AaronEdwards
Apr 27, 08:25 AM
5. Can Apple locate me based on my geo-tagged Wi-Fi hotspot and cell tower data?
justin bieber never say never
justin bieber never say never dvd release date. today, at thought Justin; today, at thought Justin. MacBoobsPro. Jul 20, 09:17 AM
justin bieber never say never
Justin Bieber: Never Say Never
Justin Bieber Never Say Never
DVD release of quot;Never Say
Justin Bieber#39;s “Never Say
justin bieber never say never
econgeek
Apr 12, 08:40 PM
Migrated to the new thread.
daver969
Sep 13, 11:05 AM
A bit pointless given that no software utilises the extra cores yet. But nice to know, I guess.
I'm still getting used to having two cores in my laptop!
What I couldn't understand - I couldn't see it explained in the article - why is the dual core Mac Pro (i.e. with current Mac Pro with 2 cores disabled) faster in so many tests than the 4 core Mac Pro.
I think part of the reason so many people seem to be hung up on the "software doesn't utilize multiple cores" mantra is because benchmarks tend to test only one software component at a time. If a given app isn't multithreaded, then it doesn't benefit from multiple cores in these tests. But that doesn't mean that multiple cores don't affect the overall system speed.
What we need is some kind of a super benchmark: How fast is my computer when I'm watching a quicktime stream of Steve demoing the latest insanely great stuff, while ripping my CD collection to iTunes, while surfing complex Cnet.com pages (w/animation), and compiling the latest version of my Java app, every once in a while flipping over to Dashboard (dashboard seems to take up a lot of system resources every time I invoke it, not just on startup).
At this point I would rather push towards more cores than more raw speed in a single core, since I don't tend to wait on any single process. If something is taking a long time, like loading a page or compiling code, I switch to something else and come back later. I would much rather have the whole system retain its responsive feel than have one app finish its task a few seconds quicker.
I'm still getting used to having two cores in my laptop!
What I couldn't understand - I couldn't see it explained in the article - why is the dual core Mac Pro (i.e. with current Mac Pro with 2 cores disabled) faster in so many tests than the 4 core Mac Pro.
I think part of the reason so many people seem to be hung up on the "software doesn't utilize multiple cores" mantra is because benchmarks tend to test only one software component at a time. If a given app isn't multithreaded, then it doesn't benefit from multiple cores in these tests. But that doesn't mean that multiple cores don't affect the overall system speed.
What we need is some kind of a super benchmark: How fast is my computer when I'm watching a quicktime stream of Steve demoing the latest insanely great stuff, while ripping my CD collection to iTunes, while surfing complex Cnet.com pages (w/animation), and compiling the latest version of my Java app, every once in a while flipping over to Dashboard (dashboard seems to take up a lot of system resources every time I invoke it, not just on startup).
At this point I would rather push towards more cores than more raw speed in a single core, since I don't tend to wait on any single process. If something is taking a long time, like loading a page or compiling code, I switch to something else and come back later. I would much rather have the whole system retain its responsive feel than have one app finish its task a few seconds quicker.
marksman
Mar 31, 04:57 PM
Only if you do not add products like the iPad and the iPod Touch. In other words, if you throw out 50% of the iOS products.
I would add I never understand the comparison of Smartphones running Android to smartphones running IOS.
Neither Google or Apple sell their phone operating systems, and the Android spectrum is made up of 50 handsets from 10 different manufacturers who are in direct competition with each other. They are not one big group working together to take on Apple. It makes absolutely zero sense to make that kind of comparison.
It is just as weird as loping off iPod and iPad IOS users...
If people want to compare smartphones, then compare actual sales of individual smartphones, each which only use one OS. People should not draw meaningless lines in the sand lumping all android based handsets together, because they are not together other than they run android. They might as well compare black phones to white phones.
I imagine if you made a chart of the top selling smartphones in the last 5 years, it would consist of the iPhone 4, the iPhone 3GS, the iPhone 3G and the iPhone.
Why not group smartphones by what kind of graphics chip they have or what type of memory chip they use? The OS is irrelevant. Nobody in the smartphone business is directly making money off any of these oses, it is a stupid way to categorize smart phones.
Of course it happens because if they didn't lump them together it would look absurd with Apple totally dominating the smart phone market with their latest phone every year while 100 android commodity phones all have tiny market shares just to get replaced by the next one.
How does HTC running android OS benefit or relate to a Motorola phone running android? It does not, at all.
I would add I never understand the comparison of Smartphones running Android to smartphones running IOS.
Neither Google or Apple sell their phone operating systems, and the Android spectrum is made up of 50 handsets from 10 different manufacturers who are in direct competition with each other. They are not one big group working together to take on Apple. It makes absolutely zero sense to make that kind of comparison.
It is just as weird as loping off iPod and iPad IOS users...
If people want to compare smartphones, then compare actual sales of individual smartphones, each which only use one OS. People should not draw meaningless lines in the sand lumping all android based handsets together, because they are not together other than they run android. They might as well compare black phones to white phones.
I imagine if you made a chart of the top selling smartphones in the last 5 years, it would consist of the iPhone 4, the iPhone 3GS, the iPhone 3G and the iPhone.
Why not group smartphones by what kind of graphics chip they have or what type of memory chip they use? The OS is irrelevant. Nobody in the smartphone business is directly making money off any of these oses, it is a stupid way to categorize smart phones.
Of course it happens because if they didn't lump them together it would look absurd with Apple totally dominating the smart phone market with their latest phone every year while 100 android commodity phones all have tiny market shares just to get replaced by the next one.
How does HTC running android OS benefit or relate to a Motorola phone running android? It does not, at all.
bedifferent
Apr 10, 10:42 PM
I guess there's a lot of drama among the industry about Apple's refusal to release any kind of road map for FCP, not unlike their other products, and apparently a lot of people are starting to jump ship to Adobe's offerings. Everyone is pretty worried about this new overhaul because the guy who botched iMovie is the guy now in charge of FCP. I'm not into video editing, and I've never never used FCP or any product like it, but after hearing about all the drama and excitement surrounding this new overhaul I'm pretty stoked to see what happens.
My friend, who is a documentary film maker, was hired by Apple as a designer working with FCP engineers. In the past, we had differing views on FCP; I believed Apple was dropping it as well as other pro-sumer based products while she thought they wouldn't.
After recently speaking, and w/o breaking her NDA, she said she's disappointed. The project managers and engineers squabble a lot, and the designers (all almost film-makers and editors) aren't getting much input. According to her, Apple needs to fire the management and instate those focused on bringing the product to a new pro-sumer level. There appears to be a lot of mixed reviews, and that (as like Aperture) FCP is an attempt to bridge consumer and prosumer engines creating a big mess.
We'll see.
The guy who 'botched' iMovie is the same person that created Final Cut and continues to work on Final Cut. Randy Ubillos has been the head of Apple's video editing suites/applications for as long as I can remember.
�and according to those close to FCP development, therein lies the issue...
My friend, who is a documentary film maker, was hired by Apple as a designer working with FCP engineers. In the past, we had differing views on FCP; I believed Apple was dropping it as well as other pro-sumer based products while she thought they wouldn't.
After recently speaking, and w/o breaking her NDA, she said she's disappointed. The project managers and engineers squabble a lot, and the designers (all almost film-makers and editors) aren't getting much input. According to her, Apple needs to fire the management and instate those focused on bringing the product to a new pro-sumer level. There appears to be a lot of mixed reviews, and that (as like Aperture) FCP is an attempt to bridge consumer and prosumer engines creating a big mess.
We'll see.
The guy who 'botched' iMovie is the same person that created Final Cut and continues to work on Final Cut. Randy Ubillos has been the head of Apple's video editing suites/applications for as long as I can remember.
�and according to those close to FCP development, therein lies the issue...
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?
jephrey
Jul 14, 11:47 PM
I assume that the PS move is due to heat. That thing generates heat, and if it can vent in a different location or through a different air channel than the processors, the I think that's good... And 2 drive bays is effin spectacular. I myself am fine with 1, but if I can get a bracket and put a couple HDs in that spot then cool. It'd be cool if apple made it usable that way. I would sure like more bays, but just having that real estate for them, and a solution to cleanly mount them would be nice.
Jephrey
Jephrey
diamond.g
Apr 11, 02:38 PM
snip...
I think it is very telling that last week (http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9215598/Clorox_cleans_out_BlackBerries_in_favor_of_iPhones_Android_devices?taxonomyId=154&pageNumber=1) when Clorox CIO offered 2000 Clorox employees the option to switch off Blackberry and get an iPhone, Android or Win Phone 7 device on the company's dime to replace their Blackberry device, that 92% of those 2000 employees chose a 10-month-old iPhone 4, with only 6% choosing Android, and 2% choosing WP7. Google would have you believe that people prefer Android. The truth of the matter is that the people who don't care about having a smartphone or not just choose the best "free phone" or BOGO option that the carrier offers -- if that option happens to be Android, then sure Android commands a greater market share of the growing smartphone market. Those customers will never care what their mobile OS is -- they were just looking to get what they could for free (or cheap). Its like asking somebody if they would prefer the Honda or Hyundai -- most would prefer the Honda, but many may settle for the Hyundai if it is cheaper. But when you take cost out of the equation then the story changes. The moral of that story is that Apple needs a cheaper entry point for an iOS smartphone if they want to command market share and especially to put their phones in the hands of more teenagers.
I don't think that's the market Apple wants. They already have the #1 selling smart phone. They make more profit than all competitors combined off of the iPhone. The Cell phone market is very fluid and Apple knows it just has to keep producing the coolest and more desired phone and they will always have a decent share of the market and make tons of money.
in the mean time, Moto, Samsung, HTC, LG and others all battle it out with the same OS and dropping prices to get market share. A race to the bottom strategy that I'm not sure will last forever.
All Apple needs to do is keep the "coolness" coming. Reward us with nice iOS updates and keep us happy with the best support in the market.
That is what the 49$ 3GS is for...
My buddy just got one the other day. Why cause it was 49 bucks...
I think it is very telling that last week (http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9215598/Clorox_cleans_out_BlackBerries_in_favor_of_iPhones_Android_devices?taxonomyId=154&pageNumber=1) when Clorox CIO offered 2000 Clorox employees the option to switch off Blackberry and get an iPhone, Android or Win Phone 7 device on the company's dime to replace their Blackberry device, that 92% of those 2000 employees chose a 10-month-old iPhone 4, with only 6% choosing Android, and 2% choosing WP7. Google would have you believe that people prefer Android. The truth of the matter is that the people who don't care about having a smartphone or not just choose the best "free phone" or BOGO option that the carrier offers -- if that option happens to be Android, then sure Android commands a greater market share of the growing smartphone market. Those customers will never care what their mobile OS is -- they were just looking to get what they could for free (or cheap). Its like asking somebody if they would prefer the Honda or Hyundai -- most would prefer the Honda, but many may settle for the Hyundai if it is cheaper. But when you take cost out of the equation then the story changes. The moral of that story is that Apple needs a cheaper entry point for an iOS smartphone if they want to command market share and especially to put their phones in the hands of more teenagers.
I don't think that's the market Apple wants. They already have the #1 selling smart phone. They make more profit than all competitors combined off of the iPhone. The Cell phone market is very fluid and Apple knows it just has to keep producing the coolest and more desired phone and they will always have a decent share of the market and make tons of money.
in the mean time, Moto, Samsung, HTC, LG and others all battle it out with the same OS and dropping prices to get market share. A race to the bottom strategy that I'm not sure will last forever.
All Apple needs to do is keep the "coolness" coming. Reward us with nice iOS updates and keep us happy with the best support in the market.
That is what the 49$ 3GS is for...
My buddy just got one the other day. Why cause it was 49 bucks...
blakbyrd
Aug 5, 04:07 PM
Reposting my prediction from another thread:
Justin+ieber+never+say+
Justin Bieber: Never Say
Justin Bieber: Never Say Never
Justin+ieber+never+say+
Justin+ieber+never+say+
Justin+ieber+never+say+
Bring the Justin Bieber
Justin+ieber+never+say+
+say+never+dvd+release
Justin Bieber Denies That He#39;s
Benjy91
Mar 31, 02:52 PM
Please, enlighten us, how does fragmentation bite Android's ass when it is the #1 smartphone OS. Regardless what you think, Android and iOS are by far the most successful OS in the last 5 years.
How is it biting them in the ass? Android is the fastest growing OS with a larger share than IOS. I think it's been a very succesfull strategy.
I never said it's already got them, I said it would get them eventually, and now Google has seen this, and is now tightening control.
And how it will 'bite them in the ass' is with the user experience, users seeing apps on the Android Marketplace, but the app doesnt support their phone, or requires features their phone doesnt support, or their phone doesnt quite have the power to run it. Could crash their phone etc.
Their strategy ensured short-term gain, but problems later on.
Apple wont run into problems with iOS Fragmentation for a long time yet. And they can easily avoid these issues by officially not supporting older devices and preventing them accessing apps they cant run.
How is it biting them in the ass? Android is the fastest growing OS with a larger share than IOS. I think it's been a very succesfull strategy.
I never said it's already got them, I said it would get them eventually, and now Google has seen this, and is now tightening control.
And how it will 'bite them in the ass' is with the user experience, users seeing apps on the Android Marketplace, but the app doesnt support their phone, or requires features their phone doesnt support, or their phone doesnt quite have the power to run it. Could crash their phone etc.
Their strategy ensured short-term gain, but problems later on.
Apple wont run into problems with iOS Fragmentation for a long time yet. And they can easily avoid these issues by officially not supporting older devices and preventing them accessing apps they cant run.
dethmaShine
Apr 12, 03:11 PM
3am.
Thanks.
And that's not good.
Thanks.
And that's not good.
CHAOS STEP
Mar 2, 07:14 PM
Well it certainly isn't the Renaissance mind, as Leonardo and Michelangelo were pretty clearly raving homosexuals.
Really! Man I'm throwing out my Ninja Turtles pyjamas.
Really! Man I'm throwing out my Ninja Turtles pyjamas.
Timepass
Aug 12, 02:33 AM
Apple won't put GPS in unless they can create a whole new 'Apple' interface for it.
I'm no GPS expert, but I'm not sure how they could do that with a simple candybar phone. It would need to be some sort of smartphone / pocketPC thing.
if they want to work with US law they will put GPS in it. I dont remember when all call company have it done by but after a certain point all companiy must be able to find anyone with in so many feet when a 911 call is made. most chose to go the GPS route for that.
Also I know my 3 last sprint flip phones all had GPS and I know the verizon razer has GPS in it.
And I pretty sure cingular phones have GPS in it since they all have the ableity to use mapping programs for the phones.
I'm no GPS expert, but I'm not sure how they could do that with a simple candybar phone. It would need to be some sort of smartphone / pocketPC thing.
if they want to work with US law they will put GPS in it. I dont remember when all call company have it done by but after a certain point all companiy must be able to find anyone with in so many feet when a 911 call is made. most chose to go the GPS route for that.
Also I know my 3 last sprint flip phones all had GPS and I know the verizon razer has GPS in it.
And I pretty sure cingular phones have GPS in it since they all have the ableity to use mapping programs for the phones.
layte
Mar 31, 03:58 PM
First, I have a Dell Streak. Wanted to see what the fuss was about. Took a year for the official Froyo release to appear. Yeah, fragmentation exists.
(I appreciate Android on the Streak, but GOOD GOD does it feel like a laggy piece of software compared to my iPhone and iPad. It has widgets and tons of convenient apps for pirating software or games (no... I own ALL those ROMS)... but I digress.)
So, Android unifies. Google forces handset/tablet manufacturers to adopt a stock OS interface. How will they differentiate themselves? What incentive, beyond a free OS, will there be to creating "phone B" that looks just like "phone A". This is where Google will shoot itself in the foot. The less the carriers and handset manufacturers can customize, the less incentive they have to launch on Android. Heck, just emulate Android if you want the apps, right RIM?
Weren't there waves a few weeks about about Motorola wanting its own OS? I'd want to control my own destiny. This is creating a "walled garden" (Andy as caretaker) for the device manufacturers/carriers, and they're the ones that Google needs to be pushing the platform.
The thing is, if handset manufacturers want to crap up a handset with their own gunk they are free to do so still. They will have to wait longer than has been the case (is there an echo in here?) but it is still possible. This isn't Google completely shutting off access, just them making things a bit harder (some will think this is a good thing, some wont).
Perhaps they can differentiate with hardware, or custom applications (just not anything that messes with the base OS by the looks of things). Horrible skins need to die a death, even hardcore fandroids would agree with that.
(I appreciate Android on the Streak, but GOOD GOD does it feel like a laggy piece of software compared to my iPhone and iPad. It has widgets and tons of convenient apps for pirating software or games (no... I own ALL those ROMS)... but I digress.)
So, Android unifies. Google forces handset/tablet manufacturers to adopt a stock OS interface. How will they differentiate themselves? What incentive, beyond a free OS, will there be to creating "phone B" that looks just like "phone A". This is where Google will shoot itself in the foot. The less the carriers and handset manufacturers can customize, the less incentive they have to launch on Android. Heck, just emulate Android if you want the apps, right RIM?
Weren't there waves a few weeks about about Motorola wanting its own OS? I'd want to control my own destiny. This is creating a "walled garden" (Andy as caretaker) for the device manufacturers/carriers, and they're the ones that Google needs to be pushing the platform.
The thing is, if handset manufacturers want to crap up a handset with their own gunk they are free to do so still. They will have to wait longer than has been the case (is there an echo in here?) but it is still possible. This isn't Google completely shutting off access, just them making things a bit harder (some will think this is a good thing, some wont).
Perhaps they can differentiate with hardware, or custom applications (just not anything that messes with the base OS by the looks of things). Horrible skins need to die a death, even hardcore fandroids would agree with that.
treblah
Aug 26, 09:14 PM
when will the Apple retail stores reflect the changes to the product line?
-mike
If they are being refreshed, the stores probably already have recieved them in a black lock box that says do not open until Tuesday morning.
-mike
If they are being refreshed, the stores probably already have recieved them in a black lock box that says do not open until Tuesday morning.
Sydde
Mar 22, 01:39 PM
I agree with the sentiment, though I wonder how much difference it would make - Bush managed to lie, cheat and steal a vote out of congress in favor of the Iraq invasion. Plenty of congress members were either duped or cowed into voting in favor. It wasn't a declared war, it was even better - he had congressional sanction without being restrained by a declared war.
hmm, that sounds exactly like what is happening here. Maybe we could asK Joe Wilson what he thinks about it.
hmm, that sounds exactly like what is happening here. Maybe we could asK Joe Wilson what he thinks about it.
mwswami
Jul 23, 04:28 PM
Well Swami I am going to have to call your bluff. Makes no sense to skip Conroe Dual Cores on the Mac Pro yet. This Winter 2007 with Clovertowns, perhaps post MacWorld SF. But not yet. And maybe not ever.
...
You fill in the specs. I can't remember what speeds are being offered. This is all just a wild guestimate for discussion purposes. Please don't flame me.
Don't worry I won't flame you. You may turn out to be right. Only two weeks to go ...
...
You fill in the specs. I can't remember what speeds are being offered. This is all just a wild guestimate for discussion purposes. Please don't flame me.
Don't worry I won't flame you. You may turn out to be right. Only two weeks to go ...
timmillwood
Aug 26, 05:43 PM
I hope we see a core 2 duo in the macbook pro to get it upto the speed of the mac pro
ART5000
Jul 20, 11:57 PM
ANy gurus on hand here..
is it possible that Apple will come out with dual woocrest then when kentfield hits the street, we could just buy the processor and snap out woody and snap in Kentfield.
IS THIS FEASIBLE:rolleyes:
is it possible that Apple will come out with dual woocrest then when kentfield hits the street, we could just buy the processor and snap out woody and snap in Kentfield.
IS THIS FEASIBLE:rolleyes:
MacRumors
Sep 18, 11:00 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
AppleInsider expects that Apple will update its complete laptop line (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2060) (13" MacBook and 15/17" MacBook Pros) to Core 2 Duo "Merom" before the holiday shopping season starts in late November. According to the site, development has been completed and the launch is simply awaiting Apple's marketing team to "pull the trigger."
MacShrine and MacOSXRumors expect the MacBook Pro to be updated (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060915171825.shtml) at Apple's September 25th event preceding Photokina. AppleInsider is unsure whether the updated MacBook will be unveiled at that event or be held off to ensure adequate supply of Intel's Core 2 Duo Merom chip.
Many users have pointed to extended ship dates and delays for MacBooks as evidence of an impending update. While possible, the shipping delays may simply be due to a demand backlog which was noted (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1896) in Apple's Q3 2006 conference call in July. At the time Apple stated they expected to reach a supply/demand balance by the end of September (the end of Apple's current fiscal quarter).
AppleInsider expects that Apple will update its complete laptop line (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2060) (13" MacBook and 15/17" MacBook Pros) to Core 2 Duo "Merom" before the holiday shopping season starts in late November. According to the site, development has been completed and the launch is simply awaiting Apple's marketing team to "pull the trigger."
MacShrine and MacOSXRumors expect the MacBook Pro to be updated (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060915171825.shtml) at Apple's September 25th event preceding Photokina. AppleInsider is unsure whether the updated MacBook will be unveiled at that event or be held off to ensure adequate supply of Intel's Core 2 Duo Merom chip.
Many users have pointed to extended ship dates and delays for MacBooks as evidence of an impending update. While possible, the shipping delays may simply be due to a demand backlog which was noted (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1896) in Apple's Q3 2006 conference call in July. At the time Apple stated they expected to reach a supply/demand balance by the end of September (the end of Apple's current fiscal quarter).
toddybody
Apr 6, 10:57 AM
Since you have no clue how the sandy bridge airs will perform, I'll take your statement as FUD.
Ehhh...youre missing his point (and being a bit rude). The IGP on SB is NOT as capable as nVidia's 320M. Certainly the SB architecture will yield great processing improvements to the MBA (over the C2D)...but graphics will most likely take a hit. That was his concern.
Ehhh...youre missing his point (and being a bit rude). The IGP on SB is NOT as capable as nVidia's 320M. Certainly the SB architecture will yield great processing improvements to the MBA (over the C2D)...but graphics will most likely take a hit. That was his concern.
Super Dave
Aug 6, 01:43 PM
As Apple applied for the trademark, it will not be approved.
It is up to Apple how they want to proceed. A fight that can't win, no matter how much money they have.
Mac Pro has been the premier Mac dealer in the same county as Apple since 1988. Out of all the names for this new line of computers, why choose one that they know they cannot have.
We are already getting countless support calls for the macbook pro. It seems they assume we made them When we can't help them, they seem to get very upset.
Mac Pro is in a position to file for a court order not to release any computer that bears our name.
So get ready WWDC, we will be watching.
Mike Ajlouny
President
MAC-PRO.com
Admittedly trademark law isn't my specialty, but I suspect Apple has a trademark on the word "Mac," and adding a generic word like "Pro" to it does not seem like something you could claim any originality with. Especially since it's based on their trademarked word in the first place. Is there something I'm missing?
Oh, and a computer and computer store aren't exactly the same thing. How are you going to claim consumer confusion?
David :cool:
It is up to Apple how they want to proceed. A fight that can't win, no matter how much money they have.
Mac Pro has been the premier Mac dealer in the same county as Apple since 1988. Out of all the names for this new line of computers, why choose one that they know they cannot have.
We are already getting countless support calls for the macbook pro. It seems they assume we made them When we can't help them, they seem to get very upset.
Mac Pro is in a position to file for a court order not to release any computer that bears our name.
So get ready WWDC, we will be watching.
Mike Ajlouny
President
MAC-PRO.com
Admittedly trademark law isn't my specialty, but I suspect Apple has a trademark on the word "Mac," and adding a generic word like "Pro" to it does not seem like something you could claim any originality with. Especially since it's based on their trademarked word in the first place. Is there something I'm missing?
Oh, and a computer and computer store aren't exactly the same thing. How are you going to claim consumer confusion?
David :cool:
epitaphic
Aug 18, 09:06 PM
Do you think a Conroe iMac will beat a Mac Pro due to lower memory latency alone? Do you have real experience or data regarding how horrendous a problem this is? Extra dual-core processor aside, the Mac Pro has a higher speed FSB, higher memory bus bandwidth, higher RAM capacity, and ability to set up internal RAID amongst other advantages over a Conroe iMac.
Obviously, inherently the iMac design is inferior to the Mac Pro/Powermac. But I think there's a bigger reason why Apple chose to go all quad with the Mac Pro: Apple chose all quad because a duo option would have had the same performance in professional apps (again, excluding handbrake and toast which are the only two examples touted about). A single processor Woodcrest or Conroe option will have the same obtainable CPU power for 90-95% of the professional market for another 6-12 months at the very least.
Here's some data regarding the Mac Pro's FSB:
the Mac Pro (...) actually takes longer to access main memory than the Core Duo processor in the MacBook Pro. This is much worse than it sounds once you take into account the fact that the MacBook Pro features a 667MHz FSB compared to the 1333MHz FSB (per chip) used in the Mac Pro.
What can we take from this? Because of the use of FB-DIMMs, the Mac Pro's effective FSB is that of ~640MHz DDR2 system.
And how does it fare in memory latency?
It's not Apple's fault, but FB-DIMMs absolutely kill memory latency; even running in quad channel mode, the FB-DIMM equipped Mac Pro takes 45% more time to access memory than our DDR2 equipped test bed at the same memory frequency.
As for bandwidth, although the Mac Pro has a load of theoretical bandwidth, the efficiency is an abysmal 20%. In real use a DDR2 system has 72% more usable bandwidth. (source here (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2816&p=11))
I don't know bout you, but if I were a heavy user of memory intensive apps such as Photoshop, I'd be worried. Worried in the sense that a Conroe would be noticeably faster.
Memory issues aside, Woodcrests are faster than Conroes, 2.4% on average (source here (http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2795&p=6))
Obviously, inherently the iMac design is inferior to the Mac Pro/Powermac. But I think there's a bigger reason why Apple chose to go all quad with the Mac Pro: Apple chose all quad because a duo option would have had the same performance in professional apps (again, excluding handbrake and toast which are the only two examples touted about). A single processor Woodcrest or Conroe option will have the same obtainable CPU power for 90-95% of the professional market for another 6-12 months at the very least.
Here's some data regarding the Mac Pro's FSB:
the Mac Pro (...) actually takes longer to access main memory than the Core Duo processor in the MacBook Pro. This is much worse than it sounds once you take into account the fact that the MacBook Pro features a 667MHz FSB compared to the 1333MHz FSB (per chip) used in the Mac Pro.
What can we take from this? Because of the use of FB-DIMMs, the Mac Pro's effective FSB is that of ~640MHz DDR2 system.
And how does it fare in memory latency?
It's not Apple's fault, but FB-DIMMs absolutely kill memory latency; even running in quad channel mode, the FB-DIMM equipped Mac Pro takes 45% more time to access memory than our DDR2 equipped test bed at the same memory frequency.
As for bandwidth, although the Mac Pro has a load of theoretical bandwidth, the efficiency is an abysmal 20%. In real use a DDR2 system has 72% more usable bandwidth. (source here (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2816&p=11))
I don't know bout you, but if I were a heavy user of memory intensive apps such as Photoshop, I'd be worried. Worried in the sense that a Conroe would be noticeably faster.
Memory issues aside, Woodcrests are faster than Conroes, 2.4% on average (source here (http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2795&p=6))
citizenzen
Mar 17, 10:44 AM
Yet another war, yet another military action which will inevitably cause 'blow-back', started by a man who sold himself to you as a military dove.
While I might agree with some of things you said, I do have to take exception to this point. How did Obama sell himself as a "military dove"?
He campaigned on getting out of Iraq, while escalating our campaign in Afghanistan. And promises to close Gitmo had more to do with due process than it did pacifism.
So please 5P, provide some evidence on how Obama sold himself as a "dove".
And please, let's dispense with your ridiculous "both parties are the same line". Is that a pickle in your pocket, or are you just happy to see Newt Gingrich?
While I might agree with some of things you said, I do have to take exception to this point. How did Obama sell himself as a "military dove"?
He campaigned on getting out of Iraq, while escalating our campaign in Afghanistan. And promises to close Gitmo had more to do with due process than it did pacifism.
So please 5P, provide some evidence on how Obama sold himself as a "dove".
And please, let's dispense with your ridiculous "both parties are the same line". Is that a pickle in your pocket, or are you just happy to see Newt Gingrich?
No comments:
Post a Comment