Mal67
May 1, 12:34 AM
I absolutely agree. This is the same reason why I was hoping the USB 3.0 would be on this version. I realize now that is almost certainly not going to happen. I just thought that with so many PC's (including some PC laptops) already offering USB 3.0 that maybe the brand spankin' new iMac might be so equipped.
ivybridge imac 2012 for usb3?
+ when will we see the sandybridge mac minis?
ivybridge imac 2012 for usb3?
+ when will we see the sandybridge mac minis?
FrankySavvy
Mar 22, 01:48 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
Psyched! Late April, Early Nay would be perfect timing for me to pick up a brand new iMac. :)
Psyched! Late April, Early Nay would be perfect timing for me to pick up a brand new iMac. :)
apolloa
Apr 20, 11:07 AM
hahaha, if you read the original report by The Guardian link here:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/apr/20/iphone-tracking-prompts-privacy-fears
You will see that it does indeed state the Apple EULA at the end of the article, the part that seems to have been strangely left off all same reports in Mac Rumors, Engadget, 9TO5MAC all quoting The Guardian source :rolleyes::rolleyes:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/apr/20/iphone-tracking-prompts-privacy-fears
You will see that it does indeed state the Apple EULA at the end of the article, the part that seems to have been strangely left off all same reports in Mac Rumors, Engadget, 9TO5MAC all quoting The Guardian source :rolleyes::rolleyes:
rajador
Mar 23, 05:48 AM
There is a video demonstrating Thunderbolt tech transfer speed. Soft meter gives around 700mb/s but it copies 4,42gb in 14 so its like 350mb/s. Best SSD hd transfer are around 250mb/s, its a nice improvement...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gk69pCcVSSQ&feature=related
:eek::eek::eek:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gk69pCcVSSQ&feature=related
:eek::eek::eek:
Mac'nCheese
Apr 17, 03:30 PM
If you are going to make a claim like that you really should provide a source.
http://www.acsh.org/healthissues/newsid.442/healthissue_detail.asp
http://www.eco-imperialism.com/content/article.php3?id=68
http://winteryknight.wordpress.com/2010/04/25/john-stossel-explains-how-environmentalism-kills-millions-of-people/
http://www.acsh.org/healthissues/newsid.442/healthissue_detail.asp
http://www.eco-imperialism.com/content/article.php3?id=68
http://winteryknight.wordpress.com/2010/04/25/john-stossel-explains-how-environmentalism-kills-millions-of-people/
MacSA
Jul 17, 10:17 AM
I wouldn't give you good odds for WWDC, but you should have your update within less than a month from it.
Merom isn't out at the time of WWDC- it won't be until later in August. It is possible they may let apple take pre-orders if steve wants to really make it a massive attack at WWDC on all parts of the line charging ahead into the next generation, but you never know with him.
Of course the way things are going, for all we know there may really be PB G5s at WWDC, who knows nowadays :rolleyes:
But wasnt Yonah supposed to come out in January this year, and Apple released the iMac early January. So tens of thousands of chips must have been shipping before the official release date, I dont see why the same couldn't be true of these new chips.
Merom isn't out at the time of WWDC- it won't be until later in August. It is possible they may let apple take pre-orders if steve wants to really make it a massive attack at WWDC on all parts of the line charging ahead into the next generation, but you never know with him.
Of course the way things are going, for all we know there may really be PB G5s at WWDC, who knows nowadays :rolleyes:
But wasnt Yonah supposed to come out in January this year, and Apple released the iMac early January. So tens of thousands of chips must have been shipping before the official release date, I dont see why the same couldn't be true of these new chips.
jettredmont
Sep 13, 09:27 PM
Hmm. A few thoughts.
First, the "candybar" reference you make is quite apt: this looks a lot like the LG Chocolate. Which, of course, was designed to look like an iPod, so duh. But, I foresee market confusion. At least the buttons here will have some response to them (I hope!).
Second, I'm not sure about the slide-out idea. I like the idea on many cell phones as a way to keep buttons from being pressed accidentally, but greatly prefer Apple's iPod "Hold" switch over a physical drawer or "key lock" mechanism. With the music buttons so exposed, seems we'd still need a "hold", and it'd be silly for that to only apply to half the device. More, though, I worry about how flimsy the device will feel with the scroll wheel "slid out". Granted, that seems infinitely better ergonomics than the keyboard itself sliding out (can slide open and dial with one hand in one smooth movement without re-adjusting phone in hand). But, still, I worry about the likelihood of the wheel "drawer" snapping off. I hate to see iPods in such pain!
Third, what about cases? My cell phones without cases always end up looking like crap. I wouldn't want a nice shiny black iPhone to be all beaten up a week after I got it. How would a case work with a slide-out drawer? Are we stuck using socks?
I'm assuming that the non-numeric controls (answer the phone, hang up, you know, the little not-so-important functions) are also in the drawer. Does that make sense for answering the phone while on the go?
Finally: size? I know, most of the world doesn't have American-size Big Mac fingers. Still, I can't imagine using a keypad small enough (both width/height and depth) to fit under the scroll wheel of a nano. If you make it that small, the buttons have to be really bulby and stiff (see Treo); otherwise you just hit the wrong one too often.
First, the "candybar" reference you make is quite apt: this looks a lot like the LG Chocolate. Which, of course, was designed to look like an iPod, so duh. But, I foresee market confusion. At least the buttons here will have some response to them (I hope!).
Second, I'm not sure about the slide-out idea. I like the idea on many cell phones as a way to keep buttons from being pressed accidentally, but greatly prefer Apple's iPod "Hold" switch over a physical drawer or "key lock" mechanism. With the music buttons so exposed, seems we'd still need a "hold", and it'd be silly for that to only apply to half the device. More, though, I worry about how flimsy the device will feel with the scroll wheel "slid out". Granted, that seems infinitely better ergonomics than the keyboard itself sliding out (can slide open and dial with one hand in one smooth movement without re-adjusting phone in hand). But, still, I worry about the likelihood of the wheel "drawer" snapping off. I hate to see iPods in such pain!
Third, what about cases? My cell phones without cases always end up looking like crap. I wouldn't want a nice shiny black iPhone to be all beaten up a week after I got it. How would a case work with a slide-out drawer? Are we stuck using socks?
I'm assuming that the non-numeric controls (answer the phone, hang up, you know, the little not-so-important functions) are also in the drawer. Does that make sense for answering the phone while on the go?
Finally: size? I know, most of the world doesn't have American-size Big Mac fingers. Still, I can't imagine using a keypad small enough (both width/height and depth) to fit under the scroll wheel of a nano. If you make it that small, the buttons have to be really bulby and stiff (see Treo); otherwise you just hit the wrong one too often.
yg17
Apr 25, 09:31 AM
Instead of increasing the driving age, what about requiring more logged hours with a parent whit a learner's permit, manditory quality driver's ed, and making it harder for unsafe drivers to get their licence? Then require a one year driving check up a year after the licence was attained?
I don't think that would've done much good here. His mom was encouraging him to do this ****.
I don't think that would've done much good here. His mom was encouraging him to do this ****.
Lixivial
Aug 23, 04:40 PM
In addition, the companies announced that Creative has joined Apple's "Made for iPod" program and will be announcing their own iPod accessory products later this year.
:eek:
...Sim Wong Hoo throwing in the towel? NEVER!
EDIT: Yeah, the $100 million is kinda shocking, too... :D
:eek:
...Sim Wong Hoo throwing in the towel? NEVER!
EDIT: Yeah, the $100 million is kinda shocking, too... :D
aafuss1
Aug 31, 10:24 PM
Obviously iPod related-with a musical guest on stage or via ichat (last year Madonna and Jamie Foxx). Nike kit for 5G iPod, and tubes for 5g.
ouimetnick
Apr 4, 12:00 PM
Non issue. Just avoid robbing a store.
-Steve
Sent from my iPhone
:D
If someone wants to commit a crime. Then I think there rights should be gone. If they don't want to get shot or arrested, then act like a normal person.
Simple as that.
-Steve
Sent from my iPhone
:D
If someone wants to commit a crime. Then I think there rights should be gone. If they don't want to get shot or arrested, then act like a normal person.
Simple as that.
Mikael
Sep 9, 10:21 AM
The fact that the new iMacs can't address more than 3Gb of memory and are therefore operating on a 32bit logic-board makes me doubtful as to whether or not these systems are really 64-bit capable... It seems like some kind of hybrid 32/64bit system.
Will the C2D iMacs be able to run 64bit code, despite not having the 64bit address space (and being able to access over 4Gb or RAM)?
I've searched for address bus width for the Core 2 line, but haven't found anything. It is, however, not likely that Intel downgraded the width from the previous models, which would mean either a 36 or a 40 bit bus. Also note that AMD's K8 (Athlon 64, Sempron and Opteron) also feature a 40 bit address bus and not 64 as someone might think. I also think that the G5 uses a 40 or 42 bit address bus, so it's pretty much the same there too.
So, if Core 2 has a 40 bit bus (which is likely) you end up with 1TB of addressable memory space.
Also, Core 2 CPUs are fully capable of running 64 bit code. Whether the address bus is 64 bits wide or not hasn't got anything to do with the width of the internal data path and execution unit width.
Will the C2D iMacs be able to run 64bit code, despite not having the 64bit address space (and being able to access over 4Gb or RAM)?
I've searched for address bus width for the Core 2 line, but haven't found anything. It is, however, not likely that Intel downgraded the width from the previous models, which would mean either a 36 or a 40 bit bus. Also note that AMD's K8 (Athlon 64, Sempron and Opteron) also feature a 40 bit address bus and not 64 as someone might think. I also think that the G5 uses a 40 or 42 bit address bus, so it's pretty much the same there too.
So, if Core 2 has a 40 bit bus (which is likely) you end up with 1TB of addressable memory space.
Also, Core 2 CPUs are fully capable of running 64 bit code. Whether the address bus is 64 bits wide or not hasn't got anything to do with the width of the internal data path and execution unit width.
Yamcha
Apr 30, 06:43 PM
Glad, hoping for a redesign, but probably unlikely, also would be great to see the yellow tint issue resolved..
mwayne85
Apr 22, 12:54 PM
So I'm guessing the chances of them putting AMD graphics in one of these models is practically zero?
erikistired
Sep 19, 05:02 PM
As I stated in a few posts up I'm not that happy with the pricing of the iTunes Movies, but, if I were to buy any I would quickly run into a huge problem - STORAGE! I have an iBook with 60 GB drive and it's almost full from other stuff.
Apple should come out with a home storage network server with RAID, etc.
that's my hold back right now. i just don't have space for movies on my powerbook, and putting them on external media wouldn't make sense, at that point i could just toss a dvd or two in my backpack.
Apple should come out with a home storage network server with RAID, etc.
that's my hold back right now. i just don't have space for movies on my powerbook, and putting them on external media wouldn't make sense, at that point i could just toss a dvd or two in my backpack.
Eidorian
Jul 19, 10:50 AM
Hmmm, it's a tough one. But I think the price vs. performance of Conroe being so much better than Merom will mean that Apple will try their best to cram one into the iMac. It would mean a more powerful computer that's cheaper for Apple to produce, and it is a desktop after all.
But you are right that the thermals of Conroe could be a problem. I'm not sure how much of a difference speed-step will make. Although it is the most power-efficient desktop chip out there, it consumes less power under load than Pentium D's at idle:
http://images.tomshardware.com/2006/07/14/power_conroe.png
And it runs much cooler than the chips in the Macbook and Macbook Pro in normal computer cases:
http://images.tomshardware.com/2006/07/14/game_over_core_2_duo_knocks_out_athlon_64/conroe_temp_min.gif
25 degrees celcius with speedstep...
http://images.tomshardware.com/2006/07/14/game_over_core_2_duo_knocks_out_athlon_64/x6800_temp_max.gif
And 45 degrees at max clockspeed. And that's the 75W Conroe, the 65W one should be slightly cooler. Now I know this isn't in the iMac case, but if the chips run that cool in desktops then hopefully they shouldn't run too much hotter in an iMac...Then all we're looking at is cranking up the current 180 watt power supply. I remember my iMac G5 2.0 GHz hitting 75-76º C at 100% load. The Rev. C iMac G5 was whisper quiet compared to my machine using the same 970FX chip. If Conroe doesn't break 45° C then it's not a thermal nightmare to put into the iMac. It's just a pain to power.
But you are right that the thermals of Conroe could be a problem. I'm not sure how much of a difference speed-step will make. Although it is the most power-efficient desktop chip out there, it consumes less power under load than Pentium D's at idle:
http://images.tomshardware.com/2006/07/14/power_conroe.png
And it runs much cooler than the chips in the Macbook and Macbook Pro in normal computer cases:
http://images.tomshardware.com/2006/07/14/game_over_core_2_duo_knocks_out_athlon_64/conroe_temp_min.gif
25 degrees celcius with speedstep...
http://images.tomshardware.com/2006/07/14/game_over_core_2_duo_knocks_out_athlon_64/x6800_temp_max.gif
And 45 degrees at max clockspeed. And that's the 75W Conroe, the 65W one should be slightly cooler. Now I know this isn't in the iMac case, but if the chips run that cool in desktops then hopefully they shouldn't run too much hotter in an iMac...Then all we're looking at is cranking up the current 180 watt power supply. I remember my iMac G5 2.0 GHz hitting 75-76º C at 100% load. The Rev. C iMac G5 was whisper quiet compared to my machine using the same 970FX chip. If Conroe doesn't break 45° C then it's not a thermal nightmare to put into the iMac. It's just a pain to power.
asdf542
Apr 14, 04:24 PM
No. You are confusing these with facts. I've pointed out to you each time you have made something up in my reply.LOL, and yet you still haven't given any examples.
Person 1: Thunderbolt = Mac Only True. In the same way FW is 'Mac only'. You perhaps don't understand the difference between speaking literally and effectively. Effectively, FW is considered 'Mac only' yet is available to any vendor that wants to implement it. But the lack of interest has resulted in it being considered 'Mac only'. Not literally, but effectively. See the difference?
Right, and no where was this specified at this point in the conversation. You are simply fitting it in for your argument. FireWire was not mentioned in the original post.
You: Bingo True.
Me: Post to an article showing that it won't be Mac only False. You posted an article that said others could use it. Nowhere in your article did it say others would use it. I explained this to you, but again, you missed the point. Firewire isn't literally Mac only either. I knew what article I posted and I knew what it contained and it served its purpose perfectly fine. I don't need to show you who's going to use it because it's going to be native in Ivy Bridge ALONGSIDE USB 3 as the title would suggest. There's no reason NOT to use it as the superior IO and it's already there. This isn't rocket science.
You: Claim you were talking metaphorically to save your ass False. I don't think you understand what a metaphor is, because you aren't using it right. I claimed, and the OP later explained, it was meant, in context, effectively Mac only. Seriously, this is highschool english. Wow, what a surprise. The OP decided to choose the route that served him better for the discussion. :rolleyes:
Myself and Econgeek: Explain to you why what you saved your ass with won't be trueFalse. Econogeek did well in explaining how the situations differ. You explained nothing.I explained why ThunderBolt wouldn't be another FireWire. You weren't having it and decided to pull strawman attacks.
You: Go on a rampage of insults False. No insults. Just observations. If you made a lot of spelling errors and I pointed them out, that would be an observation, not an insult. You both misunderstood posts and made up claims of statements that did not exist. I pointed that out. If you felt insulted, you are being overly sensitive.Pointing out spelling errors and telling someone that they belong on the short bus are two different things. :rolleyes: Sounds like you have some self-esteem issues if you feel the need to tell someone they're mentally retarded over an IO discussion.
Person 1: Thunderbolt = Mac Only True. In the same way FW is 'Mac only'. You perhaps don't understand the difference between speaking literally and effectively. Effectively, FW is considered 'Mac only' yet is available to any vendor that wants to implement it. But the lack of interest has resulted in it being considered 'Mac only'. Not literally, but effectively. See the difference?
Right, and no where was this specified at this point in the conversation. You are simply fitting it in for your argument. FireWire was not mentioned in the original post.
You: Bingo True.
Me: Post to an article showing that it won't be Mac only False. You posted an article that said others could use it. Nowhere in your article did it say others would use it. I explained this to you, but again, you missed the point. Firewire isn't literally Mac only either. I knew what article I posted and I knew what it contained and it served its purpose perfectly fine. I don't need to show you who's going to use it because it's going to be native in Ivy Bridge ALONGSIDE USB 3 as the title would suggest. There's no reason NOT to use it as the superior IO and it's already there. This isn't rocket science.
You: Claim you were talking metaphorically to save your ass False. I don't think you understand what a metaphor is, because you aren't using it right. I claimed, and the OP later explained, it was meant, in context, effectively Mac only. Seriously, this is highschool english. Wow, what a surprise. The OP decided to choose the route that served him better for the discussion. :rolleyes:
Myself and Econgeek: Explain to you why what you saved your ass with won't be trueFalse. Econogeek did well in explaining how the situations differ. You explained nothing.I explained why ThunderBolt wouldn't be another FireWire. You weren't having it and decided to pull strawman attacks.
You: Go on a rampage of insults False. No insults. Just observations. If you made a lot of spelling errors and I pointed them out, that would be an observation, not an insult. You both misunderstood posts and made up claims of statements that did not exist. I pointed that out. If you felt insulted, you are being overly sensitive.Pointing out spelling errors and telling someone that they belong on the short bus are two different things. :rolleyes: Sounds like you have some self-esteem issues if you feel the need to tell someone they're mentally retarded over an IO discussion.
greenstork
Jul 17, 07:38 PM
I'd actually say they'd be more likely to go straight Conroe, TDP is the same, has speedstep so it throttles back, and the Conroe has a bigger L2 Cache- just like the Meroms that would be most likely for the iMac.
I think this is all the more reason why they'll go with an Allendale, it's not as high of a performace chip but it does exceed the performace of the Meroms. It's a desktop chip, designed for lower end desktops, not a mobile chip without as much power.
I think this is all the more reason why they'll go with an Allendale, it's not as high of a performace chip but it does exceed the performace of the Meroms. It's a desktop chip, designed for lower end desktops, not a mobile chip without as much power.
pastafazoule
Apr 30, 03:16 PM
Still loving my 21.5 inch i3 iMac.
I am hoping it gets a chassis redesign though.
i hope there is a white 27in
I am hoping it gets a chassis redesign though.
i hope there is a white 27in
splintah
Sep 10, 08:33 AM
quad core macbook pro anyone ?
milo
Sep 5, 04:51 PM
Only one problem with that..
You can already do it with iTunes.
And it would be hard to go to one room and start the movie then go to the other room and start watching it.
If there is a media device it will be set-top box or Mini style that sits next to the main TV.
Did you read the post? iTunes doesn't do that, right now apple doesn't have an airport with *video* output. And look at the picture again, that mockup has a remote that talks to the airport, you don't have to leave the room.
You miss the whole point of this. Why would you want to have an expensive box next to the TV when you could just have a tiny airport, and let your computer do the heavy lifting from another room?
isn't the resolution going to be terrible. I don't see these movie downloads working with a hi-def TV. The television shows are pretty pathetic on my old 42" panasonic. 320x240 is going to look terrible on a beautiful sony 1080p television...
You're assuming they won't up the resolution when they start doing movies. What makes you so sure they'll do that?
You can already do it with iTunes.
And it would be hard to go to one room and start the movie then go to the other room and start watching it.
If there is a media device it will be set-top box or Mini style that sits next to the main TV.
Did you read the post? iTunes doesn't do that, right now apple doesn't have an airport with *video* output. And look at the picture again, that mockup has a remote that talks to the airport, you don't have to leave the room.
You miss the whole point of this. Why would you want to have an expensive box next to the TV when you could just have a tiny airport, and let your computer do the heavy lifting from another room?
isn't the resolution going to be terrible. I don't see these movie downloads working with a hi-def TV. The television shows are pretty pathetic on my old 42" panasonic. 320x240 is going to look terrible on a beautiful sony 1080p television...
You're assuming they won't up the resolution when they start doing movies. What makes you so sure they'll do that?
rmitchell
Sep 13, 09:57 PM
Ok Guys,
I know I've never posted before and I have 0 credibility in the apple rumors field but I've been sitting on something for about a month now that I wasn't sure when to let out.
I have a friend who was at a mobile conference on computing about a month ago who let me in on a demo of the apple iPhone that he saw. It had a covered company logo which he caught a glimpse of (it was a Samsung system.) The kicker on the whole system is the method of display built on the phone.
It has a built in projector that puts the display of the screen on any local area (such as a wall.) That is the secret to the apple iPhone. I'll understand if I'm bashed on here and have no support but I'm just reporting the information that I've been given (admittedly second hand but hopefully I'm on the right track.)
Rob
I know I've never posted before and I have 0 credibility in the apple rumors field but I've been sitting on something for about a month now that I wasn't sure when to let out.
I have a friend who was at a mobile conference on computing about a month ago who let me in on a demo of the apple iPhone that he saw. It had a covered company logo which he caught a glimpse of (it was a Samsung system.) The kicker on the whole system is the method of display built on the phone.
It has a built in projector that puts the display of the screen on any local area (such as a wall.) That is the secret to the apple iPhone. I'll understand if I'm bashed on here and have no support but I'm just reporting the information that I've been given (admittedly second hand but hopefully I'm on the right track.)
Rob
ten-oak-druid
Apr 19, 08:59 PM
A strong response from Samsung:
"We're guilty!"
"We're guilty!"
drumrobot
May 3, 11:05 AM
what about target display mode on the 21/24" models?
There isn't a 24" model. That was discontinued years ago.
There isn't a 24" model. That was discontinued years ago.