drsmithy
Sep 14, 08:23 PM
True (today anyway; in the NT era they were indeed separate platforms though. Which brings me to my next point..)
I think you're a bit arse-about-face there. Someone else has already pointed out the differences between XP and Windows 2003 aren't trivial, so I won't go into that. However, if you're sufficient vintage, you should remember the "outrage" when someone demonstrated that you could turn NT 4 Workstation into NT 4 Server (including the boot and login screens) just by changing a few Registry settings (although the part that usually doesn't get said is that those Registry settings then triggered a whole range of different tuning settings for the scheduler, memory management, etc). NT 3.5 & 3.51 were the same, and IIRC, NT 3.1 didn't even have a "Server" version.
I think you're a bit arse-about-face there. Someone else has already pointed out the differences between XP and Windows 2003 aren't trivial, so I won't go into that. However, if you're sufficient vintage, you should remember the "outrage" when someone demonstrated that you could turn NT 4 Workstation into NT 4 Server (including the boot and login screens) just by changing a few Registry settings (although the part that usually doesn't get said is that those Registry settings then triggered a whole range of different tuning settings for the scheduler, memory management, etc). NT 3.5 & 3.51 were the same, and IIRC, NT 3.1 didn't even have a "Server" version.
ergle2
Sep 19, 10:17 PM
Why shouldnt I?
Why should it bother you that new processors come out?
Why should it bother you that new processors come out?
greenstork
Aug 16, 11:21 PM
Video cards won't make a difference in FCP as of now if that's what you are asking performance wise. If you are using Motion/Games, anything that really feeds off the video card, then I'd go for the higher end video card.
Otherwise I'd go for the 2.6 ghz.
If Cloverton is a drop-in chip, I'd say definitely go for the 2.0 GHz as it appears to be upgradeable.
Otherwise I'd go for the 2.6 ghz.
If Cloverton is a drop-in chip, I'd say definitely go for the 2.0 GHz as it appears to be upgradeable.
JDawg76
Jul 20, 12:53 PM
Anyone on here agree that we are entering the world of PC's of sh*ot in the way where we buy a Mac and 2 months later there's news of something better down the road? Or is this just for now since this is the transition period for Apple to the Intel chips. Just curious.
Orange-DE
Jul 21, 07:30 AM
Now you just need to decide what color your want your new computer... (again)
Think pINK
Think pINK
mcgillmaine
Jun 22, 12:13 PM
Thanks for the info ugp.....Is there anyway you can check other stores to see what they got in stock?
Also what area do you live in? And why do you think Apple sent out so little to your area? Because Raleigh-Durham is a decent size (maybe 7-10 stores) but we also have two Apple stores. So maybe Apple is taking that into consideration with allotted units to Radio Shack. IDK just an idea.
Thanks again for your help! Good luck on the 24th!
Also what area do you live in? And why do you think Apple sent out so little to your area? Because Raleigh-Durham is a decent size (maybe 7-10 stores) but we also have two Apple stores. So maybe Apple is taking that into consideration with allotted units to Radio Shack. IDK just an idea.
Thanks again for your help! Good luck on the 24th!
kevin.rivers
Jul 15, 10:44 AM
Life's great, no complaints whatsoever. :)
That would be nice as well. It would definitely increase the longevity of the Mac, since if you ever wanted to upgrade the P/S, or if it blew, it would be a lot easier to do so. Still possible the way it is of course, but this would probably result in less hassle.
I disagree. Using ATX power supplies is a stupid idea. I am sure Apple uses higher quality power supplies than you would pick up at your local CompUSA.
If they allow this there will be a lot of dead Macs, from power supplies whose rails aren't strong enough.
Not to mention those who buy the 400W model because it is only 20 bucks and drastically underpower there Mac.
This would cause too many problems. Keep it proprietary IMO.
That would be nice as well. It would definitely increase the longevity of the Mac, since if you ever wanted to upgrade the P/S, or if it blew, it would be a lot easier to do so. Still possible the way it is of course, but this would probably result in less hassle.
I disagree. Using ATX power supplies is a stupid idea. I am sure Apple uses higher quality power supplies than you would pick up at your local CompUSA.
If they allow this there will be a lot of dead Macs, from power supplies whose rails aren't strong enough.
Not to mention those who buy the 400W model because it is only 20 bucks and drastically underpower there Mac.
This would cause too many problems. Keep it proprietary IMO.
aswitcher
Aug 27, 04:40 AM
This is great news. Looking forward to a revamp of half the Apple line over the next month or so.
mobilehavoc
Apr 6, 02:38 PM
I own both the iPad and the Xoom - both do some things very well, and both do some things horribly.
I am starting to wean myself off of iOS, though. The iPad served me well as a "starter" tablet, but I constantly find myself wanting it to do more or different things, which is something Android (not the Xoom specifically, but Android as a whole) does offer.
To each his own, you know?
This is an excellent point. I still recommend the iPad to my parents, family and friends who are new to the tablet market. For those of my friends who are techy and into computers/technology, the XOOM is much more enjoyable.
This is why having competition is good. If Jobs had his way we'd all be stuck with iPads whether we wanted them or not.
I am starting to wean myself off of iOS, though. The iPad served me well as a "starter" tablet, but I constantly find myself wanting it to do more or different things, which is something Android (not the Xoom specifically, but Android as a whole) does offer.
To each his own, you know?
This is an excellent point. I still recommend the iPad to my parents, family and friends who are new to the tablet market. For those of my friends who are techy and into computers/technology, the XOOM is much more enjoyable.
This is why having competition is good. If Jobs had his way we'd all be stuck with iPads whether we wanted them or not.
hobi316
Jun 14, 11:05 AM
[QUOTE=NJRonbo;10129607]Radio Shack is taking preorders starting Thursday.
Essentially, they special order the phone for you.
That pretty much guarantees you a phone on opening day.
All you need to do is leave a $50 deposit when ordering.
QUOTE]
I'm thinking you meant Tuesday there?
But yeah, they're definitely doing the $50 downpayment thing like with the Evo. I was told to call back this afternoon to get the opening time.
Generally seems like it will be easy to get this phone on launch day. Between Apple, RadioShack, Best Buy, and WalMart, I'm hoping everyone who wants one next Thursday will get it!
Essentially, they special order the phone for you.
That pretty much guarantees you a phone on opening day.
All you need to do is leave a $50 deposit when ordering.
QUOTE]
I'm thinking you meant Tuesday there?
But yeah, they're definitely doing the $50 downpayment thing like with the Evo. I was told to call back this afternoon to get the opening time.
Generally seems like it will be easy to get this phone on launch day. Between Apple, RadioShack, Best Buy, and WalMart, I'm hoping everyone who wants one next Thursday will get it!
KnightWRX
Mar 26, 07:58 AM
2) $129 is too much. This one cracks me up. Apple is bundling a $500 product into the OS (and other OS based servers are far more expensive) and people think $129 is too much?
Apple is bundling a bunch of GUI management tools, akin to Webmin. Was that worth 500$ before ? Nope. Is it more expensive elsewhere ? No. Let's face it, OS X Server was always a toy Unix compared to other big-Iron Unix systems and even to Linux as far as enterprise support goes. Volume management, hello Cupertino ?
Their old archaic way of managing storage is atrocious and no, I don't necessarily want to hook up with a huge array and run Xsan, I just want to intelligently manage my local storage. No, just RAID1 volumes is not enough, I want my volumes logical and independant of my physical volumes. I want to be able to move logical extents to new physical extents without having to take down anything on the box.
And what about those GUI tools ? I can't even just do X11 tunneling over SSH to my desktop to run them, I have either run their Remote Desktop stuff or use a 3rd party solution like VNC... What good are they ? At least make them web based (HP Systems Management Homepage type stuff) and join in to what the rest of the industry got clued into years ago if you don't want to code GUI stuff over X11.
And other OS based servers are not more expensive. Solaris is free (http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/server-storage/solaris/downloads/index.html). I won't even bother linking to all the free distributions of Linux that are ready for the server (Fedora, OpenSuSE, Arch, Ubuntu). The BSDs. Unix server product vendors make their money off of support contracts, not the actual software itself, an arena Apple obviously wants no part of.
All the bits and pieces of server software is mostly re-packaged open source components nowadays anyhow. Most every vendor out there is using Apache and Tomcat in their web-based products, Postfix on the mail side, I've seen a lot of MySQL and PostgreSQL based products (HP uses both, MySQL I've seen in their Output Manager product, PostgreSQL in their System Fault Management, Symantec uses MySQL for Brightmail), and let's not even get into OpenSSL and OpenSSH...
Heck, even Apple does this. OS X server is just a bunch of open source components packaged up together. Apache, OpenLDAP, OpenSSH, ClamAV...
So please, pretty please, with a cherry on top, let's not call OS X Server something worth 500$ and compare it to "others that are more expensive but in actuality are free to download and run and only expensive to get vendor support for".
This rant was longer than it should have been. I love OS X as a desktop OS. I'd pay 129$ for a Lion upgrade with my eyes closed. Best of both worlds. Unix underpinnings and powerful command-line (everything is there!) with integration for all my server products yet fast and easy to setup GUI that is mostly consistent so as to attract a large user base that makes it a good proposition for commercial software vendors to port their packages to. Apple just never got really serious about the server side of it (and lets face it, it's not their business and they obviously want no part of the entreprise market) and I'm not faulting them for that. Let's not be as disingenious as to claim their selling you a 500$ product for 129$ though.
I'm shocked at how many people are so willing to just wave away all the nice under-the-hood changes and improvements that Snow Leopard offers just because there aren't any super-radical UI changes... really disappointing to be honest. Does it really have to be all flashy to be of interest to you? What, the functional side of things doesn't matter any more?
See how this little change in your comment still makes it apply very much to the MacRumors crowd ? ;) The fact is, you're not really dealing with technical people on MacRumors, no matter how much some of them pretend they are. Heck, some of them still believe that HTML is a programming language and that they are web developers because their tools of choice are PhotoShop and Dreamweaver.
Apple is bundling a bunch of GUI management tools, akin to Webmin. Was that worth 500$ before ? Nope. Is it more expensive elsewhere ? No. Let's face it, OS X Server was always a toy Unix compared to other big-Iron Unix systems and even to Linux as far as enterprise support goes. Volume management, hello Cupertino ?
Their old archaic way of managing storage is atrocious and no, I don't necessarily want to hook up with a huge array and run Xsan, I just want to intelligently manage my local storage. No, just RAID1 volumes is not enough, I want my volumes logical and independant of my physical volumes. I want to be able to move logical extents to new physical extents without having to take down anything on the box.
And what about those GUI tools ? I can't even just do X11 tunneling over SSH to my desktop to run them, I have either run their Remote Desktop stuff or use a 3rd party solution like VNC... What good are they ? At least make them web based (HP Systems Management Homepage type stuff) and join in to what the rest of the industry got clued into years ago if you don't want to code GUI stuff over X11.
And other OS based servers are not more expensive. Solaris is free (http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/server-storage/solaris/downloads/index.html). I won't even bother linking to all the free distributions of Linux that are ready for the server (Fedora, OpenSuSE, Arch, Ubuntu). The BSDs. Unix server product vendors make their money off of support contracts, not the actual software itself, an arena Apple obviously wants no part of.
All the bits and pieces of server software is mostly re-packaged open source components nowadays anyhow. Most every vendor out there is using Apache and Tomcat in their web-based products, Postfix on the mail side, I've seen a lot of MySQL and PostgreSQL based products (HP uses both, MySQL I've seen in their Output Manager product, PostgreSQL in their System Fault Management, Symantec uses MySQL for Brightmail), and let's not even get into OpenSSL and OpenSSH...
Heck, even Apple does this. OS X server is just a bunch of open source components packaged up together. Apache, OpenLDAP, OpenSSH, ClamAV...
So please, pretty please, with a cherry on top, let's not call OS X Server something worth 500$ and compare it to "others that are more expensive but in actuality are free to download and run and only expensive to get vendor support for".
This rant was longer than it should have been. I love OS X as a desktop OS. I'd pay 129$ for a Lion upgrade with my eyes closed. Best of both worlds. Unix underpinnings and powerful command-line (everything is there!) with integration for all my server products yet fast and easy to setup GUI that is mostly consistent so as to attract a large user base that makes it a good proposition for commercial software vendors to port their packages to. Apple just never got really serious about the server side of it (and lets face it, it's not their business and they obviously want no part of the entreprise market) and I'm not faulting them for that. Let's not be as disingenious as to claim their selling you a 500$ product for 129$ though.
I'm shocked at how many people are so willing to just wave away all the nice under-the-hood changes and improvements that Snow Leopard offers just because there aren't any super-radical UI changes... really disappointing to be honest. Does it really have to be all flashy to be of interest to you? What, the functional side of things doesn't matter any more?
See how this little change in your comment still makes it apply very much to the MacRumors crowd ? ;) The fact is, you're not really dealing with technical people on MacRumors, no matter how much some of them pretend they are. Heck, some of them still believe that HTML is a programming language and that they are web developers because their tools of choice are PhotoShop and Dreamweaver.
boncellis
Jul 29, 05:59 PM
Ok, here goes. (Quick pass)
Eeek. Not so sure I like that.
Hmmm... maybe with just one slot?
A little better. I personally prefer the taller narrower one, though.
It looks pretty good! The extra room would allow for the 3.5" HDD and a dedicated GPU--making it a "true" media center.
Not to nitpick, but maybe it would only have to be 1.5x wider rather than 2x wide. Either way, I think it's pretty cool. Thanks! ;)
Eeek. Not so sure I like that.
Hmmm... maybe with just one slot?
A little better. I personally prefer the taller narrower one, though.
It looks pretty good! The extra room would allow for the 3.5" HDD and a dedicated GPU--making it a "true" media center.
Not to nitpick, but maybe it would only have to be 1.5x wider rather than 2x wide. Either way, I think it's pretty cool. Thanks! ;)
BJNY
Aug 23, 09:38 AM
My Quad G5 is silent as well, unlike Dual 2.7's which rev frequently.
I was concerned that the fans at the rear ports never spin, even during the Apple Hardware Test, but I've noticed that in other Quads as well. CPU temps are 50 to 60 degrees celcius.
Multimedia, would you confirm both with your Quad G5, please?
I was concerned that the fans at the rear ports never spin, even during the Apple Hardware Test, but I've noticed that in other Quads as well. CPU temps are 50 to 60 degrees celcius.
Multimedia, would you confirm both with your Quad G5, please?
islanders
Sep 19, 08:07 AM
Unofficial MacRumors Newbie Prediction:
First week of October for MBP. (October 4th)
Fourth week of October for MB. (October 24rd)
First week of October for MBP. (October 4th)
Fourth week of October for MB. (October 24rd)
dethmaShine
Apr 19, 02:48 PM
The First Commercial GUI
http://img62.imageshack.us/img62/5659/star1vg.gif
Xerox's Star workstation was the first commercial implementation of the graphical user interface. The Star was introduced in 1981 and was the inspiration for the Mac and all the other GUIs that followed.
http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/7892/leopardpreviewdesktop4.jpghttp://img714.imageshack.us/img714/5733/xerox8010star.gif
Oh!
wayfarer tortoise shell.
Ray-Ban Dark Tortoise Shell
Ray-Ban Dark Tortoise Shell
Obviously, actual Ray-Bans are
http://img62.imageshack.us/img62/5659/star1vg.gif
Xerox's Star workstation was the first commercial implementation of the graphical user interface. The Star was introduced in 1981 and was the inspiration for the Mac and all the other GUIs that followed.
http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/7892/leopardpreviewdesktop4.jpghttp://img714.imageshack.us/img714/5733/xerox8010star.gif
Oh!
wizz0bang
Jul 14, 05:29 PM
Here are my guesses/wishes:
Mac - New Mini tower case (2 HD, 2 CD bays)
Mac $1499
(Conroe) Core 2 Duo 2.4Ghz 4MB cache
1GB DDR2-800
ATI Radeon X1800 256MB
250GB HD
2x front USB, 1x front FW400
4x rear USB, 2x rear FW400, 1x rear FW800
Digital + analog audio I/O
Bluetooth and Airport extreme
Dual gb ethernet
Keyboard and mightymouse
Mac eXtreme $1999
Same as above, but with 2.93GHz Core 2 extreme (maybe overclocked to 3GHz+ so Steve can gloat)
Mac Pro: Similar case to previous G5 towers, all will be quad (dual dual).
Mac Pro $1999
2x Woodcrest 2.0Ghz
1GB DDR667
ATI Radeon X1800 256MB
2x250GB raid
ATI Radeon
Mac Pro $2499
2x Woodcrest 2.66Ghz
Mac Pro $3299
2x Woodcrest 3.0Ghz
More storage and more Ram
Look for same hot video upgrade options.
Come on Steve, I know you can do it!
Mac - New Mini tower case (2 HD, 2 CD bays)
Mac $1499
(Conroe) Core 2 Duo 2.4Ghz 4MB cache
1GB DDR2-800
ATI Radeon X1800 256MB
250GB HD
2x front USB, 1x front FW400
4x rear USB, 2x rear FW400, 1x rear FW800
Digital + analog audio I/O
Bluetooth and Airport extreme
Dual gb ethernet
Keyboard and mightymouse
Mac eXtreme $1999
Same as above, but with 2.93GHz Core 2 extreme (maybe overclocked to 3GHz+ so Steve can gloat)
Mac Pro: Similar case to previous G5 towers, all will be quad (dual dual).
Mac Pro $1999
2x Woodcrest 2.0Ghz
1GB DDR667
ATI Radeon X1800 256MB
2x250GB raid
ATI Radeon
Mac Pro $2499
2x Woodcrest 2.66Ghz
Mac Pro $3299
2x Woodcrest 3.0Ghz
More storage and more Ram
Look for same hot video upgrade options.
Come on Steve, I know you can do it!
HecubusPro
Sep 19, 09:21 AM
That whole comment had the tone of a spoilt 13 year old...
You have no idea why some ppl are waiting for the next revision or upgrade - don't benchmark your rationale with others in way that dismisses other ppl who have equally legitimate reasons and opinions...
Some ppl (who don't have allot of money to drop every year for the next best thing) have to spend wisely - and perhaps just want a revB machine that is more stable and refined. I for one keep my macs until they die...so I will be waiting for revB to maximise my chances of a solid bug-free machine.
If that makes me spoilt - b/c I don't want to purchase new products year after year - then there is nothing I can do about your perceptions...
AMEN!!!! :D
You have no idea why some ppl are waiting for the next revision or upgrade - don't benchmark your rationale with others in way that dismisses other ppl who have equally legitimate reasons and opinions...
Some ppl (who don't have allot of money to drop every year for the next best thing) have to spend wisely - and perhaps just want a revB machine that is more stable and refined. I for one keep my macs until they die...so I will be waiting for revB to maximise my chances of a solid bug-free machine.
If that makes me spoilt - b/c I don't want to purchase new products year after year - then there is nothing I can do about your perceptions...
AMEN!!!! :D
animatedude
Apr 6, 12:27 PM
the article doesn't mention when these wil be released.
JAT
Apr 6, 04:09 PM
YOU apparently havent used either at any length.
I have said nothing that would relate to usage. Do you know what "apparent" means?
I have said nothing that would relate to usage. Do you know what "apparent" means?
maelstromr
Apr 19, 04:58 PM
Obsession can be positive or negative. Loving or hating a company is irrational.
You're missing the point. It's more fun to come to an Apple rumors site and irrationally bait the residents into irrationally baiting you into irrationally...well, you get the point. :rolleyes:
You're missing the point. It's more fun to come to an Apple rumors site and irrationally bait the residents into irrationally baiting you into irrationally...well, you get the point. :rolleyes:
Thunderhawks
Mar 22, 03:31 PM
Blackberry playbook = The IPad 2 killer - you heard it here first.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Thank you.
Getting in line tomorrow morning 4:30 a.m. with all the other people in front of Best Buy.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Thank you.
Getting in line tomorrow morning 4:30 a.m. with all the other people in front of Best Buy.
miketcool
Aug 11, 06:38 PM
You all must realize now that the touch screen scroll wheel is for the iPhone, not, the iPod. You wont watch video's on your phone, but youll listen to audio, dial numbers and store info. The Video player will be a spin off and be video oriented, this will be mobile oriented. $399, I'd still buy a mobile hub with music and phone capabilities.
It Cometh.
It Cometh.
jacg
Jul 27, 10:22 AM
Ah and where has the wireless mouse/kbd option gone in the store? Maybe they will be free with the upgraded iMacs.
According to the bluetooth mighty mouse info at apple.com, you still need a wired keyboard and mouse to install the thing. When you went for the wireless option before, did you get a wired keyboard too?
Also, are there any how-to guides for upgrading Yonah iMacs to Merom?
According to the bluetooth mighty mouse info at apple.com, you still need a wired keyboard and mouse to install the thing. When you went for the wireless option before, did you get a wired keyboard too?
Also, are there any how-to guides for upgrading Yonah iMacs to Merom?
shawnce
Sep 13, 11:48 AM
Yes, that's true.
It's also true that most of the time, most people aren't even maxing out ONE core never mind eight.
And when they do, their program won't get any faster unless it's multithreaded and able to run on multiple cores at once.
Lets not forget things like Spotlight that can now run more rigorously without affecting CPU resource much. You will get more intelligent software that can prepare for what you want to do so that when you go to do it it will be much more responsive. In other words just because some tasks cannot be easily broken up to leverage multiple cores doesn't mean that tasks such as those cannot be speculative run by software on idle cores in preparation for you doing the task.
It's also true that most of the time, most people aren't even maxing out ONE core never mind eight.
And when they do, their program won't get any faster unless it's multithreaded and able to run on multiple cores at once.
Lets not forget things like Spotlight that can now run more rigorously without affecting CPU resource much. You will get more intelligent software that can prepare for what you want to do so that when you go to do it it will be much more responsive. In other words just because some tasks cannot be easily broken up to leverage multiple cores doesn't mean that tasks such as those cannot be speculative run by software on idle cores in preparation for you doing the task.