Dont Hurt Me
Aug 29, 04:37 PM
We've all been crying for a new cube since the mini came out... is the mini an awesome machine? Absolutely, I love mine. But there is a market for a headless iMac/Cube/MacPro mini... people like me. I don't need a quad core computer. I don't need 16gb of RAM. I don't need 4 harddrive bays, or even two optical drive slots.
I do want a fast CPU, an upgradable GPU, a couple of full size HDDs and a full size optical drive. I also want something quiet, relatively affordable (something a bit less than an iMac would be idea), and stylish.
I don't think that Apple would lose Mac Pro sales to something like this - they might lose iMac sales but if the margins are the same for them who cares, and any loss of mini sales would be upsells, so it'd be a good thing.
I think a lot PC types, especially gamers, would be interested, bringing in new markets... None of my gamer friends would be satisfied by an iMac, but neither would they shell out $2-3k for a Mac Pro.
Let's see, the mini is 6.5x6.5x2 inches, would anyone even notice if it went to 8.5x8.5x4? Even better would be 8x8x8, just for the cube dimensions, done in iPod white (or black), would look stellar on a desktop. Core 2 Duo 1.83ghz, 4 RAM slots for an 8gb max with 512mb installed stock, 1 16x PCIe w/ 7300GT base (BTO options), 1 PCI slot, 2 3.5" drive bays w/ 160gb standard, 1 5.25" bay w/ SD, AE, BT2, 6 USB2 (4 back, 2 front), 1 FW 400, 1 eSATA (in place of FW800)... $999 anyone? BTO options for slower/fast CPUs and GPUs, more RAM, bigger HDD and a $200 TV tuner/video encoder breakout box... :DThat is the machine that Apple needs, at the moment its still the marketeers at Apple who seem to rule their product offerings with mini vs All in one vs workstation..
I do want a fast CPU, an upgradable GPU, a couple of full size HDDs and a full size optical drive. I also want something quiet, relatively affordable (something a bit less than an iMac would be idea), and stylish.
I don't think that Apple would lose Mac Pro sales to something like this - they might lose iMac sales but if the margins are the same for them who cares, and any loss of mini sales would be upsells, so it'd be a good thing.
I think a lot PC types, especially gamers, would be interested, bringing in new markets... None of my gamer friends would be satisfied by an iMac, but neither would they shell out $2-3k for a Mac Pro.
Let's see, the mini is 6.5x6.5x2 inches, would anyone even notice if it went to 8.5x8.5x4? Even better would be 8x8x8, just for the cube dimensions, done in iPod white (or black), would look stellar on a desktop. Core 2 Duo 1.83ghz, 4 RAM slots for an 8gb max with 512mb installed stock, 1 16x PCIe w/ 7300GT base (BTO options), 1 PCI slot, 2 3.5" drive bays w/ 160gb standard, 1 5.25" bay w/ SD, AE, BT2, 6 USB2 (4 back, 2 front), 1 FW 400, 1 eSATA (in place of FW800)... $999 anyone? BTO options for slower/fast CPUs and GPUs, more RAM, bigger HDD and a $200 TV tuner/video encoder breakout box... :DThat is the machine that Apple needs, at the moment its still the marketeers at Apple who seem to rule their product offerings with mini vs All in one vs workstation..
skunk
Mar 31, 01:11 PM
Well regarding defeating the Nazi's and the Axis powers, one can credit the US to turning the tide. When the Nazis like practically conquered everyone in their path and are invading the UK, the Brits had to transfer a lot of technologies they made for the war to the US...where the US industrial might pretty much defined what we know today as "air dominance". Even though the Brits did make a lot of neat weapons (as traditional to their roots), the US was the one who turned those into massive amounts of airplanes, carriers, and sophisticated radars for killing Nazi and Japanese air planes and submarines.
So I mean, without the Brits, the US might not have been able to make all those toys so fast, but without the US, the Brits would have fell. But in retrospect, I feel that the Allies would have won anyway...just that it would have ended with many more atomic bombs dropped all over the place by the US.Probably the most idiotic analysis of WW2 I have ever read. I await with interest to hear where and when the Germans invaded.
So I mean, without the Brits, the US might not have been able to make all those toys so fast, but without the US, the Brits would have fell. But in retrospect, I feel that the Allies would have won anyway...just that it would have ended with many more atomic bombs dropped all over the place by the US.Probably the most idiotic analysis of WW2 I have ever read. I await with interest to hear where and when the Germans invaded.
macgeek18
Feb 23, 11:25 AM
Handbrake comes VERY close to destroying my Macbook ha ha, the CPU goes up close to 90 degrees celsius! Terrifying!
When I'm using Handbrake I have it going for 6 plus hours straight. So I just turn turn on Caffine, max my fans out at 6200 RPM with keeps it at a steady 70 degrees. :)
When I'm using Handbrake I have it going for 6 plus hours straight. So I just turn turn on Caffine, max my fans out at 6200 RPM with keeps it at a steady 70 degrees. :)
twoodcc
Oct 12, 11:42 AM
What are bigadv units? and how do I run them?
I am currently running two instances using:
./fah6 -local -smp -verbosity 9
do I just add the flag ' -bigadv ' to my command above?
PS: I have a 2.53ghz MBP
bigadv units are a new project that folding@home has started. there is a thread about it here (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=768187).
but as already stated, you cannot run these units on iMacs or laptops. you need either an 8-core mac, or a very fast 4-core i7 machine. if you don't have one of these, then your computer will not be able to meet the deadlines
I am currently running two instances using:
./fah6 -local -smp -verbosity 9
do I just add the flag ' -bigadv ' to my command above?
PS: I have a 2.53ghz MBP
bigadv units are a new project that folding@home has started. there is a thread about it here (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=768187).
but as already stated, you cannot run these units on iMacs or laptops. you need either an 8-core mac, or a very fast 4-core i7 machine. if you don't have one of these, then your computer will not be able to meet the deadlines
QuantumLo0p
Mar 6, 02:23 PM
Why do Americans harbor hate for diesel? I'm not very familiar with the differences between the fuels, other than gasoline is more refined.
There are a lot of old perceptions about diesel. I love diesel; they are inherently more efficient than gasoline engines.
I could say something like- "there are a lot of people in the US stuck on old tech, out dated, dirty, inefficient, gas powered cars that don't last as long as diesels nor have as good as ROI as diesels" but I wouldn't want to upset anyone who owns a technically inferior vehicle so I will keep my thoughts to myself.
:D
There are a lot of old perceptions about diesel. I love diesel; they are inherently more efficient than gasoline engines.
I could say something like- "there are a lot of people in the US stuck on old tech, out dated, dirty, inefficient, gas powered cars that don't last as long as diesels nor have as good as ROI as diesels" but I wouldn't want to upset anyone who owns a technically inferior vehicle so I will keep my thoughts to myself.
:D
MacMan86
Apr 26, 12:20 PM
EDIT - wrong thread - nothing to see here
AppliedVisual
Nov 15, 12:34 PM
You are not a developer, I take it?
Are you seriously suggesting that a developer should ship a product with features that are not only untested, but haven't even been tried out?
What do you prefer: Unpack 8 core Mac Pro, install Handbrake, run it, 50 percent CPU usage, or unpack 8 core Mac Pro, install Handbrake, run it, kaboom!
Being a developer with a fair bit of graphics programming and multithreaded development experience, I would say the solution is somewhere in-between. There's no reason software isn't being planned for the upcoming CPU architectures and newer versions being developed to handle such. In other words, it's no secret that this hardware is coming, we've known about quad-core clovertown CPUs for nearly a year.. Engineering samples started shipping several months ago (early september, IIRC). Too bad Apple doesn't make pre-release hardware available via higher-level ADC programs, only a select few get the priviledge.
Programmers should make the effort to accommodate upcoming multi-core designs into their software development cycle. Once a new system is released, it should be a minimal effort to test and tweak the software for the new system and quickly release an update, thus making their customers only wait a week or two from when the systems first ship as opposed to several weeks/months while much of an application is re-written to accommodate 8 cores since the last version was hard-coded to handle 4. And then the cycle starts again in 18 months when 12 or 16 core chips start shipping. I don't think the software industry has really warmed-up to the multi-core paradigm just yet. They have been resisting it for years as anyone who has run multiprocessor systems over the years will attest to. But this is the way it's going to be for a while and eventually we'll hit a core barrier, just as the MHz barrier popped up. Both Intel and AMD are predicting 80 to 120 cores being the max for the x86 architecture. So start planning and figuring how to micro-manage threads and fibers within your code because we'll be hitting 16 to 24 cores by 2010 and MHz per core isn't going to creep much past 3GHz. And the current thread per task, thread per CPU core mentality that many programmers have is not the proper way to approach this.
Are you seriously suggesting that a developer should ship a product with features that are not only untested, but haven't even been tried out?
What do you prefer: Unpack 8 core Mac Pro, install Handbrake, run it, 50 percent CPU usage, or unpack 8 core Mac Pro, install Handbrake, run it, kaboom!
Being a developer with a fair bit of graphics programming and multithreaded development experience, I would say the solution is somewhere in-between. There's no reason software isn't being planned for the upcoming CPU architectures and newer versions being developed to handle such. In other words, it's no secret that this hardware is coming, we've known about quad-core clovertown CPUs for nearly a year.. Engineering samples started shipping several months ago (early september, IIRC). Too bad Apple doesn't make pre-release hardware available via higher-level ADC programs, only a select few get the priviledge.
Programmers should make the effort to accommodate upcoming multi-core designs into their software development cycle. Once a new system is released, it should be a minimal effort to test and tweak the software for the new system and quickly release an update, thus making their customers only wait a week or two from when the systems first ship as opposed to several weeks/months while much of an application is re-written to accommodate 8 cores since the last version was hard-coded to handle 4. And then the cycle starts again in 18 months when 12 or 16 core chips start shipping. I don't think the software industry has really warmed-up to the multi-core paradigm just yet. They have been resisting it for years as anyone who has run multiprocessor systems over the years will attest to. But this is the way it's going to be for a while and eventually we'll hit a core barrier, just as the MHz barrier popped up. Both Intel and AMD are predicting 80 to 120 cores being the max for the x86 architecture. So start planning and figuring how to micro-manage threads and fibers within your code because we'll be hitting 16 to 24 cores by 2010 and MHz per core isn't going to creep much past 3GHz. And the current thread per task, thread per CPU core mentality that many programmers have is not the proper way to approach this.
twoodcc
Feb 9, 05:03 PM
million = mio
oh ok. that's what i thought. but how do you have 6.4 million?
oh ok. that's what i thought. but how do you have 6.4 million?
razzmatazz
Aug 6, 11:21 PM
i dunno if this has been cleared up in any other posts or whatever, but does anybody know if there will be a live quicktime video feed? i figured if steve is going to be demo-ing stuff in leopard, he'd want the hundreds of thousands of people to actually *see* it! anyway, just curious.
mr
There won't be a live VIDEO feed. Just the live TEXT feed supplied by MacRumors
mr
There won't be a live VIDEO feed. Just the live TEXT feed supplied by MacRumors
xPismo
Sep 1, 11:54 AM
Wow. That would be great news. I'd think about one of those instead of a mac pro.... please make it have fw800. Then I really would take it over a pro.
aricher
Nov 27, 01:10 PM
meh - does this matter? Isn't 17" is getting to be a bit skimpy by any consumer standards.
MattSepeta
May 2, 05:42 PM
Another iOS feature implemented in a desktop OS.
Fan-frickin-tastic :(
Fan-frickin-tastic :(
Machead III
Jan 2, 08:41 AM
There WILL be an Apple phone at MWSF
-- HOWEVER --
it will only have modest music playback capabilities. If you want a good music player AND a good phone then you will have to buy a Nano AND an Apple Phone.
If wish this was more than just paper thin speculation, because this is exactly what I want to be the case: there's nothing I want to do less on my phone than play music.
-- HOWEVER --
it will only have modest music playback capabilities. If you want a good music player AND a good phone then you will have to buy a Nano AND an Apple Phone.
If wish this was more than just paper thin speculation, because this is exactly what I want to be the case: there's nothing I want to do less on my phone than play music.
Mac'Mo
Jan 1, 10:46 PM
i thought the iPhone rumor was laid to rest?
RebootD
Apr 12, 10:03 PM
$299 are you out of your mind?
That's very inexpensive but... what about motion? soundtrack? Livetype?
That's very inexpensive but... what about motion? soundtrack? Livetype?
twoodcc
Mar 24, 09:13 PM
I decided I don't need to right now so it's back to bigadv units now.
good, cuz that's where the points are at!
good, cuz that's where the points are at!
Rocketman
Nov 15, 09:46 AM
From what I am reading so far, the real benefit of 8 cores in the real world of a minority of applications being truly well threaded, is the ability to run 2-4 large complicated programs simultaneously, multiple instances of programs (some have talked about running 4 copies of handbrake), and multiple OS's simultaneously.
All those things also require vast amounts of memory as well, so a MacPro or X-serve is the only way to go now to addres 16GB+.
Apple has always had memory crippled computers on the low end. If they could do ONE thing in the coming 64 bit world, I would ask them to make the motherboards at least be able to address FUTURE RAM options as the cost always drops rapidly and the requirements always seem to be predominantly ram based.
Rocketman
All those things also require vast amounts of memory as well, so a MacPro or X-serve is the only way to go now to addres 16GB+.
Apple has always had memory crippled computers on the low end. If they could do ONE thing in the coming 64 bit world, I would ask them to make the motherboards at least be able to address FUTURE RAM options as the cost always drops rapidly and the requirements always seem to be predominantly ram based.
Rocketman
Doctor Q
Jul 18, 12:53 PM
Rentals are definitely the way to go.I think rentals are sometimes the way to go. If I want to watch a movie once, a rental is perfect. If I want to watch it 2 or 3 times over many years, I might as well rent it more than once. But I want to watch it many times, month after month or year after year, I ought to own a copy, to save the expense and trouble of renting it. I already have both choices in "hardcopy" format. I'd like to have both choices online too, as conveniently as possible.
milo
Aug 29, 11:53 AM
I think the Apple unit has the edge in terms of specs, looks, price and of course, OS! (Well, I would, woudn't I!!)
Sure. But many people don't WANT a tiny box. On the apple side, you're paying extra for the miniturization. Unfortunately, since apple doesn't offer any alternatives to the mini, it's also competing with regular budget pc's.
When you look at what you can get for $799 in a pc, the mini looks way overpriced.
Sure. But many people don't WANT a tiny box. On the apple side, you're paying extra for the miniturization. Unfortunately, since apple doesn't offer any alternatives to the mini, it's also competing with regular budget pc's.
When you look at what you can get for $799 in a pc, the mini looks way overpriced.
gwangung
Apr 21, 11:59 AM
If someone breaks into my home and hacks into my Mac (using the OS X DVD to do a password reset), I have a lot more worries than whether they know how to find out what neighborhoods� cell towers I�ve used! Luckily, encrypting your iPhone backup is simple, automatic, and unbreakable; and has the added benefit that then your iPhone�s keychain gets included in the backup. (Otherwise it doesn�t, with good reason.)
If, on the other hand, they steal my phone, they�re unlikely to stop me from remotely shredding it so fast their head spins :)
That said, dumping the old cached data is good practice, and Apple really needs to do so. I�d be surprised if they didn�t patch it to do just that. So: good catch! (Of course, this was noticed months ago.)
Yep, both of these are good points.
If, on the other hand, they steal my phone, they�re unlikely to stop me from remotely shredding it so fast their head spins :)
That said, dumping the old cached data is good practice, and Apple really needs to do so. I�d be surprised if they didn�t patch it to do just that. So: good catch! (Of course, this was noticed months ago.)
Yep, both of these are good points.
chicagostars
Jan 12, 04:37 PM
These whispers seem to have possible validity. I feel that people waiting for a slim MacBook Pro may come away from MacWorld disappointed. A thin machine doesn't seem like it will fit the bill for many pro customers who are often using their MacBook Pros as desktop replacements, but may be great for another market: non-creative professionals, many of whom would like something along the lines of a successor to the 12" Powerbook. (Rumors of an aluminum enclosure don't mean all that much as Apple is going toward aluminum enclosures in more and more of their product lines, regardless the price point or 'pro' image. iPod Shuffle anyone?)
Let's enjoy the show!
Let's enjoy the show!
ranviper
Feb 18, 08:20 AM
New pics for the new thread. :eek:
http://img837.imageshack.us/img837/4420/openb.jpg
http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/3604/clamshell.jpg
http://img837.imageshack.us/img837/4420/openb.jpg
http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/3604/clamshell.jpg
GregA
Dec 28, 02:14 AM
the option to dock and iPod simply is so out of place that I do not know why it keeps getting brought up. iTV is focused on streaming content from your computer, not your iPod.I've been wondering about this. Assuming the iTV is just a streaming device which shows a movie stored on iTunes on your PC or Mac, it is probably reasonably simple for Apple to make the iTV also stream video from an iPod (including Nano or even Shuffle).
Of course, why not just plug your iPod directly into the TV? And if there's a movie on your iPod, it came via your iTunes anyway so you can stream from there right...?
I'm not sure what the answer to that is. I do think there's scope for buying a movie in a store, downloading to iPod, and uploading to your iTunes (assuming that you have a low bandwidth net connection).
Is there scope for buying a movie in a store, downloading to iPod, and watching on TV? Or buying a movie in a store, downloading to a 1GB ram drive, and watching on your iTV? I think if I was going to the store anyway, I'd probably buy the HD-DVD instead. But for rental it might work.
Of course, why not just plug your iPod directly into the TV? And if there's a movie on your iPod, it came via your iTunes anyway so you can stream from there right...?
I'm not sure what the answer to that is. I do think there's scope for buying a movie in a store, downloading to iPod, and uploading to your iTunes (assuming that you have a low bandwidth net connection).
Is there scope for buying a movie in a store, downloading to iPod, and watching on TV? Or buying a movie in a store, downloading to a 1GB ram drive, and watching on your iTV? I think if I was going to the store anyway, I'd probably buy the HD-DVD instead. But for rental it might work.
cleric
Mar 23, 01:22 AM
As mentioned above,some people want to listen to their songs uncompressed.
I find it hard to believe anyone keeps their music uncompressed thats just dumb and plain lazy.
I find it hard to believe anyone keeps their music uncompressed thats just dumb and plain lazy.
