andrewbecks
Apr 19, 07:31 PM
Yay! I've been waiting for a while to purchase an iMac. I'm trading in my MBP for an iMac. I need the processing horsepower and display size (27") more than I need a portable computer these days, especially since I have an iPad and an old first gen black MacBook that will do in a pinch.
bwiissofly
Feb 28, 05:10 PM
benjayman2
I LOVE LOVE LOVEEEEE your room setup. I wish I had a larger room so I could do that.
I LOVE LOVE LOVEEEEE your room setup. I wish I had a larger room so I could do that.
aafuss1
Sep 6, 10:10 PM
Is the 160GB BTO HD perpendicular?
dethmaShine
May 2, 06:12 PM
That's a very nice feature! Too bad it won't work for apps not from the app store...
It does.
It does.
Stella
Aug 16, 09:33 AM
If the report is from Digitimes then it can't be true.
They are consistently full of *****.
I'm surpised this isn't on page 2.
They are consistently full of *****.
I'm surpised this isn't on page 2.
miamiracing
Jan 27, 07:59 AM
Some pics of my Impreza after a night of freezing rain:
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5203/5366971777_ce8b11c76d_b.jpg
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5090/5366971673_6d6ab4f12e_b.jpg
nice shots! yea i hated the freezing rain last week.
how do you like the snow we got last night haha
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5203/5366971777_ce8b11c76d_b.jpg
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5090/5366971673_6d6ab4f12e_b.jpg
nice shots! yea i hated the freezing rain last week.
how do you like the snow we got last night haha
Chef Medeski
Jul 14, 11:31 AM
I just saw this and though it was pretty interesting:
Sony also introduced their own small-format 90.0 � 94.0 mm disk, similar to the others but somewhat simpler in construction than the AmDisk. The first computer to use this format was the HP-150 of 1983, and Sony also used them fairly widely on their line of MSX computers. Other than this the format suffered from a similar fate as the other new formats; the 5�-inch format simply had too much market share. Things changed dramatically in 1984 when Apple Computer selected the format for their new Macintosh computers. By 1989 the 3�-inch was outselling the 5�-inch.
Here is the source:
Sony's 3.5" Floppy Disk (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floppy_drive#The_3.C2.BD-inch_microfloppy_diskette)
Yeah, but wasn't that also when Apple had something like 50% of the consumer market share. I mean... I think its a very different situation even if its the same names.
Sony also introduced their own small-format 90.0 � 94.0 mm disk, similar to the others but somewhat simpler in construction than the AmDisk. The first computer to use this format was the HP-150 of 1983, and Sony also used them fairly widely on their line of MSX computers. Other than this the format suffered from a similar fate as the other new formats; the 5�-inch format simply had too much market share. Things changed dramatically in 1984 when Apple Computer selected the format for their new Macintosh computers. By 1989 the 3�-inch was outselling the 5�-inch.
Here is the source:
Sony's 3.5" Floppy Disk (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floppy_drive#The_3.C2.BD-inch_microfloppy_diskette)
Yeah, but wasn't that also when Apple had something like 50% of the consumer market share. I mean... I think its a very different situation even if its the same names.
nerdo
Apr 13, 05:40 AM
Holy smoke what is with all the bitching in this thread?
Final Cut X is coming! It seems to have all the stuff i'm dying for.. maybe even CUDA support! Damn now I got to sell my CS5 production suite..
And yeah if you want you can still use iMovie and feel good about it. I know enough people who got a great result out of it because they did not get stuck with tech they didn't understand. All these opinions about personal choices is a total waste of time.
Rejoice the choice and do something creative with all this energy
(FCP is rendering so I have time to waste lol...)
Final Cut X is coming! It seems to have all the stuff i'm dying for.. maybe even CUDA support! Damn now I got to sell my CS5 production suite..
And yeah if you want you can still use iMovie and feel good about it. I know enough people who got a great result out of it because they did not get stuck with tech they didn't understand. All these opinions about personal choices is a total waste of time.
Rejoice the choice and do something creative with all this energy
(FCP is rendering so I have time to waste lol...)
Spanky Deluxe
Sep 1, 02:35 PM
I think this means that there will definitely be no Mac Midi. Only the pro user would want a 30" screen and Apple makes loads of cash on their screens anyway. If they offered a mid sized mac they know that a lot of people would go and spend their money on a screen from Dell instead of a screen from Apple. They'd rather force buyers to either buy a Mac Pro (i.e. spend more on Apple) or an iMac with their required screen size (i.e. spend more on Apple).
I wouldn't expect Conroe in the iMac either folks. It would serve them better to use the same platform as used in the MacBook Pros, it would save them on R&D and that way the iMacs can't be faster than their Pro range of laptops.
I wouldn't expect Conroe in the iMac either folks. It would serve them better to use the same platform as used in the MacBook Pros, it would save them on R&D and that way the iMacs can't be faster than their Pro range of laptops.
Frobozz
Mar 25, 09:40 AM
Nop... consider.
2x CPUs 130W rated. So thats 260W, right there. However, no CPU consumes the rated, so it's give or take ~260W.
Each 5770 is ~108W, given two, that's ~216 W. Right off the bat we have ~476 W being consumed. Not bad; however let's look at the side where its not a dual 5770 setup.
The PSU on the Mac Pro is rated for 980 W of power, but for simplicity sake let's say 1 kW. Now, factor in the Super drive, Ethernet, Airport, at least 1 HDD and peripheral docks/cards you are looking at ~100 W. Take into account a 20 W per 1GB of memory (assume 6GB) and you've got ~120 W more. So far ~ 220 W more.
Now we have ~480 W [~260W + ~220W]consumption leaving only ~520 W left for a GPU. Currently, the HD 6970 requires 2x 8-pin connectors to provide 150 W per pin. That's 300W right off. So we are left with ~220 W in the system. Now, factor in that PCIe slot power draw at 75 W and we've got a ~145 W left over. ~145 W is cutting it too close and something will yield (yes I do realize 145 W is a lot more, but read on). Now, the sad part, we were assuming 1kW PSU which is not the case; it's 980 W meaning there will be less power, ~125 W. Now, also take into consideration no PSU is 100% efficient, hence there will be greater power outlet draw and the PSU will be operating at high voltage/amps and its life span will decrease dramatically over very high usage.
In other words the current PSU may come up short. Add to that the fact that all current shipping and past model Mac Pros don't have extra dual 8-pin connectors. They have dual 6-pins. There is an adapter to make a 6-pin into an 8-pin, but it is risky at best, big no-no.
So as you can see an HD 6970 would be barely supported on current models. Future models? Perhaps yes assuming Apple bumps to 1.1kW or 1.2kW PSU.
Take into account this was calculated assuming 6GB of memory and 1 HDD, anymore RAM (20 W/1GB) or HDDs (10W/disc) and the consumption will go up. Also, assuming nothing is hooked up to peripheral ports; like a small external drive that draws 5-10 W.
I have an 850 watt PSU in my gaming rig with a 4870x2 and custom coolers all around on the CPU, GPU, and case. I think your calculations are pretty close to correct if you wanted to run everything in the case at once. But that's not typical to run everything at max all at once. I suppose Apple might not want to get in the business of telling people it's okay to buy this honking huge GPU as long as you're not running a lot of extra hard drives and extra PCI-E cards.
But, for people looking to simply drop in a fast GPU and not have a lot of extra bells and whistles (read: a gaming rig), they would be fine with 850 watts or so, even with a 6970. Or at least damn close.
The tricky part with GPU's is that the high end units commonly exceed rated specifications at max load, so these calculations are tricky. And your point about running too close to your max is also a good one. It's fair to say that when you add up all your max dissipation, add 20% or so, and that's the wattage your PSU needs.
2x CPUs 130W rated. So thats 260W, right there. However, no CPU consumes the rated, so it's give or take ~260W.
Each 5770 is ~108W, given two, that's ~216 W. Right off the bat we have ~476 W being consumed. Not bad; however let's look at the side where its not a dual 5770 setup.
The PSU on the Mac Pro is rated for 980 W of power, but for simplicity sake let's say 1 kW. Now, factor in the Super drive, Ethernet, Airport, at least 1 HDD and peripheral docks/cards you are looking at ~100 W. Take into account a 20 W per 1GB of memory (assume 6GB) and you've got ~120 W more. So far ~ 220 W more.
Now we have ~480 W [~260W + ~220W]consumption leaving only ~520 W left for a GPU. Currently, the HD 6970 requires 2x 8-pin connectors to provide 150 W per pin. That's 300W right off. So we are left with ~220 W in the system. Now, factor in that PCIe slot power draw at 75 W and we've got a ~145 W left over. ~145 W is cutting it too close and something will yield (yes I do realize 145 W is a lot more, but read on). Now, the sad part, we were assuming 1kW PSU which is not the case; it's 980 W meaning there will be less power, ~125 W. Now, also take into consideration no PSU is 100% efficient, hence there will be greater power outlet draw and the PSU will be operating at high voltage/amps and its life span will decrease dramatically over very high usage.
In other words the current PSU may come up short. Add to that the fact that all current shipping and past model Mac Pros don't have extra dual 8-pin connectors. They have dual 6-pins. There is an adapter to make a 6-pin into an 8-pin, but it is risky at best, big no-no.
So as you can see an HD 6970 would be barely supported on current models. Future models? Perhaps yes assuming Apple bumps to 1.1kW or 1.2kW PSU.
Take into account this was calculated assuming 6GB of memory and 1 HDD, anymore RAM (20 W/1GB) or HDDs (10W/disc) and the consumption will go up. Also, assuming nothing is hooked up to peripheral ports; like a small external drive that draws 5-10 W.
I have an 850 watt PSU in my gaming rig with a 4870x2 and custom coolers all around on the CPU, GPU, and case. I think your calculations are pretty close to correct if you wanted to run everything in the case at once. But that's not typical to run everything at max all at once. I suppose Apple might not want to get in the business of telling people it's okay to buy this honking huge GPU as long as you're not running a lot of extra hard drives and extra PCI-E cards.
But, for people looking to simply drop in a fast GPU and not have a lot of extra bells and whistles (read: a gaming rig), they would be fine with 850 watts or so, even with a 6970. Or at least damn close.
The tricky part with GPU's is that the high end units commonly exceed rated specifications at max load, so these calculations are tricky. And your point about running too close to your max is also a good one. It's fair to say that when you add up all your max dissipation, add 20% or so, and that's the wattage your PSU needs.
MisterK
Apr 3, 11:25 AM
I loved this ad. The voiceover reminds me of old Hal Riney commercials, where there is a reverence for the product � a person with quiet confidence telling you a "truth". When the message is a simple one, it's easier to tell a compelling story. Here's the message: when you don't notice the tech the experience feels magical.
There's nothing wrong with this. Magic is what tech is at its finest. Engineers and developers become mired in the details of how to make it work and think that's the important part, and then we get awful commercials boasting specs. When we lift abstractions and technological explanations, the things we do become more fantastic. We don't visit websites, but can see all the knowledge of the world. We don't Skype; we talk face-to-face with distant loved ones. We don't use Photoshop brushes; we create images with our fingers. Why are the details of how that happens the important part?
TBWA are the marketing geniuses that have always done Apple's stuff and I'm glad they saw this nugget of truth in Apple's iPad message. This is what we have to do in the advertising business (yes, I'm in it). I've been lucky enough to work with TBWA and can say that they are the real deal. They are true MadMen who honestly look for the most beautiful truth in the products they are asked to sell and then speak that truth more eloquently than everyone else.
People who identify this as "simply advertising" are missing the point. You're not the smartest kid in the playground when you tell everyone that Santa doesn't exist. The smart ones are the kids enjoying Christmas.
There's nothing wrong with this. Magic is what tech is at its finest. Engineers and developers become mired in the details of how to make it work and think that's the important part, and then we get awful commercials boasting specs. When we lift abstractions and technological explanations, the things we do become more fantastic. We don't visit websites, but can see all the knowledge of the world. We don't Skype; we talk face-to-face with distant loved ones. We don't use Photoshop brushes; we create images with our fingers. Why are the details of how that happens the important part?
TBWA are the marketing geniuses that have always done Apple's stuff and I'm glad they saw this nugget of truth in Apple's iPad message. This is what we have to do in the advertising business (yes, I'm in it). I've been lucky enough to work with TBWA and can say that they are the real deal. They are true MadMen who honestly look for the most beautiful truth in the products they are asked to sell and then speak that truth more eloquently than everyone else.
People who identify this as "simply advertising" are missing the point. You're not the smartest kid in the playground when you tell everyone that Santa doesn't exist. The smart ones are the kids enjoying Christmas.
lOUDsCREAMEr
Jul 19, 06:41 PM
Here are historical Mac sales by quarter.
1Q2000 - 1,377,000
2Q2000 - 1,043,000
3Q2000 - 1,016,000
4Q2000 - 1,122,000
1Q2001 - 659,000
2Q2001 - 751,000
3Q2001 - 827,000
4Q2001 - 850,000
1Q2002 - 659,000
2Q2002 - 813,000
3Q2002 - 808,000
4Q2002 - 734,000
1Q2003 - 743,000
2Q2003 - 711,000
3Q2003 - 771,000
4Q2003 - 787,000
1Q2004 - 743,000
2Q2004 - 749,000
3Q2004 - 771,000
4Q2004 - 787,000
1Q2005 - 1,046,000
2Q2005 - 1,070,000
3Q2005 - 1,182,000
4Q2005 - 1,236,000
1Q2006- 1,254,000
2Q2006- 1,112,000
3Q2006- 1,327,000
what happened exactly in between 2000-Q4 and 2001-Q1?
1Q2000 - 1,377,000
2Q2000 - 1,043,000
3Q2000 - 1,016,000
4Q2000 - 1,122,000
1Q2001 - 659,000
2Q2001 - 751,000
3Q2001 - 827,000
4Q2001 - 850,000
1Q2002 - 659,000
2Q2002 - 813,000
3Q2002 - 808,000
4Q2002 - 734,000
1Q2003 - 743,000
2Q2003 - 711,000
3Q2003 - 771,000
4Q2003 - 787,000
1Q2004 - 743,000
2Q2004 - 749,000
3Q2004 - 771,000
4Q2004 - 787,000
1Q2005 - 1,046,000
2Q2005 - 1,070,000
3Q2005 - 1,182,000
4Q2005 - 1,236,000
1Q2006- 1,254,000
2Q2006- 1,112,000
3Q2006- 1,327,000
what happened exactly in between 2000-Q4 and 2001-Q1?
Irishman
May 3, 04:43 PM
Yep, I am pleasantly surprised. I ordered one.
The Quad i5 or i7?
The Quad i5 or i7?
twoodcc
Dec 10, 04:45 AM
congrats to 6161 for 2 million points!
iMacThere4Iam
Apr 19, 03:27 PM
As much as I want an Air, every time I'm in an Apple Store I drool over the 27" iMac. There's just something about that beautiful aluminum behemoth sitting on a desk that says I'm in the right camp.
Dare we dream of a 30" model?
Dare we dream of a 30" model?
Digital Dude
Mar 24, 02:07 PM
This is HUGE, ginormous news. If Lion, or even later released of Snow Leopard, has this kind of support, ti would revitalize the Mac gaming scene. Even 3D artists would have more options, especially when you consider how well the high end consumer cards stack up against their FireGL competition.
Now all they need is complete 6900 series support-- yeah, I'm lookin' at you, 6990. ;-)
Not likely since Steve Jobs isn't smart enough to do that. Heck, he still believes that glossy displays are a cool idea.
I almost gave up on the MacPro until Steve forced me into a 'NON-GLARE' NEC PA271, and all I can say is wow! Even with the pithy GT120 card-less piece of crap offering by Apple, the screen looks fantastic.
Now all they need is complete 6900 series support-- yeah, I'm lookin' at you, 6990. ;-)
Not likely since Steve Jobs isn't smart enough to do that. Heck, he still believes that glossy displays are a cool idea.
I almost gave up on the MacPro until Steve forced me into a 'NON-GLARE' NEC PA271, and all I can say is wow! Even with the pithy GT120 card-less piece of crap offering by Apple, the screen looks fantastic.
bassfingers
Apr 26, 04:07 PM
well we all know who really controls the goverment and everyone involved ... companies. so whoever throws more money at them is obvs gonna win
silliness
silliness
applekid
Sep 1, 12:34 PM
Man, if they can fit something better than a ATI Radeon X1600 XT or whatever nVidia equivalent, that would be awesome.
If they do release a 23-inch iMac, I'm wondering if that's big enough for more user upgrades. Processor replacements, adding a PCI or replacing a GPU, etc. I mean, if there's space for it, I would certainly like an all-in-one iMac that has upgradable features that make it almost Mac Pro like. The only damper on the non-Mac Pro desktops and laptops is your upgrade paths are limited.
If they do release a 23-inch iMac, I'm wondering if that's big enough for more user upgrades. Processor replacements, adding a PCI or replacing a GPU, etc. I mean, if there's space for it, I would certainly like an all-in-one iMac that has upgradable features that make it almost Mac Pro like. The only damper on the non-Mac Pro desktops and laptops is your upgrade paths are limited.
mags631
Sep 14, 11:13 AM
http://tinyurl.com/yed7h3p
Non sequitur.
Non sequitur.
mozmac
Jul 18, 02:40 PM
I have mixed feelings about this. The only way I see this really becoming big is if Apple releases a Mac Mini media center. By so doing, Apple will catch a huge market of people who say, "What do you want to watch tonight?" How many times have you been in this situation. You've looked at all your movies, which you've seen at least three times each, and decide that you don't have anything you want to watch. Would if, from your remote, you had a whole movie store IN YOUR HOME? That's right. Who needs to go to Blockbuster or wait for NetFlix. Just point, click, and...hello, movie. You get to keep it for a few days.
This will only work, though, if it is that easy. If people have to figure out their own way to get it to the TV, they will simply go get the DVD from Blockbuster, because the player is already hooked up to the TV. If Apple wants to make it in the movie business, they need to build something that is meant to hook up to the TV right OUT OF THE BOX.
I'm excited to see it!
This will only work, though, if it is that easy. If people have to figure out their own way to get it to the TV, they will simply go get the DVD from Blockbuster, because the player is already hooked up to the TV. If Apple wants to make it in the movie business, they need to build something that is meant to hook up to the TV right OUT OF THE BOX.
I'm excited to see it!
ten-oak-druid
Apr 26, 02:58 PM
NO... they do not "have it already".
It's still in the opposition phase. No registration has been granted.
Image (http://sites.google.com/site/wjohnstone/appstoretm.jpg)
Learn how to read TESS and understand the coding.
Apple is filing a preemptive lawsuit against Amazon.
This is perfectly normal for anyone who is going through the trademark process.
The lawsuit's merits will be determined by the outcome of the opposition phase from the USPTO.
Now step away from the keyboard.
Yes Apple was given approval to use the trademark but not the final awarding of the trademark. See my other post. I acknowledged this.
And I'm still at my keyboard.
Thank you for saving me the time to post this.
There is NO trademark yet.
Yes I was wrong and discovered the error.
It's still in the opposition phase. No registration has been granted.
Image (http://sites.google.com/site/wjohnstone/appstoretm.jpg)
Learn how to read TESS and understand the coding.
Apple is filing a preemptive lawsuit against Amazon.
This is perfectly normal for anyone who is going through the trademark process.
The lawsuit's merits will be determined by the outcome of the opposition phase from the USPTO.
Now step away from the keyboard.
Yes Apple was given approval to use the trademark but not the final awarding of the trademark. See my other post. I acknowledged this.
And I'm still at my keyboard.
Thank you for saving me the time to post this.
There is NO trademark yet.
Yes I was wrong and discovered the error.
shawnce
Jul 19, 10:38 PM
Interesting... (http://www.macnn.com/articles/06/07/19/apple.grows.16.in.us/)
lordonuthin
Jan 6, 05:17 PM
We are now in 56th place!
And mc68k should be over 10 million about now! Congrats! Happy new year :D
And mc68k should be over 10 million about now! Congrats! Happy new year :D
matteo2005
Jan 13, 12:28 PM
I think it means over the air ipod touch/iphone syncing
No comments:
Post a Comment