Lollypop
Jul 20, 12:47 PM
As fast as possible! Don't worry I do agree that e mail and browsing has very little to do with the processor speed, still you did ask the question! Now if only I could get a fibre link to my house without it costing a few hundred thousand Pounds a year hmm :rolleyes:
Sort of proves the point i was trying to make, at some point mose users wil rather get a beter IO subsystem than more processing power. When last i checked most operating systems dont scale very well beyond 32 processors, I asume that they have gotten the OS scale beyond that, but wont it at some point become impossible to improve to OS to scale better on more processors?
Multitasking has be mentioned as a situation where multiple processors will be an advantage, but at the same time be real, to what level do you multitast with processor intense apps?
Most of the time I have itunes running in the background, web browser open, word, entourage, few finder windows... basics really, but even with so few things open I cant concentrate on the report im writing or the thread im reading because of everything else happening and drawing my attention. Wont the same be true if not more so for a photoshop user? Or a FCP user? So asuming that you reduce the clutter wont the level of multitasking be reduced then?
Sort of proves the point i was trying to make, at some point mose users wil rather get a beter IO subsystem than more processing power. When last i checked most operating systems dont scale very well beyond 32 processors, I asume that they have gotten the OS scale beyond that, but wont it at some point become impossible to improve to OS to scale better on more processors?
Multitasking has be mentioned as a situation where multiple processors will be an advantage, but at the same time be real, to what level do you multitast with processor intense apps?
Most of the time I have itunes running in the background, web browser open, word, entourage, few finder windows... basics really, but even with so few things open I cant concentrate on the report im writing or the thread im reading because of everything else happening and drawing my attention. Wont the same be true if not more so for a photoshop user? Or a FCP user? So asuming that you reduce the clutter wont the level of multitasking be reduced then?
gallinger
Sep 13, 10:27 AM
does anyone know how much the clovertown chips are going to be?
babyj
Sep 19, 09:52 AM
Like I said, 64 bit is pretty irrelevant for most users, and the speed and battery differences are quite negligible. And the argument that Apple is losing tons of sales to PC manufactuers is, frankly, laughable too.
The pre-release tests I saw reckoned Merom was about 25% faster with 7% longer battery life. Though they are pretty meaningless figures and we won't know until Merom is actually in a Macbook and a comparable test can be made.
I'd imagine there will be far bigger improvements to both with Santa Rosa and nand cache (which I presume Apple will support) than there is with Merom.
The pre-release tests I saw reckoned Merom was about 25% faster with 7% longer battery life. Though they are pretty meaningless figures and we won't know until Merom is actually in a Macbook and a comparable test can be made.
I'd imagine there will be far bigger improvements to both with Santa Rosa and nand cache (which I presume Apple will support) than there is with Merom.
KnightWRX
Apr 6, 03:41 PM
double.
Multimedia
Aug 17, 03:51 PM
Some people do things called graphic design and video editing for a living. Sometimes, when you want to make money and put food on the table, you want top of the line equipment.:rolleyes:Yes. I agree totally. If you are making your living with your Mac doing graphics and video work, every minute saved is another minute you can take on another client or meet a perviously impossible deadline. So in that case the extra $850 is made up in a matter of a few weeks or months at worst. Totally understandable when time is money for the Mac professional. :)
samcraig
Apr 27, 09:02 AM
And assume you go to a place you have been a month ago, wouldn't having the database speed things up when you return to that location a month later?
(Though I agree the effect will be very minor, as soon as you land with a plane, the iPhone will start populating that database, thus having the data from a month ago will only be relevant if you need location data right away after landing.)
I'm not as impatient as some on here. If I have to wait another second or two - I'm good. :)
(Though I agree the effect will be very minor, as soon as you land with a plane, the iPhone will start populating that database, thus having the data from a month ago will only be relevant if you need location data right away after landing.)
I'm not as impatient as some on here. If I have to wait another second or two - I'm good. :)
turtlebud
Aug 7, 11:47 PM
does anyone see a potential for a security breach with the ichat feature that lets you take over someone's desktop? (the purpose is of course to collaborate or to help them fix a problem)
MacinDoc
Aug 26, 11:40 PM
I just called Apple support, I was on hold for over 20 minutes, then I was disconnected. No wonder people are unhappy :mad: :( :confused:
I mentioned this on the battery recall forum, so ignore this post if you've already read it, but I think it may help explain why this sort of thing is happening.
I know it's frustrating to wait to speak to a customer services rep when there's a potential problem with your Mac, but before complaining that Apple has a problem with customer service, let's look at things objectively.
Let's say that Apple sells approximately 12,000 computers per day (a realistic estimate, based on their most recent financial statement). If 1 in 10 customers needs to speak with a customer services rep (this estimate is high, I think, but sometimes more than one consulation is required, so I will be generous with this number), and if a rep can deal with 10 problems per day (a very conservative estimate), then Apple could theoretically provide for all of its computer-related customer service needs with a total of 120 computer-oriented customer support staff (I am excluding iPod customer support staff from this discussion). Now, that number sounds really low, so let's multiply it by 10, for a total of 1200 customer support staff (this would mean that each would normally only have to deal with one customer per day). I understand that 1.8 million batteries were recalled, and this would mean that each customer support rep would have to deal with 1500 recalled batteries. Does anyone think that this can be done, along with all the other usual customer service needs, in a day, a week, or even a month? Apple is going to have to divert staff from other areas to deal with this problem. Remember, the number of batteries recalled is greater than the number of computers Apple ships in a quarter!
I mentioned this on the battery recall forum, so ignore this post if you've already read it, but I think it may help explain why this sort of thing is happening.
I know it's frustrating to wait to speak to a customer services rep when there's a potential problem with your Mac, but before complaining that Apple has a problem with customer service, let's look at things objectively.
Let's say that Apple sells approximately 12,000 computers per day (a realistic estimate, based on their most recent financial statement). If 1 in 10 customers needs to speak with a customer services rep (this estimate is high, I think, but sometimes more than one consulation is required, so I will be generous with this number), and if a rep can deal with 10 problems per day (a very conservative estimate), then Apple could theoretically provide for all of its computer-related customer service needs with a total of 120 computer-oriented customer support staff (I am excluding iPod customer support staff from this discussion). Now, that number sounds really low, so let's multiply it by 10, for a total of 1200 customer support staff (this would mean that each would normally only have to deal with one customer per day). I understand that 1.8 million batteries were recalled, and this would mean that each customer support rep would have to deal with 1500 recalled batteries. Does anyone think that this can be done, along with all the other usual customer service needs, in a day, a week, or even a month? Apple is going to have to divert staff from other areas to deal with this problem. Remember, the number of batteries recalled is greater than the number of computers Apple ships in a quarter!
ChazUK
Apr 6, 01:29 PM
It'll be 100,001 when it comes out in the UK when mine gets delivered..... Roll on Saturday!:D
roland.g
Apr 6, 12:32 PM
Let me know when it can run CS5 (in a pinch) and I'm in
Until then, I'm waiting for a back-lit key board and a faster processor (yah, I know learn how to type, yada-yada. I've been at this long enough that if you could type you became a "typesetter")
I run Handbrake and Photoshop among other things when I need to (in a pinch (and zoom)).
Until then, I'm waiting for a back-lit key board and a faster processor (yah, I know learn how to type, yada-yada. I've been at this long enough that if you could type you became a "typesetter")
I run Handbrake and Photoshop among other things when I need to (in a pinch (and zoom)).
daneoni
Aug 26, 03:47 PM
PowerBook G5 next tuesday?
daneoni
Aug 26, 04:13 PM
That doesn't make sense, marketing wise. If they do anything to the MacBooks and iMacs they would at least bump their speeds. It doesn't matter f the 2GHz Merom chip is faster than the 2GHz Yonah chip, the consumers don't give a crap about the chip... they want to see "them GHz numbers" go up.
Well unless they use Conroe in iMac thats how it will be. They'll just tell you the new machines are using intel's new Core 2 Duo (64 bit computing) chips. Apple WILL differentiate their pro laptops so the 2.16 & 2.33 GHz combo is a given. Maybe, just maybe, they might bump the mini to 1.83 and 1.66 on its low end. The imacs will use 1.83 & 2.00 there is just no other option apparent to me because the 17" & 20" will also be differentiated. The macbooks may become 2.00GHz only across the board but even that route is questionable.
Well unless they use Conroe in iMac thats how it will be. They'll just tell you the new machines are using intel's new Core 2 Duo (64 bit computing) chips. Apple WILL differentiate their pro laptops so the 2.16 & 2.33 GHz combo is a given. Maybe, just maybe, they might bump the mini to 1.83 and 1.66 on its low end. The imacs will use 1.83 & 2.00 there is just no other option apparent to me because the 17" & 20" will also be differentiated. The macbooks may become 2.00GHz only across the board but even that route is questionable.
gnasher729
Jul 27, 05:59 PM
but is still more productive because it handles more calculations per clock cycle
I'm no processor geek. I have a basic understanding of the terminology and how things work so correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't this one of the advantages that the PPC had over Intel chips? Does this mean Intel is moving toward shorter pipes? Are we talking more instructions per clock cycle or what? What does "calculations" mean in this context?
With most processors, especially the Intel/AMD processors, "instructions per cycle" is not a useful number. These processors have both simple instructions (add register number 3 to register number 6) and complex instructions (add register number 3 to the number whose address is in register number 6). A PowerPC has the simple instructions, but not the complex ones. Instead it would need three instructions "load the number whose address is in register number 6, and move it to register 7", "add register 3 to register 7", "store register 7 to the location whose address is in register 6". But the Intel processor doesn't magically do three times as much work. Instead, it splits the complex instruction into three so-called "macro-ops", and does exactly the same work. So in this case, the PowerPC would execute three times as many instructions per cycle (3 instead of 1), but because it doesn't do more actual work, that is pointless. Instead you would count the number of operations, and they are more or less the same.
Intel is indeed moving towards shorter pipelines. They have done that already with the Core Duo chips. Longer pipelines have the advantage that each pipeline step is a bit faster, so you can get higher clockspeed. Shorter pipelines have the advantage that they take much less energy (very important; at some point your chips just melt), they are much faster handling branches, and they are just much much easier to design. Pentium 4 needed absolutely heroic efforts to produce it, and would have needed twice the heroics to improve it. Instead, the Core Duo has a much simpler design, that is just as powerful, and because it was so simple, Core 2 Duo could improve it.
And Core 2 Duo can now execute up to four "micro-ops" per cycle, same as the G5, compared to three for Core Duo, Pentium 4 and G4. It also has some clever features that reduce the number of micro-ops needed up to 10 percent, and some other improvements.
I'm no processor geek. I have a basic understanding of the terminology and how things work so correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't this one of the advantages that the PPC had over Intel chips? Does this mean Intel is moving toward shorter pipes? Are we talking more instructions per clock cycle or what? What does "calculations" mean in this context?
With most processors, especially the Intel/AMD processors, "instructions per cycle" is not a useful number. These processors have both simple instructions (add register number 3 to register number 6) and complex instructions (add register number 3 to the number whose address is in register number 6). A PowerPC has the simple instructions, but not the complex ones. Instead it would need three instructions "load the number whose address is in register number 6, and move it to register 7", "add register 3 to register 7", "store register 7 to the location whose address is in register 6". But the Intel processor doesn't magically do three times as much work. Instead, it splits the complex instruction into three so-called "macro-ops", and does exactly the same work. So in this case, the PowerPC would execute three times as many instructions per cycle (3 instead of 1), but because it doesn't do more actual work, that is pointless. Instead you would count the number of operations, and they are more or less the same.
Intel is indeed moving towards shorter pipelines. They have done that already with the Core Duo chips. Longer pipelines have the advantage that each pipeline step is a bit faster, so you can get higher clockspeed. Shorter pipelines have the advantage that they take much less energy (very important; at some point your chips just melt), they are much faster handling branches, and they are just much much easier to design. Pentium 4 needed absolutely heroic efforts to produce it, and would have needed twice the heroics to improve it. Instead, the Core Duo has a much simpler design, that is just as powerful, and because it was so simple, Core 2 Duo could improve it.
And Core 2 Duo can now execute up to four "micro-ops" per cycle, same as the G5, compared to three for Core Duo, Pentium 4 and G4. It also has some clever features that reduce the number of micro-ops needed up to 10 percent, and some other improvements.
Trekkie
Sep 13, 05:42 PM
According to tha Anandtech article its likely that the Clovertown family will be clocked slower then the Woodcrests
clock speed isn't everything. workload dependant of course.
clock speed isn't everything. workload dependant of course.
ryanx27
Aug 27, 10:37 AM
The 1.83 & 2.00GHz for iMacs (if they use merom) and MacBooks and the 2.16 and 2.33 for the 15 & 17 MBPs respectively. Its that simple.
Yeah, I agree. I don't see MacBooks breaking 2.00, but I can def. see a base MBP with a 2.13 and a premium MBP with a 2.33 ... (in fact, I can see it on my desk in 3 weeks :D )
So obviously Merom is coming to the MBP -- what I really want to know is if it will get a better video card and maybe some neat little form factor improvements....:rolleyes:
Yeah, I agree. I don't see MacBooks breaking 2.00, but I can def. see a base MBP with a 2.13 and a premium MBP with a 2.33 ... (in fact, I can see it on my desk in 3 weeks :D )
So obviously Merom is coming to the MBP -- what I really want to know is if it will get a better video card and maybe some neat little form factor improvements....:rolleyes:
yoak
Apr 12, 01:14 PM
+1
I posted it over in the other FCS thread after learning of the link here. Thanks
I posted it over in the other FCS thread after learning of the link here. Thanks
Lotso
Apr 11, 01:03 PM
Analysts can just shove it. Complete BS all over the place. So.. according to them, we're going to have OSX Lion, iOS5, iPhone5, new iPods AND iPad 3... ALL IN THE FALL?! Complete bull. Oh, and throw in macbook pro updates for the later part of the fall, as usual. Just think about that for a second.
Now, let me remember, when was the last time they were wrong.. oh wait, that's right, iPad 2. Last I remember, it was, you won't see it till May/June at the earliest. WRONG. And after analysts vs. bloggers report, it seems bloggers are more right than analysts.
Anyways, after the 1st paragraph I wrote, I have no doubt in my mind that this is impossible. Last time Apple tried something like this, if I recall, it was Mobile Me, iPhone 3G + iOS2. It was a mess. Jobs himself said it was a mistake (http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10006873-93.html) they'll never make again. So, when thinking about everything that is rumored by analysts to be coming out this fall, yeah, don't think so.:rolleyes:
Edit: Don't get me started on how much their sales would be and strain on supplies having a huge item (iPhone) not only just going on sale, but going on sale leading into holiday season. That's 2x the demand of just releasing during the summer, and we all know how much of a demand that causes.
And going to the guy who said iPhone 3 brought 3GS, what the heck is that? There is 3G, no 3GS (technology wise). It's only a naming convention apple used. Like when cars use SE or GLS. All the did was add a camera, and maybe something else hardware wise.
Edit 2: ipad 2 entered production 1 month b4 apple announcing, so no freak'n 3 months as I've heard around rumor sites.
Thank you! Finally some sense. Any so called "analyst" would be an idiot to claim that Apple will be releasing that many products all within the fall.
You are a much better analyst than the guy from Avian Securities. Arn should make a post saying, "Macrumors forum analyst drewyboy claims the iPhone 5 will launch right on schedule."
Now, let me remember, when was the last time they were wrong.. oh wait, that's right, iPad 2. Last I remember, it was, you won't see it till May/June at the earliest. WRONG. And after analysts vs. bloggers report, it seems bloggers are more right than analysts.
Anyways, after the 1st paragraph I wrote, I have no doubt in my mind that this is impossible. Last time Apple tried something like this, if I recall, it was Mobile Me, iPhone 3G + iOS2. It was a mess. Jobs himself said it was a mistake (http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10006873-93.html) they'll never make again. So, when thinking about everything that is rumored by analysts to be coming out this fall, yeah, don't think so.:rolleyes:
Edit: Don't get me started on how much their sales would be and strain on supplies having a huge item (iPhone) not only just going on sale, but going on sale leading into holiday season. That's 2x the demand of just releasing during the summer, and we all know how much of a demand that causes.
And going to the guy who said iPhone 3 brought 3GS, what the heck is that? There is 3G, no 3GS (technology wise). It's only a naming convention apple used. Like when cars use SE or GLS. All the did was add a camera, and maybe something else hardware wise.
Edit 2: ipad 2 entered production 1 month b4 apple announcing, so no freak'n 3 months as I've heard around rumor sites.
Thank you! Finally some sense. Any so called "analyst" would be an idiot to claim that Apple will be releasing that many products all within the fall.
You are a much better analyst than the guy from Avian Securities. Arn should make a post saying, "Macrumors forum analyst drewyboy claims the iPhone 5 will launch right on schedule."
clevin
Aug 7, 05:37 PM
can't believe only 8 people voted for 64bit, its the most profound change here.... all others you can achieve with some 3rd party softwares.
tortoise
Aug 7, 09:26 PM
Well I wouldn't say "Nothing" as obviously it required a lot of programmer time to move the OS to Intel, create the new XCode compiler, create & debug rosetta, re-write all of the iLife, and Pro-Apps offered by Apple, etc. etc.
This should be pretty trivial for the most part, mostly just a rebuild of the code base plus a rewrite of some tiny core bits that will be in assembly code (like locking primitives) and a few drivers. The normal applications should require approximately no porting effort at all.
I would point out that the Intel compiler for OSX is much better than the PPC compiler for the same. I found a couple extremely irritating compiler bugs under XCode PPC, while I have never even seen a bug in contemporaneous versions of GCC for Intel. This by itself is worth something. Current versions of GCC for x86 and AMD64 are on par with the best commercial compilers. GCC for PPC was a usable but inferior pile of dog poo that gave me many problems.
This should be pretty trivial for the most part, mostly just a rebuild of the code base plus a rewrite of some tiny core bits that will be in assembly code (like locking primitives) and a few drivers. The normal applications should require approximately no porting effort at all.
I would point out that the Intel compiler for OSX is much better than the PPC compiler for the same. I found a couple extremely irritating compiler bugs under XCode PPC, while I have never even seen a bug in contemporaneous versions of GCC for Intel. This by itself is worth something. Current versions of GCC for x86 and AMD64 are on par with the best commercial compilers. GCC for PPC was a usable but inferior pile of dog poo that gave me many problems.
barkomatic
Mar 31, 03:38 PM
Keep in mind that Google tightening up Android and forcing handset makers to adhere to certain guidelines is primarily a problem for the *handset makers* and carriers--but not consumers.
I couldn't care less what problems Verizon and Motorola have if the end result is a beautiful and functional device. If not, I'll buy something else.
I couldn't care less what problems Verizon and Motorola have if the end result is a beautiful and functional device. If not, I'll buy something else.
shawnce
Jul 14, 06:45 PM
Agreed. I can make an argument for the consumer machines, where perhaps 512 MB is sufficient for basic users. Specifically, why force them to pay more for 1 GB if they don't need it. But when it comes to the Pro machines, as if anyone buying one of these beasts is not going to require at least 2 GB of RAM, let alone 1 GB. No one buys a quad Xeon Powermac to just surf the Internet and check their e-mail. :cool:
Personally I go the BTO route at Apple.com for my PowerMacs and downgrade all RAM to the minimum cost and buy my RAM from a trusted 3rd party vendor for a savings of at least 10% if not more so.
Personally I go the BTO route at Apple.com for my PowerMacs and downgrade all RAM to the minimum cost and buy my RAM from a trusted 3rd party vendor for a savings of at least 10% if not more so.
technicolor
Sep 19, 10:15 PM
Why do you care?
Why shouldnt I?
Why shouldnt I?
Rt&Dzine
Apr 27, 12:32 PM
So what would be good enough to convince you?
Nothing. These Birthers aren't going to give up their religion.
Nothing. These Birthers aren't going to give up their religion.
robbyx
Apr 25, 04:05 PM
This suit has merit. If I turn off location services there should be no record of where I go.
Why would you assume that turning off location services would prevent tracking? The phone is still connected to the cell network. I'd assume Airplane Mode would turn off tracking, but not location services.
With that and other simple info I can find out where you work, where you bank, where you live, what time you usually get home. All it takes is one website or email attachment to compromise your device. This info is not encrypted.
I do think if Any device does this they should be sued
First, someone would have to obtain your phone. No one seems to mention this. Big bad Apple is tracking us all!!! Apple isn't tracking anyone. The phone is logging location information for some reason, perhaps legit, perhaps a bug, perhaps test code that got left behind, who knows. The point is, your location isn't compromised unless someone steals your phone.
And if they steal your phone, they'll have your address book, your web bookmarks, your email, your notes, etc.
Suing over this is idiotic and really shows how absurd this whole "privacy" debate has become. Scott McNealy said it best years ago: "Privacy is dead. Get over it."
Why would you assume that turning off location services would prevent tracking? The phone is still connected to the cell network. I'd assume Airplane Mode would turn off tracking, but not location services.
With that and other simple info I can find out where you work, where you bank, where you live, what time you usually get home. All it takes is one website or email attachment to compromise your device. This info is not encrypted.
I do think if Any device does this they should be sued
First, someone would have to obtain your phone. No one seems to mention this. Big bad Apple is tracking us all!!! Apple isn't tracking anyone. The phone is logging location information for some reason, perhaps legit, perhaps a bug, perhaps test code that got left behind, who knows. The point is, your location isn't compromised unless someone steals your phone.
And if they steal your phone, they'll have your address book, your web bookmarks, your email, your notes, etc.
Suing over this is idiotic and really shows how absurd this whole "privacy" debate has become. Scott McNealy said it best years ago: "Privacy is dead. Get over it."
No comments:
Post a Comment