liketom
Jul 19, 04:56 PM
Wow, he basically just revealed they're working on an iPhone...
nope just putting iTunes on the phone
nope just putting iTunes on the phone
Galaxas0
Apr 2, 11:37 PM
Here's a pic of the content width changed in Safari.
Baseline
Nov 15, 08:41 AM
seriously though, how hard is it to get a program to multi-thread? (if thats the right term; being a complete programming novice, i've no idea)
That really depends on the program, on how "parallelizable" the application is.
The simplest way to think of it is like this: Let's say you have a program that first has to calculate A. Then, when it's done that, it uses the result of A to calculate B. Then, when it's done that, uses the result of B to calculate C, then C to D, and so on. That's a *serial* problem there. The calculation of B can't begin until A is done, so it doesn't matter how many processors you have running, all computation is held up on one spot.
On the other hand, let's say you have an application that needs to calculate A, B, C and D, but those four values are not dependent on each other at all. In that case, you can use four processors at the same time, to calculate all four values at the same time.
Think of it like baking a cake. You can't start putting on the icing until the cake is done baking. And you can't start baking the cake until the ingredients are all mixed together. But you can have people simultaneously getting out and measuring the ingredients.
So that problem is partially parallelizable, but the majority of its workload is a serial process.
Some software applications, just by their very nature, will never be able to do anything useful with multiple processors.
That really depends on the program, on how "parallelizable" the application is.
The simplest way to think of it is like this: Let's say you have a program that first has to calculate A. Then, when it's done that, it uses the result of A to calculate B. Then, when it's done that, uses the result of B to calculate C, then C to D, and so on. That's a *serial* problem there. The calculation of B can't begin until A is done, so it doesn't matter how many processors you have running, all computation is held up on one spot.
On the other hand, let's say you have an application that needs to calculate A, B, C and D, but those four values are not dependent on each other at all. In that case, you can use four processors at the same time, to calculate all four values at the same time.
Think of it like baking a cake. You can't start putting on the icing until the cake is done baking. And you can't start baking the cake until the ingredients are all mixed together. But you can have people simultaneously getting out and measuring the ingredients.
So that problem is partially parallelizable, but the majority of its workload is a serial process.
Some software applications, just by their very nature, will never be able to do anything useful with multiple processors.
MistaBungle
Jan 11, 05:16 PM
There's something in the air...
planes shipping iPhones to Canada?
planes shipping iPhones to Canada?
popelife
Jan 2, 03:35 PM
Since Intel is releasing the 2.0 Ghz C2Q chip this week, it seems likely to find its way into an iTV and/or iMac device. That's four cores on the cheap.
Rocketman
I see where you're coming from, but I believe the processor in the current iMacs is the laptop Merom C2D, which is why the iMac tops out at 2.33GHz, and the FSB is 667MHz. TDP for most Meroms is 35W.
The Core 2 Quad is a desktop processor, with a TDP more like 80-100W. So not suitable for the iMac without a big redesign.
Do correct me if I'm wrong.
Wasn't aware there's a 2.0GHz version of C2Q...
Rocketman
I see where you're coming from, but I believe the processor in the current iMacs is the laptop Merom C2D, which is why the iMac tops out at 2.33GHz, and the FSB is 667MHz. TDP for most Meroms is 35W.
The Core 2 Quad is a desktop processor, with a TDP more like 80-100W. So not suitable for the iMac without a big redesign.
Do correct me if I'm wrong.
Wasn't aware there's a 2.0GHz version of C2Q...
McScooby
Sep 6, 09:01 AM
Does this mean we can expect MB / MBP revisions with a bumped HD?
kelving525
Sep 19, 11:54 PM
I saw some of the pics and the buttons are covered. :)
The volume-rocker and hold buttons are both covered.
The volume-rocker and hold buttons are both covered.
Multimedia
Sep 1, 01:04 PM
Most of the posts in this thread are about the 23" screen. Yes, I think it will happen to allow the imac to play 1080i/1080p HD.
But, how about the processors? Apple needs to have a Core 2 (Conroe not Merom) inside the imac. The imac is not a conventionally size desktop (not as much room inside as a tower) but Apple can not continue to use a laptop processor in the imac. If they do, then how will the Conroe be used in Apple's line up? In a Mac tower? I don't think so. Surely, a 23" iMac could house the Conroe suitably?
So I would say that the 23" iMac would kill 2 birds - Conroe and HD for the home user. :)Absolutely Quad Girl. You are right on the money. Plus DUAL DVI support so you can span to a 30" display.
But, how about the processors? Apple needs to have a Core 2 (Conroe not Merom) inside the imac. The imac is not a conventionally size desktop (not as much room inside as a tower) but Apple can not continue to use a laptop processor in the imac. If they do, then how will the Conroe be used in Apple's line up? In a Mac tower? I don't think so. Surely, a 23" iMac could house the Conroe suitably?
So I would say that the 23" iMac would kill 2 birds - Conroe and HD for the home user. :)Absolutely Quad Girl. You are right on the money. Plus DUAL DVI support so you can span to a 30" display.
Stridder44
Apr 19, 01:15 PM
Yay, news that's something other than iOS related.
Now hopefully the Mac Mini will get updated as well.
Now hopefully the Mac Mini will get updated as well.
blueflame
Sep 6, 09:22 PM
I think everyone is obsessing about quality. someone here said earlier that its about convinience. these are going to be the same resoluition as the tv shows, and cost 3.99. i actually dont think they will be letting you burn it on a disk either. I agree that a movie rental system is the way to go. but honestly, for these prices, i can get through time warner all the on demand stations, (stars, stars2, cinemax, showtime, and like 3 hbo channels.) this is the future, there is no waiting to download anything, this model is waht for all reality needs to be used, then if you like the movie enough, you pay $15 for you to burn it to one dvd only (comes with label pictures and cover) maybe they even mail you the emtpy case. for that price, they will afford it.) anywy. maybe this set top box everyone wants is some sort of propriatary thing they are making like tivo, with a burner, from an apple cable server, with an ipod port. I like it. but this is such an exciting time.
A
A
Hunabku
Apr 13, 01:50 AM
+1 here. Every time I've tried to use iMovie for a "quick" edit it always ends in disasters like this. In my case, I was trying to move some music around and time my edits with the music. It was really infuriating trying to do this in iMovie compared to how fast I could have done it in FCP. I guess we'll have wait till Apple posts more info or we get it in our hands to really tell if it can be run like the current FCP.
Yes i agree we have to get our hands on it to know. Which in a way negates everything you said previously. Just because the UI borrows some of the visuals from imovie does not mean that running the program and editing will be like iMovie.
This is typical of people -apple releases something radically new in a given category and everyone proclaims the sky is falling and the product is a flop. Only after time we discover that there was deep thought given to the users' experience and the end result is booming sales.
Randy has definined the vanguard of video editing software - from writing/architecting Premiere, Final Cut, iMovie and now Final Cut X. He knows how to make software for video pros so please reserve judgment until using it and respect the depth of experience here.
PS i really think that apple is powerfully positioning themselves by selling final cut so cheap. Now you can justify paying more for a Mac box because the software is so much less than the competition. Brilliant if you ask me - make software cheap, sell more macs and cost kick your competition out of the market.
Yes i agree we have to get our hands on it to know. Which in a way negates everything you said previously. Just because the UI borrows some of the visuals from imovie does not mean that running the program and editing will be like iMovie.
This is typical of people -apple releases something radically new in a given category and everyone proclaims the sky is falling and the product is a flop. Only after time we discover that there was deep thought given to the users' experience and the end result is booming sales.
Randy has definined the vanguard of video editing software - from writing/architecting Premiere, Final Cut, iMovie and now Final Cut X. He knows how to make software for video pros so please reserve judgment until using it and respect the depth of experience here.
PS i really think that apple is powerfully positioning themselves by selling final cut so cheap. Now you can justify paying more for a Mac box because the software is so much less than the competition. Brilliant if you ask me - make software cheap, sell more macs and cost kick your competition out of the market.
iRobby
Mar 24, 01:46 PM
Buying my first iMac is getting even better!! can't wait for the refresh!
xlii
Apr 20, 02:35 PM
Can you even buy a car today (in the USA) that has the following:
manual transmission
manual steering
manual brakes
wind em up yourself windows
Sure, I understand it has to have the emission controls on it but if I could get a car without all the electronic stuff on it that tries to disconnect me from the feel of the road.
manual transmission
manual steering
manual brakes
wind em up yourself windows
Sure, I understand it has to have the emission controls on it but if I could get a car without all the electronic stuff on it that tries to disconnect me from the feel of the road.
aliasfox
Nov 27, 09:33 PM
For desktop use, I find even a 19" widescreen too "short" vertically, so a 17" standalone display would feel rather confining to me (odd, as two of my main machines are 12" PowerBooks...).
That said, Apple does need to lower the price on its 20" display - it may be color accurate and beautiful, but its perceived competition is all the stuff at Best Buy, Circuit City, and the Dell kiosk. Like it or not, with the iMac, iPod, and Mac mini, Apple's gunning for the consumer crowd - where "good enough at a reasonable price" is far more important than "the best at any price" - which is part of why iTMS took off, and part of why I think DVD players will be the reigning standard for a few years even after the next generation comes out.
Anyway, Apple should either a) reduce the price of the 20" to perhaps $399 (same price as the upper end of the 20" price spectrum in the consumer market), or b) release a different 20" priced at the $399 level or less, clearly differentiated from the "good" 20" display.
If Apple's going to put a premium on its displays, it better make displays that're worth the price. The 23" really isn't that far off the price of other consumer 23-24" displays, but pink hues and uneven backlighting just make it not worth it.
I bought the 22" Westinghouse display from Best Buy on Black Friday. $200. Is it anywhere near as beautiful as an 8-bit panel housed inside an Apple case? No, but it's good enough and that $500 difference can easily go somewhere else... like food.
That said, Apple does need to lower the price on its 20" display - it may be color accurate and beautiful, but its perceived competition is all the stuff at Best Buy, Circuit City, and the Dell kiosk. Like it or not, with the iMac, iPod, and Mac mini, Apple's gunning for the consumer crowd - where "good enough at a reasonable price" is far more important than "the best at any price" - which is part of why iTMS took off, and part of why I think DVD players will be the reigning standard for a few years even after the next generation comes out.
Anyway, Apple should either a) reduce the price of the 20" to perhaps $399 (same price as the upper end of the 20" price spectrum in the consumer market), or b) release a different 20" priced at the $399 level or less, clearly differentiated from the "good" 20" display.
If Apple's going to put a premium on its displays, it better make displays that're worth the price. The 23" really isn't that far off the price of other consumer 23-24" displays, but pink hues and uneven backlighting just make it not worth it.
I bought the 22" Westinghouse display from Best Buy on Black Friday. $200. Is it anywhere near as beautiful as an 8-bit panel housed inside an Apple case? No, but it's good enough and that $500 difference can easily go somewhere else... like food.
paradillon
Oct 23, 09:28 PM
I cannot wait till I have my entire environment on a large pocket sized full-screen iPod like device and do most of my work via 802.11n and 4G wireless. I might suggest a slightly larger screen and battery as a BTO option.
Rocketman
Amen Brother! That's what I want too. Don't forget the built in isight.
Rocketman
Amen Brother! That's what I want too. Don't forget the built in isight.
.jpg "behind Justin Bieber.")
lifeinhd
Feb 28, 08:01 PM
15! *internet props*, at one point i had a blue and white g3, a ruby imac g3, and a few others...unfortunatly my mom was tired of all the "useless" (in her eyes) computers and made me discard them (the only computers i have every gotten rid of that werent compleatly dead)
now all im starting again, with this mdd g4 :D
As much as I hate clutter, I'm a bit of a collector as well. Usually, whenever I get a free Mac (and most of the Macs I get are free), I sell them, but whenever I come across a free classic or really old Mac, I figure "eh, it isn't worth anything, might as well keep it..." and the collection builds from there. So far, I've got an SE/30, two PowerBook 180s, an eMac, a PowerMac G4 AGP (I think), an iMac G3, a Performa 5200CD, and an Apple //e. They all boot, but one of the PBs is iffy. I've also owned two 1.25GHz PowerBook G4s, a PowerMac G5 dual 2.0, two 1.83GHz Mac Minis, a 1.66GHz Mac Mini, several iMac G5s, a G4 Quicksilver, a MacBook Pro, an iMac G4, and maybe some others I'm forgetting. Only ones I paid for were some of the iMac G5s, the MBP, and two of the Mac Minis.
And I've only been an Apple user since 2006 :p
now all im starting again, with this mdd g4 :D
As much as I hate clutter, I'm a bit of a collector as well. Usually, whenever I get a free Mac (and most of the Macs I get are free), I sell them, but whenever I come across a free classic or really old Mac, I figure "eh, it isn't worth anything, might as well keep it..." and the collection builds from there. So far, I've got an SE/30, two PowerBook 180s, an eMac, a PowerMac G4 AGP (I think), an iMac G3, a Performa 5200CD, and an Apple //e. They all boot, but one of the PBs is iffy. I've also owned two 1.25GHz PowerBook G4s, a PowerMac G5 dual 2.0, two 1.83GHz Mac Minis, a 1.66GHz Mac Mini, several iMac G5s, a G4 Quicksilver, a MacBook Pro, an iMac G4, and maybe some others I'm forgetting. Only ones I paid for were some of the iMac G5s, the MBP, and two of the Mac Minis.
And I've only been an Apple user since 2006 :p
dukishdary
Jan 11, 05:15 PM
i highly highly doubt they are calling it the "macbook air." that's borderline laughable. i am willing to bet the phase "there's something in the air" is referring to the soon to be announced rental service, not a piece of hardware. apple is making an obvious attempt to eliminate physical mediums altogether, first cds with mp3s and now dvds with downloadable vids (both via the itunes music store). everything will be available "in the air" or "up in the cloud," if you will. i'll be damned if they name their next product the "macbook air." c'mon people...
Kiwi Jones
Mar 24, 03:21 PM
So, this doesn't mean it would be possible to upgrade a 2010 15" MBP's GPU from the INTEL HD graphics to anything different does it??
This INTEL HD sucks really bad...
This INTEL HD sucks really bad...
islanders
Dec 29, 08:21 AM
It looks like it�s going to play YouTube on your TV and be a HDMI/DVI/USB switch board.
A video processor or scaler would be nice.
If it doesn�t have HD there wont be much demand for iTunes download.
I wish they would team up with a high speed satellite internet provider and provide an iDish, but it looks like Apple is thinking small potatoes and thinks it�s going go luck out with another simple iPod device.
It is a good price point and a lot of people will want to watch YouTube on their tv, and a HDMI/DVI switch is about a $100 bucks.
A video processor or scaler would be nice.
If it doesn�t have HD there wont be much demand for iTunes download.
I wish they would team up with a high speed satellite internet provider and provide an iDish, but it looks like Apple is thinking small potatoes and thinks it�s going go luck out with another simple iPod device.
It is a good price point and a lot of people will want to watch YouTube on their tv, and a HDMI/DVI switch is about a $100 bucks.
andrew.gw
Apr 3, 08:37 PM
I actually hate FS mode. But I dont see much sense in hiding the address bar, an often used feature of a browser.
I personally us shortcuts to interact with the address bar, I don't want a delay in my interaction if it is hidden.
It doesn't matter though, I hate FS mode and I am absurd.
It should be an option, at least. You can hide the toolbar in windowed mode, so you should be able to in fullscreen; I can't see Apple leaving it in its current implementation.
I personally us shortcuts to interact with the address bar, I don't want a delay in my interaction if it is hidden.
It doesn't matter though, I hate FS mode and I am absurd.
It should be an option, at least. You can hide the toolbar in windowed mode, so you should be able to in fullscreen; I can't see Apple leaving it in its current implementation.
inkswamp
Aug 6, 09:53 PM
Blah, it should read "Mac OS X Leopard, introducing Panter 2.0"
No offense, my friend, but I'm glad Apple isn't taking any marketing cues from readers of MacRumors. ;)
No offense, my friend, but I'm glad Apple isn't taking any marketing cues from readers of MacRumors. ;)
liamkp
Sep 12, 09:29 AM
Does anybody know how it will fit in a last gen case?
wolfboy
Sep 30, 03:12 AM
Yes, I've bought a clear (smoked) tpu case on eBay. Stay away from the clear ones, they leave watermarks on the back. Get the patterned ones. Fitment is kind of loose on some sides but good temp case until something good comes out. I'm waiting on the incase slider myself, just wish it didn't cost 35 bucks for a piece of plastic!
Evangelion
Aug 29, 01:08 PM
Spam? No, just off topic. But all these posts about his one post being off topic? Now that I could consider spam.
like i said, repeating same off-topic thing in several threads is imo spam
like i said, repeating same off-topic thing in several threads is imo spam
No comments:
Post a Comment