wizard
Apr 6, 04:05 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
For a programmer dealing with Terminal, Xcode, Netbeans, Eclipse, etc (not graphic intensive softwares), would this macbook air be a better deal than the 13/15" Macbook pro?
Anyone?
It depends upon the programmer doesn't it?
One concern I would have is wear on the SSD. Due to that I couldn't recommend the current model with it's limited SSD size. Look at how much space your current installation uses and then multiply by 3. That ought to give you enough excess capacity to assure that wear leveling works to your advantage. Considering how my machine is set up that would mean about 350GB of SSD.
In any event why would you even ask if an rumored un released machine is suitable for your usage? There are many factors to consider and to evaluate them you need the machines real specs nit rumors.
For a programmer dealing with Terminal, Xcode, Netbeans, Eclipse, etc (not graphic intensive softwares), would this macbook air be a better deal than the 13/15" Macbook pro?
Anyone?
It depends upon the programmer doesn't it?
One concern I would have is wear on the SSD. Due to that I couldn't recommend the current model with it's limited SSD size. Look at how much space your current installation uses and then multiply by 3. That ought to give you enough excess capacity to assure that wear leveling works to your advantage. Considering how my machine is set up that would mean about 350GB of SSD.
In any event why would you even ask if an rumored un released machine is suitable for your usage? There are many factors to consider and to evaluate them you need the machines real specs nit rumors.
milo
Jul 31, 09:49 AM
I respectfully disagree. I say take it back and be ready for a much faster iMac Core 2 Duo. You want the latest, take it back. It won't be the latest for many more weeks. Core 2 Duo will be the latest for two more years.
Much faster? Benchmarks so far only say about 20% faster at the same clock speed. You just have to decide if paying a 10% restocking fee and being without your computer for who knows how long (I REALLY doubt new iMacs at the show, probably just towers and maybe MBP's) is worth that speed boost. And core 2 duo won't be "the latest for two years". Supposedly intel is going to ship quad cores by the end of this year! Not sure why you think that intel is suddenly going to stop making improvements.
Personally, at this point if I hadn't bought I'd wait, but if did I'd keep it.
Of course, the problem with waiting until Paris for consumer upgrades like MacBook is that Apple will entirely miss the educational buying season, losing one of the largest markets for its consumer products...
The educational buying season already happened...and apple was just in time with the macbook. They just came out a couple months ago and are still selling like hotcakes, they didn't miss anything.
And Snowy...love that design, that would be perfect. And it would have WAY better bang for buck compared to the cube, they need to make it simple, not a shiny work of art.
You don't think Vista will be out before the revision to the Core 2 Duo due in Q1 2007 with the Santa Rosa chipset??? I bet Vista will ship by the time the Santa Rosa chipset is ready, especially because MS is suggesting Vista systems use harddrives or Mobos with flash RAM to speed up the boot process.
The next update to Core isn't the new chipset, it's the four core versions, cloverton and kentsfield. And those are supposed to ship before the end of this year, which would beat Vista handily.
Here's an example of a post based in fantasy instead of fact. Core 3 is a distinct next generation set of processors based on a 45nm manufacturing process that will not begin before LATE 2008 and reign all of 2009 and 2010. :rolleyes:
Did you read his post? He said he meant the next update to Core, whether that's called Core 3 or not (any processor that goes beyond Core 2 because I don't know if they'll call it "Core 3"). He just used "core 3" because he didn't know what the real name for the next gen is.
I hope not. Visions of Motorola hauntingly return.
Possible initial supply constraints...because they decided to ship the chip a month EARLY? That's not remotely like moto.
Much faster? Benchmarks so far only say about 20% faster at the same clock speed. You just have to decide if paying a 10% restocking fee and being without your computer for who knows how long (I REALLY doubt new iMacs at the show, probably just towers and maybe MBP's) is worth that speed boost. And core 2 duo won't be "the latest for two years". Supposedly intel is going to ship quad cores by the end of this year! Not sure why you think that intel is suddenly going to stop making improvements.
Personally, at this point if I hadn't bought I'd wait, but if did I'd keep it.
Of course, the problem with waiting until Paris for consumer upgrades like MacBook is that Apple will entirely miss the educational buying season, losing one of the largest markets for its consumer products...
The educational buying season already happened...and apple was just in time with the macbook. They just came out a couple months ago and are still selling like hotcakes, they didn't miss anything.
And Snowy...love that design, that would be perfect. And it would have WAY better bang for buck compared to the cube, they need to make it simple, not a shiny work of art.
You don't think Vista will be out before the revision to the Core 2 Duo due in Q1 2007 with the Santa Rosa chipset??? I bet Vista will ship by the time the Santa Rosa chipset is ready, especially because MS is suggesting Vista systems use harddrives or Mobos with flash RAM to speed up the boot process.
The next update to Core isn't the new chipset, it's the four core versions, cloverton and kentsfield. And those are supposed to ship before the end of this year, which would beat Vista handily.
Here's an example of a post based in fantasy instead of fact. Core 3 is a distinct next generation set of processors based on a 45nm manufacturing process that will not begin before LATE 2008 and reign all of 2009 and 2010. :rolleyes:
Did you read his post? He said he meant the next update to Core, whether that's called Core 3 or not (any processor that goes beyond Core 2 because I don't know if they'll call it "Core 3"). He just used "core 3" because he didn't know what the real name for the next gen is.
I hope not. Visions of Motorola hauntingly return.
Possible initial supply constraints...because they decided to ship the chip a month EARLY? That's not remotely like moto.
Soba
Jul 28, 01:02 PM
you can't make a statement like that. that's like saying "i hate general electric air conditioners." what the heck? all CPU's (and air conditioners) do the same thing.
I'm not sure if this was intended as some kind of throwaway comment or not, but this is not even remotely true.
The original poster said he hated the P4, and honestly, the P4 was a lousy chip design from day 1. The original Pentium 4 chips released about 5 1/2 years ago were outperformed in some instances by an original Pentium chip running at 166MHz. The Pentium 4 was an awful architecture in many respects that simply could not be cleaned up enough to be viable; that would be why Intel abandoned it and based its current designs on the Pentium Pro's core (which was really a very decent server chip in the nineties).
When Apple announced last year they were going with Intel, a lot of people agreed it was a good choice based on the current state of the PowerPC architecture and based on Intel's planned chip designs. Personally, I was a bit unsure at the time, but was optimistic about the switch and figured we could scarcely do much worse than sticking with the G5, which was languishing. Turning back the clock a bit, if instead of releasing the G5, Apple had announced a switch to Intel in I would have thought they were crazy. Intel's chips were awful at that time and there wasn't much of a light at the end of the tunnel, either.
CPUs can be very, very different even if the overall system architecture is similar. And I side with the original poster. The P4 was a dog, and thankfully it is about to be buried forever.
I'm not sure if this was intended as some kind of throwaway comment or not, but this is not even remotely true.
The original poster said he hated the P4, and honestly, the P4 was a lousy chip design from day 1. The original Pentium 4 chips released about 5 1/2 years ago were outperformed in some instances by an original Pentium chip running at 166MHz. The Pentium 4 was an awful architecture in many respects that simply could not be cleaned up enough to be viable; that would be why Intel abandoned it and based its current designs on the Pentium Pro's core (which was really a very decent server chip in the nineties).
When Apple announced last year they were going with Intel, a lot of people agreed it was a good choice based on the current state of the PowerPC architecture and based on Intel's planned chip designs. Personally, I was a bit unsure at the time, but was optimistic about the switch and figured we could scarcely do much worse than sticking with the G5, which was languishing. Turning back the clock a bit, if instead of releasing the G5, Apple had announced a switch to Intel in I would have thought they were crazy. Intel's chips were awful at that time and there wasn't much of a light at the end of the tunnel, either.
CPUs can be very, very different even if the overall system architecture is similar. And I side with the original poster. The P4 was a dog, and thankfully it is about to be buried forever.
~Shard~
Jul 14, 02:45 PM
Also, think about what apple would be doing with such a machine - selling you a low cost, low margin mac that you could nonetheless upgrade with 3rd party components for years. Meaning that apple doesn't make a lot off you up front and doesn't get you coming back again for 5-ish years. Great for you, not so great for them. Whereas if they sell you a mac pro, they make a killing up front, so it's ok if you keep it for years, and if they sell you anything else you'll be back a lot sooner.
Yep - and that's the reality of it. It isn't just about the consumer, it's about profit margins, product life cycles, sales, etc. Apple wants to please their customers of course, however at the end of the day, business is business. :cool:
Yep - and that's the reality of it. It isn't just about the consumer, it's about profit margins, product life cycles, sales, etc. Apple wants to please their customers of course, however at the end of the day, business is business. :cool:
KnightWRX
Apr 6, 01:47 PM
(the built-in 3G option is another)
Apple should not do Built-in 3G. I don't want my 2000$ laptop tied to a carrier and I'd rather just Apple pass me the savings of not including 3G and letting me just use my iPhone to tether.
Apple should not do Built-in 3G. I don't want my 2000$ laptop tied to a carrier and I'd rather just Apple pass me the savings of not including 3G and letting me just use my iPhone to tether.
KnightWRX
Mar 26, 12:19 PM
Do we know this? I know Samba is being replaced but does anyone have any details?
I presume it's going to have better support for Vista and 7 clients purely because if Apple didn't care about that there would be no reason to ditch the older version of Samba that's GPL2. However, does anyone have any actual details on what Apple's Samba replacement is?
Details found here :
http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Apple-removes-Samba-from-Mac-OS-X-10-7-Server-1215179.html
Gist of it :
- less features than Samba
- no more Active Directory Services
- Just file sharing now.
Samba developers have also noted that the true motive behind this move might not be the GPLv3 per say, but a more global move away from the GPL. Is Apple moving to close the source on more and more of OS X ?
Anyway, Samba v4 could have given them all the "features" they implemented and much more. Their own in-house version won't necessarily be better just because it's written by Apple. The Samba team does a great job with what Microsoft puts out as documentation (if you can even call it that).
Note that from the article, this change only impacts OS X Server. The client was already an in-house solution.
I presume it's going to have better support for Vista and 7 clients purely because if Apple didn't care about that there would be no reason to ditch the older version of Samba that's GPL2. However, does anyone have any actual details on what Apple's Samba replacement is?
Details found here :
http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Apple-removes-Samba-from-Mac-OS-X-10-7-Server-1215179.html
Gist of it :
- less features than Samba
- no more Active Directory Services
- Just file sharing now.
Samba developers have also noted that the true motive behind this move might not be the GPLv3 per say, but a more global move away from the GPL. Is Apple moving to close the source on more and more of OS X ?
Anyway, Samba v4 could have given them all the "features" they implemented and much more. Their own in-house version won't necessarily be better just because it's written by Apple. The Samba team does a great job with what Microsoft puts out as documentation (if you can even call it that).
Note that from the article, this change only impacts OS X Server. The client was already an in-house solution.
qtx43
Mar 31, 05:11 PM
That was a hoot changing the search to Bing. Only thing gutsier would be to somehow replace every admob ad to a competitor.
I wouldn't leave Google completely blameless here. They knew who they were dealing with. They need eyeballs to sell (ad business) so they made their bed. Same reason why the software marketplace on android sucks, they designed it for their bottom line (eyeballs). They aren't making a product for people to use, they're making a channel to deliver a product (eyeballs) to their customers (advertisers).Except Google makes a big deal about how they support open source and aren't evil (presumably other profit seeking corporations are evil). And the open source fanatics lap it up. Take a look over at Groklaw, for example, and it's all a big conspiracy to discredit Google. So, I would change "[not] completely blameless" to "is completely hypocritical", then you'd be right on. I think Free and Open Source is great for many things, and proprietary works too, just don't blow smoke up my butt and tell me it's a rim job.
I wouldn't leave Google completely blameless here. They knew who they were dealing with. They need eyeballs to sell (ad business) so they made their bed. Same reason why the software marketplace on android sucks, they designed it for their bottom line (eyeballs). They aren't making a product for people to use, they're making a channel to deliver a product (eyeballs) to their customers (advertisers).Except Google makes a big deal about how they support open source and aren't evil (presumably other profit seeking corporations are evil). And the open source fanatics lap it up. Take a look over at Groklaw, for example, and it's all a big conspiracy to discredit Google. So, I would change "[not] completely blameless" to "is completely hypocritical", then you'd be right on. I think Free and Open Source is great for many things, and proprietary works too, just don't blow smoke up my butt and tell me it's a rim job.
AppleScruff1
Apr 8, 02:31 AM
I heard galaxy tab is better than Ipad. Is it true??
It's way better. Better get one while you still can.
It's way better. Better get one while you still can.
dethmaShine
Apr 20, 07:44 AM
No, it was shown at IFA 2006 for the first time but "officially presented" a few months later.
It wasn't shown; it was announced. Get your facts right.
ANd you design hardware in a couple of weeks?
Doesnt really matter LG prada wich has simular concept and specs was designed AND shown over a month before iphone was ever shown.
LG can see the future?
Apple copies, samsung copies, LG copies,... everybody does it only only always wants to make believe everyone copies from them.
No. I don't think that's possible; but samsung didn't ship it until later. So, that could have been a testing unit meant for a future release. Samsung had touch screen plans but could have easily ripped off the design. No big deal there.
It wasn't shown; it was announced. Get your facts right.
ANd you design hardware in a couple of weeks?
Doesnt really matter LG prada wich has simular concept and specs was designed AND shown over a month before iphone was ever shown.
LG can see the future?
Apple copies, samsung copies, LG copies,... everybody does it only only always wants to make believe everyone copies from them.
No. I don't think that's possible; but samsung didn't ship it until later. So, that could have been a testing unit meant for a future release. Samsung had touch screen plans but could have easily ripped off the design. No big deal there.
merk850
Jul 28, 07:41 PM
Well we all know how Apple works with when things are due.
Look at the G5 laptop.
Tweak or no tweak, the return will cost money and getting a refurbished is not getting a new one.
CounterPoint: If he is just going to take it back to buy a refurbished one, why take it back.
He allready has it! Thats a roundabout way to work, isnt it?
If you take it back, you wait for the new one, why spend the money for restocking and not get the new one?
The question remains, what are you going to get with a new iMac that you dont have now?
If you were going to get a MacPro, then I would say, my god, return that iMac and get a new MacPro, if not then keep what you got and use it for the next 2 months and enjoy it,, cheers!
Multimedia, Snowy and Grokgod,
Thanks for the continued thoughts. A store manager said she would be flexible with the 14 day return date, as lnog as I understand that I would pay the restock fee of 10%. What that means to me is I will hold on to this machine until the WWDC and if new model is announced I will return and repurchase, eating the restock fee.( Kind of a pay for usage plan I look at it as.) If no new enhancements are announced with the iMac i guess I will keep mine.
However, there is the thought as one of you have brought up to just reetuen and wait until Sept. when it may be more likely to arrive. A slippery slop0e I know but I am leaning mroe toward a return and repurchase, as a sort of insruance policy of sorts.
I know I can't have my cake and eat it...., but I was looking for insight into how likely an improvement in the iMac is this August.
Thanks again!
Merk850
Look at the G5 laptop.
Tweak or no tweak, the return will cost money and getting a refurbished is not getting a new one.
CounterPoint: If he is just going to take it back to buy a refurbished one, why take it back.
He allready has it! Thats a roundabout way to work, isnt it?
If you take it back, you wait for the new one, why spend the money for restocking and not get the new one?
The question remains, what are you going to get with a new iMac that you dont have now?
If you were going to get a MacPro, then I would say, my god, return that iMac and get a new MacPro, if not then keep what you got and use it for the next 2 months and enjoy it,, cheers!
Multimedia, Snowy and Grokgod,
Thanks for the continued thoughts. A store manager said she would be flexible with the 14 day return date, as lnog as I understand that I would pay the restock fee of 10%. What that means to me is I will hold on to this machine until the WWDC and if new model is announced I will return and repurchase, eating the restock fee.( Kind of a pay for usage plan I look at it as.) If no new enhancements are announced with the iMac i guess I will keep mine.
However, there is the thought as one of you have brought up to just reetuen and wait until Sept. when it may be more likely to arrive. A slippery slop0e I know but I am leaning mroe toward a return and repurchase, as a sort of insruance policy of sorts.
I know I can't have my cake and eat it...., but I was looking for insight into how likely an improvement in the iMac is this August.
Thanks again!
Merk850
KnightWRX
Apr 6, 10:52 AM
The Intel IGP is a serious downgrade. It's too bad Intel kicked nVidia out of the market, they have no talent for graphics. I would not have bought a SB MBA with Intel graphics, quite happy with my C2D+320m one.
tk421
Nov 29, 01:38 PM
Not true. Apple doesn't need the iTunes Store since all iPods are full of stolen music! ;)
No kidding! Hasn't Apple done enough to promote legal music purchases?
No kidding! Hasn't Apple done enough to promote legal music purchases?
leekohler
Feb 28, 09:12 PM
I'm pretty sure I figured it out.
I watched Wonder Woman too much as a kid! :eek:
Well then, they have to explain me. I liked GI Joe, Captain America, Batman and played sports. It just gets more ridiculous the more they try with their junk science.
I watched Wonder Woman too much as a kid! :eek:
Well then, they have to explain me. I liked GI Joe, Captain America, Batman and played sports. It just gets more ridiculous the more they try with their junk science.
rezenclowd3
Dec 8, 12:25 PM
^^^ Again, from Sony and referenced in my post 152 (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=11513752&postcount=152)
Sony has since clarified to IGN how damage works in the game. "Damage occurs to cars right from the beginning," Sony said in a statement, "it is not "unlocked."
Confusion seems to have stemmed from its differing implementation across the game's extensive garage, a point that Sony further clarified. "Standard models have minor deformation and scratches," said Sony, "Premium cars have greater visible level of damage, and Premium racing models have the highest level of damage."
I'm not arguing, just pointing out what Sony themselves have to say on the subject. Of course, as you progress further into the game, you are going to use more Premium racing models.
Sony has since clarified to IGN how damage works in the game. "Damage occurs to cars right from the beginning," Sony said in a statement, "it is not "unlocked."
Confusion seems to have stemmed from its differing implementation across the game's extensive garage, a point that Sony further clarified. "Standard models have minor deformation and scratches," said Sony, "Premium cars have greater visible level of damage, and Premium racing models have the highest level of damage."
I'm not arguing, just pointing out what Sony themselves have to say on the subject. Of course, as you progress further into the game, you are going to use more Premium racing models.
Lollypop
Jul 20, 08:12 AM
seems the tragic days of the P4 are gone for intel, good for us! :p With all the high end stuff from intel thats apparently going into the mac im a bit worried about the price of the systems though!
emotion
Aug 11, 10:09 AM
My t610 is on it's last legs. Please let this be true.
mwswami
Jul 21, 04:48 PM
Interesting. You know links where we can learn more about Bensley?
TechReport: The Bensley server platform debuts (http://techreport.com/etc/2006q2/woodcrest/index.x?pg=1)
TechReport: The Bensley server platform debuts (http://techreport.com/etc/2006q2/woodcrest/index.x?pg=1)
grue
Apr 11, 08:42 PM
Oh, and this is a more minor gripe, btu they need to pull their heads out of their asses and fix their volume licensing program, it's rubbish.
JeffDM
Sep 16, 04:39 PM
You are right. However, you try to tell consumers "Well we are moving to 2.4Ghz chips" after you just had 2.66Ghz and 3.0Ghz chips. It isnt going to work.
If today, Dell decided to move there whole line back to 1Ghz processors, nobody would buy. Unfortunetly the Ghz myth is a strong as its ever been. Taking a step backward is not an option.
It's already happened, just not in as a melodramatic way as you suggest (back to 1GHz? geez). AMD took a small step back, Hz wise when they introduced dual core, though it still advanced their "+" processor ratings I suppose that few noticed the actual clock reduction. Intel took a major step back Hz wise between Netburst and Core 2. The 5000 and 5100 series Xeon CPUs demonstrate this, you can get a Dell precision 690 with 3.73GHz Netburst based chips or the same 690 with 3.0GHz Core2 based chips.
So I don't think that a quad core Xeon running at 2.66GHz is going to be hurt too much in comparison to a dual core 3.0GHz, it's still a much more powerful processor.
Didn't you get the memo, PowerPC is dead. WTF does that have to do with anything? Do you just have this Pavlovian response to the word "Hyperthreading"?
PPC isn't dead, it's just not in new desktops anymore. IBM is making them (or at least co-designed them) for all the next generation game consoles and a lot of huge supercomputers.
If today, Dell decided to move there whole line back to 1Ghz processors, nobody would buy. Unfortunetly the Ghz myth is a strong as its ever been. Taking a step backward is not an option.
It's already happened, just not in as a melodramatic way as you suggest (back to 1GHz? geez). AMD took a small step back, Hz wise when they introduced dual core, though it still advanced their "+" processor ratings I suppose that few noticed the actual clock reduction. Intel took a major step back Hz wise between Netburst and Core 2. The 5000 and 5100 series Xeon CPUs demonstrate this, you can get a Dell precision 690 with 3.73GHz Netburst based chips or the same 690 with 3.0GHz Core2 based chips.
So I don't think that a quad core Xeon running at 2.66GHz is going to be hurt too much in comparison to a dual core 3.0GHz, it's still a much more powerful processor.
Didn't you get the memo, PowerPC is dead. WTF does that have to do with anything? Do you just have this Pavlovian response to the word "Hyperthreading"?
PPC isn't dead, it's just not in new desktops anymore. IBM is making them (or at least co-designed them) for all the next generation game consoles and a lot of huge supercomputers.
Mistrblank
Apr 8, 07:19 AM
Wow. I bought mine at Best Buy on opening day and they sold out of them. Why in anybody's right mind would best buy not sell what they have?
It keeps people coming back day after day.
It keeps people coming back day after day.
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.
NT1440
Mar 23, 08:38 AM
. Wow, completely clicked on the wrong tab.....
ugp
Jun 11, 09:23 AM
I'm on a conf call and just got word about the early openings. As soon as i get to work in a minute ill post all the info i have. :)
Please let me know ASAP! :D
Please let me know ASAP! :D
bamerican
Apr 25, 03:19 PM
"Federal Marshals need a warrant. . . . . "
Duh, the police always have to jump over a higher bar . . . I, personally, can come into your home, take your bag of cocaine, and go give it to the police and it will be admissible, even though the cops need a warrant. (I can be sued for breaking and entering, etc., but the drugs are still admissible.
You are absolutely right. This lawyer is a complete idiot. The reason that federal marshals or any other goverment actor needs a warrant is because they are government actors. The Fourth Amendment protects people from the government, not private parties. Purely private searches are not protected by the Fourth Amendment.
Apple is not a government actor and, unless they are acting in coordination or on behalf of the government, under the Fourth Amendment they don't require a warrant for a damn thing.
Did this guy miss the day they taught law in law school?
Duh, the police always have to jump over a higher bar . . . I, personally, can come into your home, take your bag of cocaine, and go give it to the police and it will be admissible, even though the cops need a warrant. (I can be sued for breaking and entering, etc., but the drugs are still admissible.
You are absolutely right. This lawyer is a complete idiot. The reason that federal marshals or any other goverment actor needs a warrant is because they are government actors. The Fourth Amendment protects people from the government, not private parties. Purely private searches are not protected by the Fourth Amendment.
Apple is not a government actor and, unless they are acting in coordination or on behalf of the government, under the Fourth Amendment they don't require a warrant for a damn thing.
Did this guy miss the day they taught law in law school?
