Hellhammer
Apr 24, 06:56 AM
My flat mate has one of those new Fusion based Netbooks. Seems pretty good. Could see the next gen of them in an Air. Considering getting one myself when I find one not made by Acer.
AMD E-350's CPU is noticeably worse than the C2Ds in MBAs. It is better than Atom but can't fight against Intel's premium CPUs, especially if we take Sandy Bridge into consideration. The IGP is wonderful though.
Llano will hopefully change this since Zacate is meant for netbook and other cheap laptops. Llano will hopefully bring low-voltage chips meant for ultraportables like MBA. So far there are no news though.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4023/the-brazos-performance-preview-amd-e350-benchmarked
AMD E-350's CPU is noticeably worse than the C2Ds in MBAs. It is better than Atom but can't fight against Intel's premium CPUs, especially if we take Sandy Bridge into consideration. The IGP is wonderful though.
Llano will hopefully change this since Zacate is meant for netbook and other cheap laptops. Llano will hopefully bring low-voltage chips meant for ultraportables like MBA. So far there are no news though.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4023/the-brazos-performance-preview-amd-e350-benchmarked
Rivix
Mar 23, 07:57 PM
Hopefully prices won't go up any. But I shouldn't count on it.
OllyW
Mar 29, 01:06 PM
He said he would be happy with 1% of the TOTAL MOBILE PHONE MARKET SHARE, not just SMARTPHONES!
What % of the total do Apple actually have?
The latest figure I could see was 1.5%, not that much over the target the Steve set.
Don't read the % figure of the Smartphone market as being the target Steve was after!
They had 2.9% of the worldwide mobile phone market for 2010.
http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=1543014
What % of the total do Apple actually have?
The latest figure I could see was 1.5%, not that much over the target the Steve set.
Don't read the % figure of the Smartphone market as being the target Steve was after!
They had 2.9% of the worldwide mobile phone market for 2010.
http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=1543014
foo10
Sep 9, 05:13 AM
I was thinkin of buying a C2D MBP 17" + 23" ACD, but no i've been thinking of going for a 24" iMac and later for the cheapest Macbook. It will be still some time thought, this G5 iMac is still running good for me. Maybe when Leopard is released.
ezekielrage_99
Sep 11, 12:02 AM
Well here at work I could replace 4 PC draughting workstations with a Conroe based system. We already have 23" monitors so we are not going to purchase iMacs, and while Mac Pro's are nice they are too expensive for us... A $1500 headless system would do wonders! (and yes the mini is too little).
If Apple cannot release such a system we will have to continue purchasing PCs... :(
What I was getting at that I hear people aren't getting a Mac Pro (which is very quick) and a waiting for the Kentsfield or Clovertown Mac Pros which haven't even been considered to b released yet.
If Apple cannot release such a system we will have to continue purchasing PCs... :(
What I was getting at that I hear people aren't getting a Mac Pro (which is very quick) and a waiting for the Kentsfield or Clovertown Mac Pros which haven't even been considered to b released yet.
jacob1201
Sep 12, 04:17 PM
will search and quick scroll be in my ipod's next update?
I've updated the software... games work, quick scroll works... but no search :(... unless I'm just blind and am missing something. Seems like it should be there, since everything else seems to be, right? Any thoughts?
I've updated the software... games work, quick scroll works... but no search :(... unless I'm just blind and am missing something. Seems like it should be there, since everything else seems to be, right? Any thoughts?
DJMastaWes
Aug 29, 07:34 AM
C2D MBPs available for ordering now!
Lol.
Store is still up, i don't think today is the day.
Lol.
Store is still up, i don't think today is the day.
fetchmebeers
Sep 12, 03:10 PM
laaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaame
although...secretly I'm happy, because I don't want to see my 5G be outdated so quick...I just bought it!
YES, another buddy who feel the same.............................
although...secretly I'm happy, because I don't want to see my 5G be outdated so quick...I just bought it!
YES, another buddy who feel the same.............................
snebes
Apr 30, 02:59 PM
I will be happy to upgrade to this. Real question is, with the wide screen 27", do I truly need me 25.5" 2nd monitor any longer...
mac-er
Oct 12, 07:56 PM
http://www.chicagotribune.com/media/photo/2006-10/25865863.jpg
Is that Omarosa helping Oprah and Bono?
Is that Omarosa helping Oprah and Bono?
Str8edgepunker
Apr 25, 04:28 PM
Please no insane 15.6" screens with a 16:9 resolution ratio. I don't care whatever else happens.
jz1492
Nov 13, 06:26 PM
Ah, but Apple won't let us sell it in our own store!
I guess you could say "There's a droid for that", but following my analogy it would be just like a swap meet with a big seller taking up the central aisles.
But that doesn't mean that now you can reach everyone. The Android swap meet excludes BlackBerry, Palm, Symbian, WinMo and Apple customers. You end up with a smaller customer base, with such a diverse set of user needs that you end up pulling your hair out trying to meet every Android phone manufacturer's device specs. :confused:
I guess you could say "There's a droid for that", but following my analogy it would be just like a swap meet with a big seller taking up the central aisles.
But that doesn't mean that now you can reach everyone. The Android swap meet excludes BlackBerry, Palm, Symbian, WinMo and Apple customers. You end up with a smaller customer base, with such a diverse set of user needs that you end up pulling your hair out trying to meet every Android phone manufacturer's device specs. :confused:
dwman
Apr 4, 11:54 AM
The security guard just saved CA taxpayers a nice chunk of change.
briansolomon
Sep 12, 02:29 PM
I very much would like to have seen the prices remain the same and include an AC adapter again.
calculus
Oct 12, 01:07 PM
I'll probably come of sounding like a jerk and opening a HUGE can of worms with this, BUT...
I'm glad somebody else was thinking what I was thinking! Why do we constantly have to place a line between men and women, black and white, American and everyone else. If we actually want equality and unity and all those wonderful things, I think it's about time we stop dilineating between groups of people.
It can't be both ways... if women/minorities want equality in the work place, or government, or in society as a whole, there can't also be inequality in the world when it comes to things like this... men and women, black and white, straight and gay - they have to be equal across the board, or not at all. We can't have it both ways.
That said, bravo to Apple, U2, and anyone else involved here. Anytime you can use your power and influence to raise funds and awareness - no matter the alterior motives - it's a good thing.
Exactly, why just limit this to people with AIDS. That discriminates against people who are healthy.
I'm glad somebody else was thinking what I was thinking! Why do we constantly have to place a line between men and women, black and white, American and everyone else. If we actually want equality and unity and all those wonderful things, I think it's about time we stop dilineating between groups of people.
It can't be both ways... if women/minorities want equality in the work place, or government, or in society as a whole, there can't also be inequality in the world when it comes to things like this... men and women, black and white, straight and gay - they have to be equal across the board, or not at all. We can't have it both ways.
That said, bravo to Apple, U2, and anyone else involved here. Anytime you can use your power and influence to raise funds and awareness - no matter the alterior motives - it's a good thing.
Exactly, why just limit this to people with AIDS. That discriminates against people who are healthy.
diamond.g
May 3, 12:50 PM
DP 1.2 has up to 17.28 Gbps.
TB has two 10 Gbps channels.
Is TB able to have both channels send (or receive) at the same time? I am seeing that Wiki says it has 20GB/s of total BW, but that would imply that you can send data one way at 20GB/s which I didn't think was possible.
TB, according to what I understand about it, doesn't have the bandwith (single direction) to support DP 1.2.
TB has two 10 Gbps channels.
Is TB able to have both channels send (or receive) at the same time? I am seeing that Wiki says it has 20GB/s of total BW, but that would imply that you can send data one way at 20GB/s which I didn't think was possible.
TB, according to what I understand about it, doesn't have the bandwith (single direction) to support DP 1.2.
habermas
Mar 23, 04:30 PM
What's the idea of DUI checkpoints anyway? Can't police officers just pull over drivers they suspect of DUI if they catch them while on regular patrol? That's how it works here at least. Much less predictable and it negates the utility of the apps in question..
MagnusVonMagnum
Apr 16, 11:21 AM
God forbid you carry around an inch long adapter in your laptop bag. Is that too much for you?
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.
LOL, are you kidding me bro? Do you think USB 3 peaks out at it's max 5 Gbps? YOU are the one dreaming if you believe that. Here's some more evidence for your FUD:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCz_c_rDAXw
USB 3 would completely choke in that situation let alone in a simply hard drive speed comparison. Give me a break. Here's another example for you to look at for some REAL WORLD USB 3 speeds:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrtwtSjzjZI
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.
In reality with USB 3 you get about 480 Megabits as opposed to the promised 5 Gpbs meaning Thunderbolt will be even faster than two times.
In reality, you need an actual hard drive test that makes sense not comparing a Porsche to a lawn tractor.... :rolleyes:
So you are just ASSUMING that they will cost $250 more than USB 3 drives.
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.
LOL, words can't describe how wrong you are. You think HDD speeds cap out at 480 Mbps? Maybe in your 'practical world' where you enjoy using inferior
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.
Your 'practical world' when you were just talking about how no one will pay a premium for USB 3.
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.
I have NO problem with TB technology or its usefulness in certain applications. I do contend that most people aren't going to give a crap about it one way or the other since their computers will not have it or need it for their everyday uses. More to the point, most computers (save maybe those from Apple) will have ALSO have USB3, allowing the user to make the best possible choices for their needs. USB3 will not fail or go away simply because it is a cheap upgrade to USB2 that is fully backwards compatible. Computers will have it just for that reason alone even if the user doesn't make good use of it.
IF TB ever achieves mass acceptance, it will be years into the future. It takes time to build a user base on a totally new technology. USB3 is a simple dump and replace and still works with everything USB2. TB works with NOTHING that already exists (save a few Mini-display port monitors and that's only because it carries Mini-display port video signals). The fact that Intel plans to do USB3 alongside TB on their next chipset shows even they understand that TB is going to be high-end/niche product for some time to come.
I have said in the past that IF Intel had used the USB3 style connector and essentially had USB compatibility + MORE bandwidth THEN they might start appearing on everything. But they chose instead to use a connector that is hardly on anything (but newer Macs) and that isn't much different than starting over with a totally new connector and no compatibility with anything (outside breakout boxes that are essentially PCI cards in a box). When it comes down to it, TB is basically the entire PCIe bus on a single external connector.
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.
LOL, are you kidding me bro? Do you think USB 3 peaks out at it's max 5 Gbps? YOU are the one dreaming if you believe that. Here's some more evidence for your FUD:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCz_c_rDAXw
USB 3 would completely choke in that situation let alone in a simply hard drive speed comparison. Give me a break. Here's another example for you to look at for some REAL WORLD USB 3 speeds:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrtwtSjzjZI
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.
In reality with USB 3 you get about 480 Megabits as opposed to the promised 5 Gpbs meaning Thunderbolt will be even faster than two times.
In reality, you need an actual hard drive test that makes sense not comparing a Porsche to a lawn tractor.... :rolleyes:
So you are just ASSUMING that they will cost $250 more than USB 3 drives.
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.
LOL, words can't describe how wrong you are. You think HDD speeds cap out at 480 Mbps? Maybe in your 'practical world' where you enjoy using inferior
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.
Your 'practical world' when you were just talking about how no one will pay a premium for USB 3.
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.
I have NO problem with TB technology or its usefulness in certain applications. I do contend that most people aren't going to give a crap about it one way or the other since their computers will not have it or need it for their everyday uses. More to the point, most computers (save maybe those from Apple) will have ALSO have USB3, allowing the user to make the best possible choices for their needs. USB3 will not fail or go away simply because it is a cheap upgrade to USB2 that is fully backwards compatible. Computers will have it just for that reason alone even if the user doesn't make good use of it.
IF TB ever achieves mass acceptance, it will be years into the future. It takes time to build a user base on a totally new technology. USB3 is a simple dump and replace and still works with everything USB2. TB works with NOTHING that already exists (save a few Mini-display port monitors and that's only because it carries Mini-display port video signals). The fact that Intel plans to do USB3 alongside TB on their next chipset shows even they understand that TB is going to be high-end/niche product for some time to come.
I have said in the past that IF Intel had used the USB3 style connector and essentially had USB compatibility + MORE bandwidth THEN they might start appearing on everything. But they chose instead to use a connector that is hardly on anything (but newer Macs) and that isn't much different than starting over with a totally new connector and no compatibility with anything (outside breakout boxes that are essentially PCI cards in a box). When it comes down to it, TB is basically the entire PCIe bus on a single external connector.
loyrun
Mar 23, 05:55 PM
you don't think a web app will pop up for this the second these apps are removed from the store?
***I am 100% against drunk driving, if you drive drunk you are ignorant and should be put in jail. period.
***I am 100% against drunk driving, if you drive drunk you are ignorant and should be put in jail. period.
shartypants
May 3, 11:09 AM
That's amazing, leave it to Apple to do something this cool when they didn't have to. Now if they would just have two thunderbolt ports on their laptops!! :)
Squire
Sep 5, 06:16 AM
If anyone at Apple HQs is listening, please give us a revved up/priced down MBP. Merom + 160 GB/7200 rpm hdd at $1999 would be sweet. I don't care to watch movies on anything less than a 50" screen, and I sure as hell am not moved to tears by an 8GB nano that is priced at 75% of a regular iPod. C'mon Apple, it's not too late!
If they release MacBook Pros, I wonder if the top end models will come with a Blu-ray option. I know people have dismissed this before but I just noticed that Sony has released "The world's first Blu-Ray disc enabled notebook." Will the 17" MBP be next?
-Squire
If they release MacBook Pros, I wonder if the top end models will come with a Blu-ray option. I know people have dismissed this before but I just noticed that Sony has released "The world's first Blu-Ray disc enabled notebook." Will the 17" MBP be next?
-Squire
jemmX
Sep 10, 09:15 AM
Predictions ...
MBP 20" inch (1920 x 1200)
Quad-core
4gb ram
Dual HD = 250gb 7200rpm Raid 0
Superdrive HD w/lightscribe
iSight HD
Audio Digital & analog in/out
Vram 512MB GDDR 4 (PCI Xpress, HDMI + DVI + TV)
3 - USB 2 / 2 - FW 400 / 2 - FW 800 / 1 - Sata
Dual Ethernet
PCMCIA
Leopard
:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D
MBP 20" inch (1920 x 1200)
Quad-core
4gb ram
Dual HD = 250gb 7200rpm Raid 0
Superdrive HD w/lightscribe
iSight HD
Audio Digital & analog in/out
Vram 512MB GDDR 4 (PCI Xpress, HDMI + DVI + TV)
3 - USB 2 / 2 - FW 400 / 2 - FW 800 / 1 - Sata
Dual Ethernet
PCMCIA
Leopard
:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D
theelysium
May 3, 01:05 PM
I think there is an error on the iMac performance page.
It shows:
For i5
283912
Then for i7
283913
Shouldn't it show faster performance for the i7?:confused:
I sent an email to someone who works on their website asking them to double check that.:D
It shows:
For i5
283912
Then for i7
283913
Shouldn't it show faster performance for the i7?:confused:
I sent an email to someone who works on their website asking them to double check that.:D
mytdave
Apr 20, 11:19 AM
'course you all know this is a feature, right? There are lots of social or other apps you can get to give you cute info about where you've been, maybe an exercise routine, or location based data for pictures, etc. The info has to be recorded in a file somewhere!
If you're paranoid, just delete the file from your computer backups and/or encrypt your iPhone. Tah dah!
If you're paranoid, just delete the file from your computer backups and/or encrypt your iPhone. Tah dah!
