out for a little over 5 years. Big shock there. I'll be the first to admit that Forza isn't even remotely close to as big of a sales hit as the GT series. But, like I've said before, liking a game is a subjective thing, and everyone is entitled to their own choices. But sales are an objective thing, that has no relevance to somethings greatness.
addicted44
Mar 31, 02:30 PM
This brings up the question of how willing manufacturers are going to be to replace their Android phones with WP7 phones.
gkarris
Mar 22, 01:22 PM
My take on this.
The good:
1. Great specs
2. Great price
3. Great form factor
Yes, my only complaint for the iPad is the size... :(
The good:
1. Great specs
2. Great price
3. Great form factor
Yes, my only complaint for the iPad is the size... :(
Silentwave
Jul 15, 05:55 PM
Too many people are complaining about rumored information that isn't even reliable, and most likely incorrect.
I agree with you whole-heartedly!
The one question I do have is why is the Mac Pro the last to make this transition, why has it taken so long? Is it simply due to chip availability, is it due to some radical new design, or is it because the Mac Pro is Apple's flagship product and Apple is working long and hard to wedge in some great new technology?
Great new technologies always made their way to the Power Macs first, and then trickled down the line. I have every faith that the Mac Pro will continue this tradition, especially since the Mac Pro will be competing with other high-end Xeon workstations. Apple will need something in the Mac Pro that nobody else has, and it will also need to utilize Intel's fastest chips in order to dispel any notions of the system being weaker than the competition in terms of speed -- this is a dark cloud over the Mac that finally needs to be cleared.
You hit the nail right on the head with the processor availability. Core Duo uses the pentium M architecture and was only in two versions: mobile, codename Yonah with its variants, and a pair of low speed ultra low power server chips- Sossaman- only going up to 2GHz with 2MB L2 and 667 FSB. the other Xeons (Paxville/Dempsey) and high end chips like the Pentium D/Pentium Extreme Edition ( Smithfield/Presler) are all using NetBurst architecutre, which is obsolete and very inefficient plus they are extremely power hungry and hot.The top Pentium Extreme Edition Presler dual core at 3.73GHz was easily outperformed by several of the Conroe cores- I recall one test where it was neck and neck with the 1.83GHz Core 2 Duo.
They wanted the fastest chips possible using the best architecture possible- that is Woodcrest and Conroe with the Core microarchitecture.
I have little doubt that the 3GHz Xeon 5160 will be in the Mac Pros, if not standard, then as a BTO option.
I agree with you whole-heartedly!
The one question I do have is why is the Mac Pro the last to make this transition, why has it taken so long? Is it simply due to chip availability, is it due to some radical new design, or is it because the Mac Pro is Apple's flagship product and Apple is working long and hard to wedge in some great new technology?
Great new technologies always made their way to the Power Macs first, and then trickled down the line. I have every faith that the Mac Pro will continue this tradition, especially since the Mac Pro will be competing with other high-end Xeon workstations. Apple will need something in the Mac Pro that nobody else has, and it will also need to utilize Intel's fastest chips in order to dispel any notions of the system being weaker than the competition in terms of speed -- this is a dark cloud over the Mac that finally needs to be cleared.
You hit the nail right on the head with the processor availability. Core Duo uses the pentium M architecture and was only in two versions: mobile, codename Yonah with its variants, and a pair of low speed ultra low power server chips- Sossaman- only going up to 2GHz with 2MB L2 and 667 FSB. the other Xeons (Paxville/Dempsey) and high end chips like the Pentium D/Pentium Extreme Edition ( Smithfield/Presler) are all using NetBurst architecutre, which is obsolete and very inefficient plus they are extremely power hungry and hot.The top Pentium Extreme Edition Presler dual core at 3.73GHz was easily outperformed by several of the Conroe cores- I recall one test where it was neck and neck with the 1.83GHz Core 2 Duo.
They wanted the fastest chips possible using the best architecture possible- that is Woodcrest and Conroe with the Core microarchitecture.
I have little doubt that the 3GHz Xeon 5160 will be in the Mac Pros, if not standard, then as a BTO option.
tortoise
Aug 7, 06:00 PM
I am sooo looking forward to this. The two top items on my OS wishlist was a competent versioning file system built-in and virtual desktops.
If I can get both, I will have damn little to complain about on the user side. I would like a deep and supported Mail.app plug-in API, for the developer side of things.
If I can get both, I will have damn little to complain about on the user side. I would like a deep and supported Mail.app plug-in API, for the developer side of things.
Multimedia
Aug 27, 11:33 PM
Core 2 Duo is here. Looks like Toshiba is first out of the gate with Core 2 Duo laptops:Toshiba Qosmio G35-AV660 - AVPC Laptop (http://www.toshibadirect.com:80/td/b2c/pdet.to?poid=347885&coid=-30600&seg=HHO)
Wow! And only $3499 :rolleyes: I think a lot of us here would have a problem with the 10.1 pounds part. I agree the 17" 1920 x 1200 would be wonderful. I like all the features - esp if we could have an HD-DVD SuperMultiDrive and dual HDs. But the battery life of 2.5 hours leaves a lot to be desired. I guess you can't have it all without losing something in the process - like reasonable weight, battery life and price. :p
Wow! And only $3499 :rolleyes: I think a lot of us here would have a problem with the 10.1 pounds part. I agree the 17" 1920 x 1200 would be wonderful. I like all the features - esp if we could have an HD-DVD SuperMultiDrive and dual HDs. But the battery life of 2.5 hours leaves a lot to be desired. I guess you can't have it all without losing something in the process - like reasonable weight, battery life and price. :p
falconeight
Apr 6, 03:11 PM
I bought a xoom...the salesmen started it up for me and after seeing it I changed my mind. It was my first return before I swipped my card.
NinjaHERO
Apr 11, 11:38 AM
I was already pushing it to wait this long with my 3G. I don't think I can wait another 4 months+ from June.
When does the EVO 2 come out?
When does the EVO 2 come out?
FF_productions
Jul 15, 12:54 AM
Here's hoping you're right. I think including 512 MB of RAM standard would be a bit of a slap in the face if Apple is releasing these supposedly "advanced" machines. What kind of advanced PowerMac has only 512 MB of RAM standard? ;) :cool:
It would be ridiculous if it came with just 512 mb's of ram...
Steve Jobs-"The New Octa-Core Mac Pro with 512 mb's of ram" It just doesn't fit...
It would be ridiculous if it came with just 512 mb's of ram...
Steve Jobs-"The New Octa-Core Mac Pro with 512 mb's of ram" It just doesn't fit...
Liske
Aug 21, 01:28 AM
Quad G5 is only $2799 on the SAVE refurb page. Refurbs are the same as new with a new warranty. But I think that would be a poor choice compared to a Mac Pro. The Mac Pro is not cheaper because you have to add more expensive RAM. But it is faster overall and Rosetta Photoshop performance isn't bad. Quad G5 will also benefit from Leopard don't forget. It's not like Leopard is going to not be written to take advantage of the 64-bit G5 as well.
But I would not recomend a G5 Quad to anyone at this point. I'm pondering a Mac Pro purchase myself. But I'm going to try and hold out for a refurb or even see if I can wait for Clovertown. But I'm likely to be one of the first to snag a Mac Pro refurb when they hit the SAVE page in November-December. By then I may even be thinking about waiting for the January 9th SteveNote. Quad G5 is no slouch. But Mac Pro is faster overall.
What I most would like to know is how does the 2GHz Mac Pro stack up to the Quad G5.
And I thought you were married to your quad last week ......
But I would not recomend a G5 Quad to anyone at this point. I'm pondering a Mac Pro purchase myself. But I'm going to try and hold out for a refurb or even see if I can wait for Clovertown. But I'm likely to be one of the first to snag a Mac Pro refurb when they hit the SAVE page in November-December. By then I may even be thinking about waiting for the January 9th SteveNote. Quad G5 is no slouch. But Mac Pro is faster overall.
What I most would like to know is how does the 2GHz Mac Pro stack up to the Quad G5.
And I thought you were married to your quad last week ......
archer75
Apr 5, 05:05 PM
Not again..
NAB is for broadcast professionals - its doubtful there will be computer releases here.
They don't have to announce the new hardware there. It's very unlikely they would have an event to announce the hardware upgrade. But there's no reason a refresh can't take place that day.
There are many reports of supplies of imacs and minis drying up as of a week ago so a refresh is certainly imminent.
NAB is for broadcast professionals - its doubtful there will be computer releases here.
They don't have to announce the new hardware there. It's very unlikely they would have an event to announce the hardware upgrade. But there's no reason a refresh can't take place that day.
There are many reports of supplies of imacs and minis drying up as of a week ago so a refresh is certainly imminent.
Thunderhawks
Apr 25, 02:50 PM
Number 1: Apple is apparently labeling the reports as false
Number 2: Who even cares if Apple or Google or Microsoft or any corporation is tracking our location? What things are you involved in where you would even care? What harm could their knowledge of that information cause you? (apart from the crackpot theories of paranoid people)...
People will sue for anything these days and hopefully legislation will be passed soon to stop the ridiculousness.
Brings to mind:
If you outlaw guns, only the outlaws will have guns.
Seriously, communication between your device and cell towers etc. has been this way since the first cell phone.
It's similar to getting your phone bill showing you all the calls made.
You keep the bill, it's private info and only at the phone company.
Somebody steals it, different problem.
If Apple was still a small company nobody would have cared.
They are connecting themselves to Apple to get publicity.
BTW: I have been asked plenty of times by my iphone whether I want to allow location services. I click yes, as I have nothing to hide.
The criminals that this would actually be harmful to are using stolen cell phone etc.
Number 2: Who even cares if Apple or Google or Microsoft or any corporation is tracking our location? What things are you involved in where you would even care? What harm could their knowledge of that information cause you? (apart from the crackpot theories of paranoid people)...
People will sue for anything these days and hopefully legislation will be passed soon to stop the ridiculousness.
Brings to mind:
If you outlaw guns, only the outlaws will have guns.
Seriously, communication between your device and cell towers etc. has been this way since the first cell phone.
It's similar to getting your phone bill showing you all the calls made.
You keep the bill, it's private info and only at the phone company.
Somebody steals it, different problem.
If Apple was still a small company nobody would have cared.
They are connecting themselves to Apple to get publicity.
BTW: I have been asked plenty of times by my iphone whether I want to allow location services. I click yes, as I have nothing to hide.
The criminals that this would actually be harmful to are using stolen cell phone etc.
skunk
Mar 22, 07:03 PM
Whether it turns out to be justified depends on subsequent events.Sticking your neck out there, I see. :)
~Shard~
Jul 15, 10:49 AM
I disagree. Using ATX power supplies is a stupid idea. I am sure Apple uses higher quality power supplies than you would pick up at your local CompUSA.
If they allow this there will be a lot of dead Macs, from power supplies whose rails aren't strong enough.
Not to mention those who buy the 400W model because it is only 20 bucks and drastically underpower there Mac.
This would cause to many problems. Keep it proprietary IMO.
Actually that is a good point. Another good example is how some people install incorrect RAM into their Mac - they just pick up generic cheapo RAM, not Mac-certified, and wonder why they have all sorts of issues.
If they allow this there will be a lot of dead Macs, from power supplies whose rails aren't strong enough.
Not to mention those who buy the 400W model because it is only 20 bucks and drastically underpower there Mac.
This would cause to many problems. Keep it proprietary IMO.
Actually that is a good point. Another good example is how some people install incorrect RAM into their Mac - they just pick up generic cheapo RAM, not Mac-certified, and wonder why they have all sorts of issues.
fatfish
Aug 7, 09:49 PM
I've seen many posts calling for a unified mail, address and calender app, this is so please Apple take no notice, I want seperate apps.
Simplicity is what makes Apple software what it is. I would however wish to see tighter integration, such as exists between itunes, iphoto, iDVD, iMovie, Garageband and iWeb.
I would also like to see the address book integrated with pages. (but that's another topic)
Simplicity is what makes Apple software what it is. I would however wish to see tighter integration, such as exists between itunes, iphoto, iDVD, iMovie, Garageband and iWeb.
I would also like to see the address book integrated with pages. (but that's another topic)
QCassidy352
Jul 14, 02:32 PM
intersting that the price differences are quite large. I was also hoping for an all-quad line up and a case redesign. I've never liked the look of the G5.
Arn/powers that be - can you tell us whether or not you consider this source to be reliable? Have you ever heard from them in the past?
Arn/powers that be - can you tell us whether or not you consider this source to be reliable? Have you ever heard from them in the past?
ChickenSwartz
Aug 27, 10:27 AM
Are you sure that discount applies to the NEW Merom based Macs - I don't think so?
It isn't like they are releasing new computers. They will update the current line. So if MBP, iMac, MB, and Mini get Merom (I know there is debate but...) and they don't include them in the promotion only the MacPro will qualify. That makes for a very stupid promotion end, you usually want your promotions to go out BIG.
It isn't like they are releasing new computers. They will update the current line. So if MBP, iMac, MB, and Mini get Merom (I know there is debate but...) and they don't include them in the promotion only the MacPro will qualify. That makes for a very stupid promotion end, you usually want your promotions to go out BIG.
Steviejobz
Apr 8, 05:22 AM
This story fails the smell test. A reader told MacRumors? You mean a disgruntled fanboy who has gone iPad-less for two weeks has turned conspiracy theorist?
All I can say is that there was an inventory tracker on one of these threads and each time it said "in store only" I was able to walk into that store and buy one.
The second time I bought a unit there were guys carrying boxes of iPads that had just arrived and sold them freely until gone.
All I can say is that there was an inventory tracker on one of these threads and each time it said "in store only" I was able to walk into that store and buy one.
The second time I bought a unit there were guys carrying boxes of iPads that had just arrived and sold them freely until gone.
THX1139
Aug 21, 12:40 PM
That's great info. Would you please tell us:
1. How fast that is compared to what Mac model-speed you are currently using?
2. IE Were you impressed or not so impressed with how fast-slow it rendered?
3. What kind of speed were you expecting?
I'm no expert, but my guess is that the lack of RAM may have been the culprit. Need more independent tests like this from other FCP users. Thanks a lot. :)
1. Since I'm currently using a G4 titanium powerbook, the Macpro screams in comparrison!! :eek: (Don't ask why I'm using such an old machine...it's a long story).
2. Yes, I was impressed with the render. It was the timeline playback of uncompressed footage that sucked.
3. I was happy with the render speed. I was expecting the rendered footage to play back without dropping frames.
You're correct to assume ram might help. Hard disk speed is another factor because the CPU has to read the data from disk. If the disk can't keep up, then FCP is forced to drop frames. I'm not sure if upgrading to ATI card is going to help or not, as I doubt that FCP utilizes the GPU to any extent.
I'm thinking that anyone who plans to use the Woodcrest to handle uncompressed footage (especially HD), is going to need a breakout box or a raid setup. The way is see it, stock Woodcrest isn't going to cut it for high end compositing. Although, most video editors don't work in uncompressed so that may not be a problem for them, and besides, they usually have a raid setup.
I'm anxious to get a Woodcrest so that I can test it with more ram. I'll definitely go with a raid or 10K drive for the occasional time I need to work with uncompressed footage.
1. How fast that is compared to what Mac model-speed you are currently using?
2. IE Were you impressed or not so impressed with how fast-slow it rendered?
3. What kind of speed were you expecting?
I'm no expert, but my guess is that the lack of RAM may have been the culprit. Need more independent tests like this from other FCP users. Thanks a lot. :)
1. Since I'm currently using a G4 titanium powerbook, the Macpro screams in comparrison!! :eek: (Don't ask why I'm using such an old machine...it's a long story).
2. Yes, I was impressed with the render. It was the timeline playback of uncompressed footage that sucked.
3. I was happy with the render speed. I was expecting the rendered footage to play back without dropping frames.
You're correct to assume ram might help. Hard disk speed is another factor because the CPU has to read the data from disk. If the disk can't keep up, then FCP is forced to drop frames. I'm not sure if upgrading to ATI card is going to help or not, as I doubt that FCP utilizes the GPU to any extent.
I'm thinking that anyone who plans to use the Woodcrest to handle uncompressed footage (especially HD), is going to need a breakout box or a raid setup. The way is see it, stock Woodcrest isn't going to cut it for high end compositing. Although, most video editors don't work in uncompressed so that may not be a problem for them, and besides, they usually have a raid setup.
I'm anxious to get a Woodcrest so that I can test it with more ram. I'll definitely go with a raid or 10K drive for the occasional time I need to work with uncompressed footage.