Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 11, 10:38 AM
Paris would be an excellent opportunity to introduce the "iPhone".
stormj
Aug 11, 01:41 PM
Here are some of the issues with the iPod phone.
In order to make the biggest splash, it will have to be available in both GSM and CDMA versions so that all of the big 4 carriers can use it. GSM is the international standard, so I'm sure they will have that *at least*.
In order for it to matter, it will have to be able to access the music store over the air. Have you tried downloading an MP3 file, even on an EDGE connection? It sucks.
The delay here has more to do with the networks. Until the 3G networks are fully rolled out (EV-DO on Verizon, UTMS on GSM, etc. etc.) and available beyond a few cities, this phone will just frustrate people. (Verizon's rollout has gone much further, but I would think given that CDMA is rare outside of the US that that fails to compensate for the fact that the GSM 3G is still in just a few markets.)
The latest rumor is that wide-spread UTMS roll out will be in Q1 2007. When that happens, we'll see an iPod phone. It's not as if Apple couldn't have made an Apple-rific phone by now. The limitation isn't theirs, it's the networks'.
In the meantime, you can get an HTC Tytn that will use 3G world wide and will play MediaPlayer... if you're into M$.
In order to make the biggest splash, it will have to be available in both GSM and CDMA versions so that all of the big 4 carriers can use it. GSM is the international standard, so I'm sure they will have that *at least*.
In order for it to matter, it will have to be able to access the music store over the air. Have you tried downloading an MP3 file, even on an EDGE connection? It sucks.
The delay here has more to do with the networks. Until the 3G networks are fully rolled out (EV-DO on Verizon, UTMS on GSM, etc. etc.) and available beyond a few cities, this phone will just frustrate people. (Verizon's rollout has gone much further, but I would think given that CDMA is rare outside of the US that that fails to compensate for the fact that the GSM 3G is still in just a few markets.)
The latest rumor is that wide-spread UTMS roll out will be in Q1 2007. When that happens, we'll see an iPod phone. It's not as if Apple couldn't have made an Apple-rific phone by now. The limitation isn't theirs, it's the networks'.
In the meantime, you can get an HTC Tytn that will use 3G world wide and will play MediaPlayer... if you're into M$.
n00bst3r
Sep 18, 11:51 PM
The thing is Apple is shooting itself in the foot because it knows that all the Prosumers research enough that they know there is better available. Apple is losing alot of sales by not being prepared. I would think that Apple would get 2nd priority to Dell on shipments so they should have a good stock of C2D.
rishio
Apr 6, 12:24 AM
The apple store is down so maybe they are announcing it tomorrow?
Count Blah
Apr 6, 02:24 PM
Apple are kicking arse without the competition. Do they need it at this point?
Yes, now more than ever.
Yes, now more than ever.
Sydde
Mar 17, 01:48 PM
Ultra FAIL fear mongering. Libertarian ≠ Anarchist. Small government ≠ no government. Limiting government with constitutional constraints ≠ destruction of government.
He's a common sense constitutional conservative, enemy of tyranny everywhere, and an unfailing defender of fundamental human liberty.
OK, I confess, "shut down" was a slight exaggeration. But as the paragon of neo-liberalism, Paul would wholly gut every little regulatory agency that provides any kind of buffer that protects people and businesses from the depredations of corporate interests, instead electing to enact policies that would protect corporations from the depredations of people. That would be the net effect of his idealism, and if you take five minutes to read the article I linked to, it will become evident that Paul's lasseiz-faire ideals have been proven to fail miserably (unless you are already loaded). Heck, we have seen parallels in the lingering devastation caused by Reagan's policies.
He's a common sense constitutional conservative, enemy of tyranny everywhere, and an unfailing defender of fundamental human liberty.
OK, I confess, "shut down" was a slight exaggeration. But as the paragon of neo-liberalism, Paul would wholly gut every little regulatory agency that provides any kind of buffer that protects people and businesses from the depredations of corporate interests, instead electing to enact policies that would protect corporations from the depredations of people. That would be the net effect of his idealism, and if you take five minutes to read the article I linked to, it will become evident that Paul's lasseiz-faire ideals have been proven to fail miserably (unless you are already loaded). Heck, we have seen parallels in the lingering devastation caused by Reagan's policies.
THX1139
Aug 19, 07:34 PM
... For anyone out there who has been needlessly influenced by this guy to wait for a system that will only be outdated by the one that will come after it, please uninfluence yourself, and buy the stupid computer that you want, when you want it.
Jeeshh!!
I agree. I'm noticing a trend. People who are looking at the Macpro in a negative way come in three flavors. The first type are invested in G5 (especially quad) and are desperately trying justify that their investment is sound, when they actually desire a Macpro. They can feel better about their old machines by making the new ones seem bad. The are almost "smug" about waiting until a better one comes out. The second flavor are people who hate the Mac culture and are pissed that the Mac is catching up to the windows workstation sector. The third type are people who can't afford a Macpro and go out of their way to publicly discredit the machine so that they can feel good about their iMacs or Minis. There are others, but you get the point.
I also find it amusing when I see posters participating in Macpro discussions when they have publicly stated that they have no intention of buying a Macpro. WTF?? Don't they have a life outside of macrumors? If I owned a G5 Quad and had no intention of buying a Macpro, I'd be spending all of my spare time doing cool stuff with my machine... instead of wasting that time participating in discussions that have nothing to do with me. I might read though some of the threads now and then, just to keep up with technology - but to particpate and debate, what a waste. I guess some folks have no life.
Jeeshh!!
I agree. I'm noticing a trend. People who are looking at the Macpro in a negative way come in three flavors. The first type are invested in G5 (especially quad) and are desperately trying justify that their investment is sound, when they actually desire a Macpro. They can feel better about their old machines by making the new ones seem bad. The are almost "smug" about waiting until a better one comes out. The second flavor are people who hate the Mac culture and are pissed that the Mac is catching up to the windows workstation sector. The third type are people who can't afford a Macpro and go out of their way to publicly discredit the machine so that they can feel good about their iMacs or Minis. There are others, but you get the point.
I also find it amusing when I see posters participating in Macpro discussions when they have publicly stated that they have no intention of buying a Macpro. WTF?? Don't they have a life outside of macrumors? If I owned a G5 Quad and had no intention of buying a Macpro, I'd be spending all of my spare time doing cool stuff with my machine... instead of wasting that time participating in discussions that have nothing to do with me. I might read though some of the threads now and then, just to keep up with technology - but to particpate and debate, what a waste. I guess some folks have no life.
gnasher729
Jul 20, 01:26 PM
But as some already pointed out, many applications can't use multiple cores, therefore you won't get any performance improvements with multi cores.
True, but many applications are fast enough on a single core, and applications that are not fast enough _will_ be modified when multiple processors are common.
True, but many applications are fast enough on a single core, and applications that are not fast enough _will_ be modified when multiple processors are common.
gnasher729
Aug 17, 03:52 AM
Lots of stuff on Anandtech about the poor memory performance on the Intel chipset.
Looks like the Xeons got killed by the G5 in Word in their tests.
Might be an interesting machine when/if the motherboard chipset/ memory performance issue is looked in to.
I think part 3 of their review will be telling, paring the machine up to XP machines in a variety of tests.
Anandtech has one big omission: They didn't look at the CPU usage at all. Word doesn't use more than one CPU. And may I say it is damned hard to do anything in Word where CPU usage is of any concern; how often do you export a thousand page Word document to HTML?
These machines can do many things simultaneously. So what would have happened if you were converting a DVD using Handbrake in the background while doing the Word test? On the dual core G5, one CPU would have been used by Word, so Handbrake slows down by 50%. On the Quad core Xeon, one core would have been used by Word, so Handbrake slows down only by 25%.
Looks like the Xeons got killed by the G5 in Word in their tests.
Might be an interesting machine when/if the motherboard chipset/ memory performance issue is looked in to.
I think part 3 of their review will be telling, paring the machine up to XP machines in a variety of tests.
Anandtech has one big omission: They didn't look at the CPU usage at all. Word doesn't use more than one CPU. And may I say it is damned hard to do anything in Word where CPU usage is of any concern; how often do you export a thousand page Word document to HTML?
These machines can do many things simultaneously. So what would have happened if you were converting a DVD using Handbrake in the background while doing the Word test? On the dual core G5, one CPU would have been used by Word, so Handbrake slows down by 50%. On the Quad core Xeon, one core would have been used by Word, so Handbrake slows down only by 25%.
shawnce
Aug 26, 07:10 PM
From the looks of it PPC based Mac's have MUCH fewer issues. Did you notice that the site was started on June 7th 2006? What do you think it will be skewed towards?
(anyway talk about a site designed for farming ad link related revenue)
(anyway talk about a site designed for farming ad link related revenue)
Eduard
Apr 9, 04:22 PM
I would rather keep my 330m than an integrated Intel GPU :(
shamino
Jul 21, 10:07 AM
With all these new technologies with 4, 8 and eventually 24-core capacities (some time in the not too distant future) all running at 64-bit, we musn't forget that software also has tobe developed for these machienes in order to get the most out of the hardware. At the moment we aren't even maximising core-duo, let alone a quad core and all the rest!!!!
It really depends on your application.
On the desktop, if you're a typical user that's just interested in web surfing, playing music files, organizing your photo collection, etc., more than two cores will probably not be too useful. For these kinds of users, even two cores may be overkill, but two are useful for keeping a responsive UI when an application starts hogging all the CPU time.
If you start using higher-power applications (like video work - iMovie/iDVD, for instance) then more cores will speed up that kind of work (assuming the app is properly multithreaded, of course.) 4-core systems will definitely benefit this kind of user.
With current applications, however, I don't think more than 4 cores will be useful. The kind of work that will make 8 cores useful is the kinds that requires expensive professional software - which most people don't use.
If you get away from the desktop and look to the server market, however, the picture changes. A web server may only be running one copy of Apache, but it may create a thread for every simultaneous connection. If you have 8 cores, then you can handle 8 times as many connections as a 1-core system can (assuming sufficient memory and I/O bandwidth, of course.) Ditto for database, transaction, and all kinds of other servers. More cores means more simultaneous connections without performance degradation.
Cluster computing has similar benefits. With 8 cores in each processor, it is almost as good as having 8 times as many computers in the cluster, and a lot less expensive. This concept will scale up as the number of cores increases, assuming motherbaords can be designed with enough memory and FSB bandwidth to keep them all busy.
I think we might see a single quad-core chip in consumer systems, like the iMac. I think it is likely that we'll see them in Pro systems, like the Mac Pro (including a high-end model with two quad-core chips.)
I think processors with more than 4 cores will never be seen outside of servers - Xserves and maybe some configurations of Mac Pro. Mostly because that's where there is a need for this kind of power.
It really depends on your application.
On the desktop, if you're a typical user that's just interested in web surfing, playing music files, organizing your photo collection, etc., more than two cores will probably not be too useful. For these kinds of users, even two cores may be overkill, but two are useful for keeping a responsive UI when an application starts hogging all the CPU time.
If you start using higher-power applications (like video work - iMovie/iDVD, for instance) then more cores will speed up that kind of work (assuming the app is properly multithreaded, of course.) 4-core systems will definitely benefit this kind of user.
With current applications, however, I don't think more than 4 cores will be useful. The kind of work that will make 8 cores useful is the kinds that requires expensive professional software - which most people don't use.
If you get away from the desktop and look to the server market, however, the picture changes. A web server may only be running one copy of Apache, but it may create a thread for every simultaneous connection. If you have 8 cores, then you can handle 8 times as many connections as a 1-core system can (assuming sufficient memory and I/O bandwidth, of course.) Ditto for database, transaction, and all kinds of other servers. More cores means more simultaneous connections without performance degradation.
Cluster computing has similar benefits. With 8 cores in each processor, it is almost as good as having 8 times as many computers in the cluster, and a lot less expensive. This concept will scale up as the number of cores increases, assuming motherbaords can be designed with enough memory and FSB bandwidth to keep them all busy.
I think we might see a single quad-core chip in consumer systems, like the iMac. I think it is likely that we'll see them in Pro systems, like the Mac Pro (including a high-end model with two quad-core chips.)
I think processors with more than 4 cores will never be seen outside of servers - Xserves and maybe some configurations of Mac Pro. Mostly because that's where there is a need for this kind of power.
Snowy_River
Jul 28, 05:34 PM
I appreciate the thoughts on my quandry whether or not to return my 20 " iMac and purchase after the WWDC. Of course my decision is not any easier with one vote for and one vote against.
Thanks Grokgod and Multimedia for the thoughts...
I'll chime in and try to help alleviate your quandary. I would take it back. You've got a narrow window of opportunity to take it back, and we're just a few days away from an event that will likely harold the release of a new iMac. Even if you wanted to keep this model, if you take it back and then buy it after the release of the new one, you'll likely be able to get it at a fairly discounted price. So, that's what you have to weigh against having a computer to play with for the next couple of weeks...
Thanks Grokgod and Multimedia for the thoughts...
I'll chime in and try to help alleviate your quandary. I would take it back. You've got a narrow window of opportunity to take it back, and we're just a few days away from an event that will likely harold the release of a new iMac. Even if you wanted to keep this model, if you take it back and then buy it after the release of the new one, you'll likely be able to get it at a fairly discounted price. So, that's what you have to weigh against having a computer to play with for the next couple of weeks...
shawnce
Sep 13, 01:22 PM
As for using a Dell, sure they could've used that. Would Windows use the extra 4 cores? Highly doubtful. Microsoft has sketchy 64 bit support let alone dual core support; I'm not saying "impossible" but I haven't read jack squat about any version of Windows working well with quad cores. You think those fools (the same idiots who came up with Genuine Advantage) actually optimized their OS to run in an 8 core setup? Please pass along what you're smoking. :rolleyes:
:confused:
Yeah because whatever you [zero2dash] are smoking is really screwing with your mind... best to get something else.
:confused:
Yeah because whatever you [zero2dash] are smoking is really screwing with your mind... best to get something else.
JAT
Apr 6, 03:53 PM
What you and every other non-informed are missing is the Xoom lack of apps is a not really a con for 2 reason.
1. Unlike iOS, ALL APPS, in the android market scale to fit the 1280x800 screen. No x1 or x2 crap. So I can still ENJOY my facebooke app on a larger screen. Nothing is lost. "optimized for tablets" gives me the same information just with a different interface. So long has my twitter app or facebooke or squeezebox app scale so i can see all. I am a happy camper.
2. Unlike iOS i would argue that the xoom needs LESS apps to do functions that take iOS 3 or 4 apps to do. I dont need goodreader or the like because I have a native file system. I dont need skyfire because i have flash. I dont need to open in here, open in there. Every app can have access to each other...
Scale?? Access to each other??
I'm beginning to wonder if you have ever used EITHER iOS or Android.
1. Unlike iOS, ALL APPS, in the android market scale to fit the 1280x800 screen. No x1 or x2 crap. So I can still ENJOY my facebooke app on a larger screen. Nothing is lost. "optimized for tablets" gives me the same information just with a different interface. So long has my twitter app or facebooke or squeezebox app scale so i can see all. I am a happy camper.
2. Unlike iOS i would argue that the xoom needs LESS apps to do functions that take iOS 3 or 4 apps to do. I dont need goodreader or the like because I have a native file system. I dont need skyfire because i have flash. I dont need to open in here, open in there. Every app can have access to each other...
Scale?? Access to each other??
I'm beginning to wonder if you have ever used EITHER iOS or Android.
leekohler
Apr 27, 02:26 PM
They're not. The proper file is flat. I downloaded and opened the PDF from the White House. Flat in both Illustrator and Photoshop, just one group on one layer... and no security on the PDF. No embedded fonts.
This is a fraud.
Uh huh- thanks again, fivepoint.
This is a fraud.
Uh huh- thanks again, fivepoint.
jackc
Aug 7, 04:36 PM
Looks like there's a time frame on the side. I imagine you could just click there to find a certain date. What could be simpler than that?
David :cool:
Right, I meant less flashy, not simpler.
David :cool:
Right, I meant less flashy, not simpler.
Tomaz
Aug 7, 07:10 PM
Did anyone else think it was odd that many of the features seemed so poorly presented. We didn't actually get to see anything new in Spotlight. And no new features of the actual Dashboard were even discussed.
It just doesn't seem that Leopard is as far along as Tiger was when previewed even though Leopard is suppose to ship in the spring just as Tiger did.
Maybe they moved the spotlight bar to the top left and don't want MS to do the same before the Vista release ;)
It just doesn't seem that Leopard is as far along as Tiger was when previewed even though Leopard is suppose to ship in the spring just as Tiger did.
Maybe they moved the spotlight bar to the top left and don't want MS to do the same before the Vista release ;)
*LTD*
Apr 27, 09:44 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8H7)
It's nice that this month's "Apple-gate" story will start to die. I can't wait to see what the media generates next month in the "Apple-gate" saga.
Antennagate
Locationgate
C'mon, Apple competitors, think up your next outrage.
Who cares about all this overblown nonsense. I just want my damn iPad 2. Those bloody things sell out as soon as anyone gets any amount of stock.
It's nice that this month's "Apple-gate" story will start to die. I can't wait to see what the media generates next month in the "Apple-gate" saga.
Antennagate
Locationgate
C'mon, Apple competitors, think up your next outrage.
Who cares about all this overblown nonsense. I just want my damn iPad 2. Those bloody things sell out as soon as anyone gets any amount of stock.
ctdonath
Mar 22, 02:57 PM
but these tablets ( and my ipad) will NEVER be a true enterprise product with out some sort of native printing and a FIRST CLASS STYLUS/WRITING APPS. PERIOD.
They're not what they're not.
Their purpose is anywhere/anytime/always-on, not "best tool for job X".
I drag my tablet everywhere because it's easy to carry and easy to use (ease on the scale of "quick email check in elevator", "get restaurant.com coupon while walking between car and cafe" easy).
Your complaint is akin to whining a Swiss Army knife is unsuitable for culinary or carpentry use. You have a serious application for which a serious tool is warranted, you get the serious tool - not whine that a lightweight general-purpose device doesn't fulfill the role. ...and sometimes the right tool for a particular enterprise application IS a Swiss Army knife, because for a particular job the "every tool is available in a tiny lightweight package" may be best.
They're not what they're not.
Their purpose is anywhere/anytime/always-on, not "best tool for job X".
I drag my tablet everywhere because it's easy to carry and easy to use (ease on the scale of "quick email check in elevator", "get restaurant.com coupon while walking between car and cafe" easy).
Your complaint is akin to whining a Swiss Army knife is unsuitable for culinary or carpentry use. You have a serious application for which a serious tool is warranted, you get the serious tool - not whine that a lightweight general-purpose device doesn't fulfill the role. ...and sometimes the right tool for a particular enterprise application IS a Swiss Army knife, because for a particular job the "every tool is available in a tiny lightweight package" may be best.
Chris Bangle
Aug 11, 11:43 AM
I agree at least since the iPod. As an investor, I hope Apple executes their plan well. The mobile phone business is getting crowded all of a sudden e.g. Best Buy, Disney, ESPN etc. I think it will come down to design e.g. Razr.
Cinch
I think the main reason the razr's such a sucess is beacuse it soo cheap. It so easy to get one free with your contract in the UK. Not only does it look alrite but its massivly affordable
Cinch
I think the main reason the razr's such a sucess is beacuse it soo cheap. It so easy to get one free with your contract in the UK. Not only does it look alrite but its massivly affordable
iphone3gs16gb
Mar 22, 10:25 AM
deleted
Patch^
Sep 13, 06:52 AM
cool!! They should hopefully increase speed :)
I like the fact that you can upgrade the processors now, but Xeons are pretty expensive.
I like the fact that you can upgrade the processors now, but Xeons are pretty expensive.
AlligatorBloodz
Apr 8, 02:30 AM
I heard galaxy tab is better than Ipad. Is it true??
Technically it is a safer product. No one is going to mug you for your galaxy tab.
Technically it is a safer product. No one is going to mug you for your galaxy tab.
