ryantheredder
Sep 19, 03:15 PM
FWIW, the average size per minute of Apple's 720p trailers are 50MB. So a 120 minute movie would be around 6GB to download or about 2 hours on an 8Mb connection. Almost watchable in real time providing perfect network conditions.
ImAlex
Sep 13, 09:18 PM
Apple can design better than that. It will probably not look like that. Why? Because they do not want it to look exactly as the Nano as it would confuse people. That design does not make sense to me.
I think and hope they will make a new Newton, more a Apple PDA than a iPod with phone capabilities.
It is time for Apple to release a phone, but not just an iPod Phone. Look at the patent Apple made some days ago, it looks more like a PDA/Smartphone than phone which is great.
I think and hope they will make a new Newton, more a Apple PDA than a iPod with phone capabilities.
It is time for Apple to release a phone, but not just an iPod Phone. Look at the patent Apple made some days ago, it looks more like a PDA/Smartphone than phone which is great.
Hardtimes
Apr 20, 01:08 PM
Just don't go anywhere
Steve
Sent from my iphone
Steve
Sent from my iphone
fetchmebeers
Sep 12, 03:15 PM
I am so glad that I didnt sell my ipod. I would really be kicking myself if I had of jumped the gun....taking a hit on the price plus having to pony up money to essentially buy back the same ipod.
*whew wipes sweat
YEEEAHHHHSSS
i'm well content that apple couldn't have come up with anything OUT OF this league
*whew wipes sweat
YEEEAHHHHSSS
i'm well content that apple couldn't have come up with anything OUT OF this league
MacVault
Sep 19, 04:11 PM
As I stated in a few posts up I'm not that happy with the pricing of the iTunes Movies, but, if I were to buy any I would quickly run into a huge problem - STORAGE! I have an iBook with 60 GB drive and it's almost full from other stuff.
Apple should come out with a home storage network server with RAID, etc.
Apple should come out with a home storage network server with RAID, etc.
Tunster
Apr 19, 09:46 AM
Apple is starting to be less and less inovative. The iPhone UI hardly changes for the last 4 years. But hey, lets sue everybody.:rolleyes:
If it ain't broke, don't fix it. iOS 5 will fix anything that's trailing and then we'll see everyone follow Apple's footsteps again.
Wouldn't you be annoyed if someone took an essay of yours and copy/pasted it with a few tweaks? Same principal.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it. iOS 5 will fix anything that's trailing and then we'll see everyone follow Apple's footsteps again.
Wouldn't you be annoyed if someone took an essay of yours and copy/pasted it with a few tweaks? Same principal.
aiqw9182
Apr 16, 11:47 AM
You keep talking about a non-existent adapter that costs $10 and comparing mini-display port adapters that merely convert signal paths isn't even in the same realm as converting to an entirely different interface. In other words your 'adapter' prices are 100% BS and you know it.
Did you miss the USB to PS2 ports or are you just avoiding that? Are you also avoiding how I said it's too difficult for you to carry around an inch long adapter?
Don't tase me bro! :eek:
Seriously, you going to compare a demonstration with a professional mass storage array that isn't available to the public yet and which I said at the bottom of my last post is a perfect use for TB (i.e. with professional editing software) with the Lacie consumer grade 5200 RPM SLOW USB3 drive? Dude, you have to compare apples to apples. You're comparing a race car to a Chevette.... That neither proves nor disproves anything about the full capability of USB3. The ad on that box is marketing BS about the "interface" not the drive they're selling (which is a slow 5200 RPM SATA drive which all top out between 40-60MB/sec PERIOD, regardless whether they use SATA, USB3, Firewire 800 or Thunderbolt). Show me a 7200 RPM (or better yet a 10,000+ SCSI rated) drive connected to USB3 AND TB (or even FW800) and then compare their actual speeds. OR find an array that goes fast like the one Intel was using that also has USB3 on it and compare their actual speeds 1 to 1. Showing me Steak Diane on one plate and a hot dog on the other doesn't prove the cook who made the hot dog doesn't know how to cook. It simply proves he was given a hot dog to cook.LOL, the drive he was using WAS 7200-RPM so I'm not even going to bother reading the rest of this paragraph.
http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?id=10492
In reality, you need an actual hard drive test that makes sense not comparing a Porsche to a lawn tractor.... :rolleyes:
See above. :rolleyes:
No more than you assuming you're going to get a $10 USB3 adapter. At least my assumption is based on Firewire statistics and early adoption rates. Yours is based on dreaming.Your assumption is based on comparing two different technologies and assuming they will fare the same. My assumption was comparing ADAPTER prices. How expensive do you think adapters are? :rolleyes:
You can get them for super cheap if you know where to look.
I think the 5200 RPM 2.5" drive that came with my MBP capped out around 50MB/sec using a SATA II interface (or 450mbps). Does that prove my SATA chip set SUCKS? NO, IT DOES NOT. When I replaced it with a 7200 RPM Hitachi, it now caps out around 110MB/sec (or 880mbps, well above FW800's theoretical cap even). Even my PPC G4 gets 105MB/sec caps with its 1.5TB 7200 RPM Seagate Barracuda drives (and SATA does eat CPU as well; if I try to run two of them at the same time I still get a total of around 100MB/sec with the CPU pegged at 95-100%. The older PCI bus is also in the way. Thus it's not the SATA interface there that's the problem either, but you might think so if you make assumptions based only on one test number and no idea what's in the computer being used or any statistics about the CPU or Bus while its being used. Your YouTube videos comparisons are absurd in that regard. Cheap mass storage devices (like the Lacie) aren't made for performance. Show me TB making that same drive do over 100MB/sec. It won't happen.Once again, YOU ARE BASING THIS ON PRESENT DAY SPEEDS THAT ARE ACHIEVABLE. This isn't a discussion about current theoretical limits, it's about the limits of the future because that's where these technologies will actually matter. The fact is that when we move to SSD transfer speeds USB 3 will get demolished.
I never said any such thing. I said they won't pay a premium for Thunderbolt for every-day use. If you're just going to lie and change what I said, I won't bother replying anymore.
USB 3 won't be a premium over anything. It's going to be dirt cheap and a simple performance upgrade for everyone. It already is cheap for new computers and a pretty cheap add-on for existing ones; you cannot add TB to existing computers so there's another problem it has to contend with, especially trying to get a large user base in any reasonable length of time. The longer it takes to get a large installed user base, the longer the prices will stay high on any TB products. It's plainly obvious that TB is going to be a high-end niche product just like FW800, at least for the forseeable future. While Intel's demo is totally cool, it doesn't remotely represent the AVERAGE PC user in any shape or form. Most people aren't editing 4 simultaneous streams of 1080p video on a mega-buck professional high-speed drive array.
solar power readily
and Solar PV Power Systems
Advanced Solar Power Inc. is
solar power system that
1kw 1000w solar system solar
Commercial solar power systems
Starts Solar Power System for
Build Solar Power System
200w Home Solar Power System
Solar-Power-Systems
Portable Solar Power System
Ready to install a solar power
Reacent Post
Did you miss the USB to PS2 ports or are you just avoiding that? Are you also avoiding how I said it's too difficult for you to carry around an inch long adapter?
Don't tase me bro! :eek:
Seriously, you going to compare a demonstration with a professional mass storage array that isn't available to the public yet and which I said at the bottom of my last post is a perfect use for TB (i.e. with professional editing software) with the Lacie consumer grade 5200 RPM SLOW USB3 drive? Dude, you have to compare apples to apples. You're comparing a race car to a Chevette.... That neither proves nor disproves anything about the full capability of USB3. The ad on that box is marketing BS about the "interface" not the drive they're selling (which is a slow 5200 RPM SATA drive which all top out between 40-60MB/sec PERIOD, regardless whether they use SATA, USB3, Firewire 800 or Thunderbolt). Show me a 7200 RPM (or better yet a 10,000+ SCSI rated) drive connected to USB3 AND TB (or even FW800) and then compare their actual speeds. OR find an array that goes fast like the one Intel was using that also has USB3 on it and compare their actual speeds 1 to 1. Showing me Steak Diane on one plate and a hot dog on the other doesn't prove the cook who made the hot dog doesn't know how to cook. It simply proves he was given a hot dog to cook.LOL, the drive he was using WAS 7200-RPM so I'm not even going to bother reading the rest of this paragraph.
http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?id=10492
In reality, you need an actual hard drive test that makes sense not comparing a Porsche to a lawn tractor.... :rolleyes:
See above. :rolleyes:
No more than you assuming you're going to get a $10 USB3 adapter. At least my assumption is based on Firewire statistics and early adoption rates. Yours is based on dreaming.Your assumption is based on comparing two different technologies and assuming they will fare the same. My assumption was comparing ADAPTER prices. How expensive do you think adapters are? :rolleyes:
You can get them for super cheap if you know where to look.
I think the 5200 RPM 2.5" drive that came with my MBP capped out around 50MB/sec using a SATA II interface (or 450mbps). Does that prove my SATA chip set SUCKS? NO, IT DOES NOT. When I replaced it with a 7200 RPM Hitachi, it now caps out around 110MB/sec (or 880mbps, well above FW800's theoretical cap even). Even my PPC G4 gets 105MB/sec caps with its 1.5TB 7200 RPM Seagate Barracuda drives (and SATA does eat CPU as well; if I try to run two of them at the same time I still get a total of around 100MB/sec with the CPU pegged at 95-100%. The older PCI bus is also in the way. Thus it's not the SATA interface there that's the problem either, but you might think so if you make assumptions based only on one test number and no idea what's in the computer being used or any statistics about the CPU or Bus while its being used. Your YouTube videos comparisons are absurd in that regard. Cheap mass storage devices (like the Lacie) aren't made for performance. Show me TB making that same drive do over 100MB/sec. It won't happen.Once again, YOU ARE BASING THIS ON PRESENT DAY SPEEDS THAT ARE ACHIEVABLE. This isn't a discussion about current theoretical limits, it's about the limits of the future because that's where these technologies will actually matter. The fact is that when we move to SSD transfer speeds USB 3 will get demolished.
I never said any such thing. I said they won't pay a premium for Thunderbolt for every-day use. If you're just going to lie and change what I said, I won't bother replying anymore.
USB 3 won't be a premium over anything. It's going to be dirt cheap and a simple performance upgrade for everyone. It already is cheap for new computers and a pretty cheap add-on for existing ones; you cannot add TB to existing computers so there's another problem it has to contend with, especially trying to get a large user base in any reasonable length of time. The longer it takes to get a large installed user base, the longer the prices will stay high on any TB products. It's plainly obvious that TB is going to be a high-end niche product just like FW800, at least for the forseeable future. While Intel's demo is totally cool, it doesn't remotely represent the AVERAGE PC user in any shape or form. Most people aren't editing 4 simultaneous streams of 1080p video on a mega-buck professional high-speed drive array.
polyesterlester
Aug 31, 05:49 PM
I have a feeling Ted Stevens won't appreciate Apple's movie store. It'll take his staff weeks to send him an internet.
Funkymonk
Apr 19, 10:45 AM
as much as others "stole" from apple I bet apple "stole" just as much from other companies. funny how macrumors failed to mention that samsung may be counter suing because apple might have used some samsung tech without asking as well.
oh well life goes on. None of theses multi BILLION dollar companies have any soul, they are just cold, calculating, heartless businesses. And for all the apple fanatics here, yes that INCLUDES apple. :o
oh well life goes on. None of theses multi BILLION dollar companies have any soul, they are just cold, calculating, heartless businesses. And for all the apple fanatics here, yes that INCLUDES apple. :o
aprilfools
Aug 31, 02:38 PM
Apple is buying MicroSoft
Warbrain
Sep 26, 08:34 AM
Agrhhh... why does Apple have to be so stupid? Do they not know that there are vast areas here in the US where Cingular doesn't support?
Why the hell can't they just sell an unlocked phone and just let us choose providers that actually have service where we live? I really hope someone finds a way to hack these phones and make them carrier-independant! :mad:
There are vast areas that Verizon and Sprint don't cover in the US, too. It's that way with every single cell phone company in the US.
Apple would have to make at least 2 different phones for that to work. There are two primary cellular networks in the US: GSM and CDMA. If Apple makes just a GSM phone, they're also making a phone that can be used in almost every other country in the world. Europe and Asia are the real cell phone markets, not the US.
Why the hell can't they just sell an unlocked phone and just let us choose providers that actually have service where we live? I really hope someone finds a way to hack these phones and make them carrier-independant! :mad:
There are vast areas that Verizon and Sprint don't cover in the US, too. It's that way with every single cell phone company in the US.
Apple would have to make at least 2 different phones for that to work. There are two primary cellular networks in the US: GSM and CDMA. If Apple makes just a GSM phone, they're also making a phone that can be used in almost every other country in the world. Europe and Asia are the real cell phone markets, not the US.
apolloa
Apr 20, 10:19 AM
LOL at everyone freaking out!! So Google can take pictures of your house, back garden, car etc and post them for the entire world to see without asking you first, Facebook would sell your soul for profit if it could, and your worried about Apple tracking your phone, most likely for it's Find My Phone feature? hahahaha.
I suggest the majority of you cancel all your services, never have an internet, car, bike, phone, anything, never leave your house, in fact don't have a house and live in a cardboard box, that way you may not need to worry about the way your personal information is handled without your knowledge! Then again you'll still be recorded somewhere and nearly every movement you make caught on a camera.
I suggest the majority of you cancel all your services, never have an internet, car, bike, phone, anything, never leave your house, in fact don't have a house and live in a cardboard box, that way you may not need to worry about the way your personal information is handled without your knowledge! Then again you'll still be recorded somewhere and nearly every movement you make caught on a camera.
toddybody
Mar 22, 03:25 PM
Hey. A boy can dream, right?
Remember when Apple put the latest and greatest GPUs in their computers? /looks back to the blue and white G3 keynote
Im with you dude...I see NO reason that apple couldnt pony up for a legitimate GPU. Especially since the 27iMac has alot of pixels to push...heck, the base GPU should have a GB of frame buffer at least. Ahhh, base 6850, 150.00 upgrade gets you a 6950 :D
Remember when Apple put the latest and greatest GPUs in their computers? /looks back to the blue and white G3 keynote
Im with you dude...I see NO reason that apple couldnt pony up for a legitimate GPU. Especially since the 27iMac has alot of pixels to push...heck, the base GPU should have a GB of frame buffer at least. Ahhh, base 6850, 150.00 upgrade gets you a 6950 :D
direzz
Aug 28, 04:15 PM
On time? The other companies just announced, and are not actually shipping. Give apple time, I'm sure they'll be shipping before the others. :-)
yea, with tons of problems to the machines.
i love apple, but everytime i buy one of there laptops, they suck!
yea, with tons of problems to the machines.
i love apple, but everytime i buy one of there laptops, they suck!
mechamac
Sep 19, 03:17 PM
I bought The Ladykillers and got the movie in 40 minutes. I watched it on my iMac (last Intel-model, 17") and the quality was really great. Might be slightly softer than DVD quality, but color, detail, everything is really sharp. Not at all like the TV shows. Chapter skipping is great....no complaints, really. I doubt I'll be buying many movies, but I'll certainly buy again when the selection improves.
My Netflix account stays, though.
My Netflix account stays, though.
jessica.
Mar 23, 04:39 PM
Funny how people are waffle so easily when it comes to censorship.
Mac Fly (film)
Sep 14, 10:03 PM
one of the best predictions i have heard to date...
Why thank you!
Why thank you!
LagunaSol
Apr 4, 01:01 PM
In Virginia Tech for instance there was heroics. The professor held his body agains the door and prevented the gunmen from entering and killing more people. The bullets passed through the door and killed the professor but he was a hero Or does he need a gun to be a hero?
"Heroics???" Who cares about heroics if you're dead??? This isn't a video game. The obvious best-case situation would have been a student pulling a pistol from his backpack and shooting the shooter in the head after the first couple of murders.
Tell you what - you hold your body against the door, I'll use my gun. :rolleyes:
There would have been no preventing that guy from killing. Sure he might have been killed. But he would have killed before people got their guns out to shoot back. And If there had been more people carrying guns there likely would have been cross fire from incompetent gun toters.
Wow, your logic processor needs calibration. Of course he would have killed some. Would he have killed that many? NO.
And notice I keep saying "armed and trained." You don't buy a handgun at the 7-11 and throw it in your pack. To use your quote, "It doesn't work that way."
It is a fantasy story you concoct. But keep dreaming.
I think the only fantasy here is the one playing out in your head.
Perhaps someday you'll get to be the hero. Lets hope you don't wet yourself in the process.
Based on your commentary, I'm sure I'm far more prepared than you. (And being a "hero" has nothing to do with it.)
"Heroics???" Who cares about heroics if you're dead??? This isn't a video game. The obvious best-case situation would have been a student pulling a pistol from his backpack and shooting the shooter in the head after the first couple of murders.
Tell you what - you hold your body against the door, I'll use my gun. :rolleyes:
There would have been no preventing that guy from killing. Sure he might have been killed. But he would have killed before people got their guns out to shoot back. And If there had been more people carrying guns there likely would have been cross fire from incompetent gun toters.
Wow, your logic processor needs calibration. Of course he would have killed some. Would he have killed that many? NO.
And notice I keep saying "armed and trained." You don't buy a handgun at the 7-11 and throw it in your pack. To use your quote, "It doesn't work that way."
It is a fantasy story you concoct. But keep dreaming.
I think the only fantasy here is the one playing out in your head.
Perhaps someday you'll get to be the hero. Lets hope you don't wet yourself in the process.
Based on your commentary, I'm sure I'm far more prepared than you. (And being a "hero" has nothing to do with it.)
Sodner
Apr 20, 10:51 AM
Eh. Not that big of a deal as far as I'm concerned. It's a tracking file on my phone copied to my computer. I have plenty more to worry about like bank or CC info then my exact location at a given moment.
Hey everybody, I'm at work in Cranberry, PA right now! :eek:
Hey everybody, I'm at work in Cranberry, PA right now! :eek:
Ryth
Apr 25, 07:35 PM
But, I didn't "jump" immediately - I always wait a couple of months to see what issues develop with the product line (the 17" range seems to have some graphics issues evidently, which seem to be resolved now) - BUT, with this rumor, do I plump down $4k for a maxed-out MBP now or wait until this new case design ?!?!?!
I would wait. Considering Lion is coming out also, you might as well wait for the next refresh which I'm sure will be optimized for Lion.
I would wait. Considering Lion is coming out also, you might as well wait for the next refresh which I'm sure will be optimized for Lion.
Dr.Gargoyle
Sep 10, 12:38 PM
Gotcha! That would get old quick, at least the old apps would work. It is kind of cool now that a G3 can still run Tiger. Oh well, can't have everything! :)
I doubt that 10.6 will run on G4. CS4 will probably run very sluggish on a Quad G5.
I doubt that 10.6 will run on G4. CS4 will probably run very sluggish on a Quad G5.
YEMandy
Sep 12, 03:35 PM
o dude ;)
that was really, really reassuring and comforting!!! thank you :D
well yes i might try that, but even if my attempt failed i won't bother to manage to get the new one, cause as you pointed out, there obviously aren't that much of major differences, as most of us seem to agree upon.....
anyway,,,
right now i'm in korea, and it's 5:30 in teh morning... had to stay up all night to get the live broadcast.... it was very enthralling and stuff, all was good except that it'd hurt my productivity today.... haha
well just saying!
Take it back!! They will give you another one with NO questions asked!! See upper posts!
that was really, really reassuring and comforting!!! thank you :D
well yes i might try that, but even if my attempt failed i won't bother to manage to get the new one, cause as you pointed out, there obviously aren't that much of major differences, as most of us seem to agree upon.....
anyway,,,
right now i'm in korea, and it's 5:30 in teh morning... had to stay up all night to get the live broadcast.... it was very enthralling and stuff, all was good except that it'd hurt my productivity today.... haha
well just saying!
Take it back!! They will give you another one with NO questions asked!! See upper posts!
MacRumors
Sep 9, 01:36 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
MacCentral posted (http://www.macworld.com/2006/09/firstlooks/imacbench/index.php) a first look at the new Core 2 Duo iMac along with some early benchmarks.
The new iMacs which were released on Wednesday (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060906091309.shtml) incorporate the latest Core 2 Duo processor from Intel. The Core 2 Duo represents the continuation of the Core Duo line which first made its appearance in Apple computers in January. Intel has maintained that the new chips would provide roughly 20% improvement in performance.
MacCentral tested the new 17" 2GHz iMac and 20" 2.16GHz iMac and compared them to the previous 20" 2GHz Core Duo and the 2.66GHz Mac Pro.
The most direct comparison between the two processors comes between the 17" 2GHz Core 2 Duo iMac and the 20" 2GHz Core Duo iMac. The overall score was 10% better in the new model while the individual tests showed gains up to 20%.
MacCentral posted (http://www.macworld.com/2006/09/firstlooks/imacbench/index.php) a first look at the new Core 2 Duo iMac along with some early benchmarks.
The new iMacs which were released on Wednesday (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060906091309.shtml) incorporate the latest Core 2 Duo processor from Intel. The Core 2 Duo represents the continuation of the Core Duo line which first made its appearance in Apple computers in January. Intel has maintained that the new chips would provide roughly 20% improvement in performance.
MacCentral tested the new 17" 2GHz iMac and 20" 2.16GHz iMac and compared them to the previous 20" 2GHz Core Duo and the 2.66GHz Mac Pro.
The most direct comparison between the two processors comes between the 17" 2GHz Core 2 Duo iMac and the 20" 2GHz Core Duo iMac. The overall score was 10% better in the new model while the individual tests showed gains up to 20%.
mromero
Sep 14, 05:02 PM
1.Aperture 2.0
2.MacBook Pro w/ Intel Merom
2.MacBook Pro w/ Intel Merom
0 comments:
Post a Comment