iansilv
Mar 23, 05:08 PM
I kind of like the idea of being able to see how piss-poor the police services are in an area. The app only shows how ineffectively these check points are setup.
gkarris
Mar 29, 02:33 PM
Oh boy, assume that all former Nokia Symbian users will automatically all buy Nokia Windows Mobile Phones - that's scientific... :eek:
;)
;)
Dr.Gargoyle
Sep 14, 09:37 AM
yes, and photo software runs on computers. "This is the new Aperture. and it will run beautifully on the new C2D Macbook Pro I just announced. Boom. does this... Boom, does that...etc..."
EDIT: iMeowbot beat me to it, but what he/she said
and you have your computer in a desk (iDesk) and you sit down then you work (iChair) and the chair is placed on a floor (iFloor)....
Apple will eventually update both MB and MBP, but I doubt they send out an invitation for an update, in particular if the venue for the presentation is a photo convention.
EDIT: iMeowbot beat me to it, but what he/she said
and you have your computer in a desk (iDesk) and you sit down then you work (iChair) and the chair is placed on a floor (iFloor)....
Apple will eventually update both MB and MBP, but I doubt they send out an invitation for an update, in particular if the venue for the presentation is a photo convention.
*LTD*
Apr 29, 06:08 AM
That can be viewed another way. Apple is too cheap to bother risking anything that is not a sure bet.
Wrong.
The exact OPPOSITE is true.
Apple takes some serious risks. How else do they move the entire industry in new directions?
iPhone. iPad. Both massive risks. Both were dismissed by major industry players. The iPad especially was dismissed by a lot of folks on MR. Vertical business model in an industry where everyone in in a race to the bottom and where some version of Windows dominates on computers. Big risk. Completely ditching OS 9 overnight and moving to OS X. Big risk as well. Apple is really the only one on the block that bothers to try new things.
Here's some claim chowder. Mmmm, deeeelish!
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=9197388&postcount=166
Am I the only one who thinks Acer is right and they are not worried nor expect the iPad to do little to no damage to their netbook market.
The iPad is basicly nothing more then a iPod touch with a bigger screen. Yes the bigger screen offers some extras stuff but still you suffer the same limitition of the iPhone/iPod Touch OS and are trapped in apple's sand box.
The iPad is not going to replace a traveling computer because it is just way to limited. It has piss poor way of connecting to USB/SD card. You are still required to carry a dedicated keyboard if you want to get much work done that way and so on.
The Netbook on the other had is a great for business travelers. It is a full flege computer. Yeah it has a small screen but it is the same size a the iPad and a full size keyboard and more powerful OS.
iPad is a consumer level devices. Netbook is a bussiness/Enterprise level device. That is 2 very different markets. The Netbook is not designed to replace a deticated desktop/Main laptop neither is the iPad. Netbooks are designed to make traveling with a computer a hell of a lot nicer.
Lets compare the 2.
Checking Email-- I give that to the iPad.
Responding to Email - Netbook due to keyboard.
Over all email - Netbook
Surfing the internet - Netbook due to flash support
Reading the news - iPad.
Reading books - iPad.
Getting real work done (word documents excel sheets ect.) -- Netbook.
iPad - Consumer device something apple has proven it is damn good at.
Netbook --Enterprise/ Bussiness device -- Something apple has shown time and time again it has craptactor support and does not really even bother making stuff to into that market.
So what happened? This "oversized iPod Touch" did this:
http://www.geekwire.com/2011/microsoft-profits-top-expectations-xbox-office-trump-pc-slump
In its quarterly filing, Microsoft indicated that the consumer PC market was the primary culprit for the decline � pointing in particular to a 40 percent decline in netbook sales in the consumer market. That�s more evidence of the iPad�s impact on the market. Many consumers are opting for the Apple slate rather than Windows-based netbooks to fill the gap between the PC and the phone.
40% decline in netbooks, huh?
Remember seeing articles like these a while back?
David Carnoy, February 2009: "Why Apple Must Do a Netbook Now"
Preston Gralla, March 2009: "Why Apple Will Have to Release a Netbook"
Charles Moore, March 2010: "Apple Still Needs a Sub-$700 Conventional Notebook"
Apple TOOK A RISK and did the iPad instead. And look what happened.
Cheap netbook junk is circling the drain and major players are suddenly in the tablet game full-tilt. AFTER Apple laid the groundwork. Apple's big risks pay off. Whether Apple thinks they're a "sure thing" is a different story. They're likely pretty confident in what they produce because they know better than everyone else, whether it's the other major industry players, pundits, etc.
MS' backbone is their universal licensing racket. Winblows on PCs. No need to innovate. Blame netbook decline. Blame a "market reset." Blame your mom. But never blame your aging cash cow whose udders are now almost completely dry. MS is NOT a risk-taker. Especially in the enterprise. Especially in operating systems. Especially by copying Apple 3 years late ALMOST EVERY TIME. Let Apple take the risks, and then Zune it! Or release a smartphone no one really gives a damn about.
Please, don't go talking about risks. Because the only one to have any friggin' shred of creativity in the industry and the power to mass produce the fruits of it is Apple. Their moves for the past decade have been nothing less than complete and total daring. They often come out of left field with products that no one initially understands, that are laughingly dismissed by other major players (Ballmer on the iPhone, nearly everyone on the iPod), but that we end up using and everyone else ends up copying shortly after. Part of the reason an industry player that does the exact opposite of the other major players is about to surpass Exxon Mobil as the most valuable company on the planet.
Wrong.
The exact OPPOSITE is true.
Apple takes some serious risks. How else do they move the entire industry in new directions?
iPhone. iPad. Both massive risks. Both were dismissed by major industry players. The iPad especially was dismissed by a lot of folks on MR. Vertical business model in an industry where everyone in in a race to the bottom and where some version of Windows dominates on computers. Big risk. Completely ditching OS 9 overnight and moving to OS X. Big risk as well. Apple is really the only one on the block that bothers to try new things.
Here's some claim chowder. Mmmm, deeeelish!
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=9197388&postcount=166
Am I the only one who thinks Acer is right and they are not worried nor expect the iPad to do little to no damage to their netbook market.
The iPad is basicly nothing more then a iPod touch with a bigger screen. Yes the bigger screen offers some extras stuff but still you suffer the same limitition of the iPhone/iPod Touch OS and are trapped in apple's sand box.
The iPad is not going to replace a traveling computer because it is just way to limited. It has piss poor way of connecting to USB/SD card. You are still required to carry a dedicated keyboard if you want to get much work done that way and so on.
The Netbook on the other had is a great for business travelers. It is a full flege computer. Yeah it has a small screen but it is the same size a the iPad and a full size keyboard and more powerful OS.
iPad is a consumer level devices. Netbook is a bussiness/Enterprise level device. That is 2 very different markets. The Netbook is not designed to replace a deticated desktop/Main laptop neither is the iPad. Netbooks are designed to make traveling with a computer a hell of a lot nicer.
Lets compare the 2.
Checking Email-- I give that to the iPad.
Responding to Email - Netbook due to keyboard.
Over all email - Netbook
Surfing the internet - Netbook due to flash support
Reading the news - iPad.
Reading books - iPad.
Getting real work done (word documents excel sheets ect.) -- Netbook.
iPad - Consumer device something apple has proven it is damn good at.
Netbook --Enterprise/ Bussiness device -- Something apple has shown time and time again it has craptactor support and does not really even bother making stuff to into that market.
So what happened? This "oversized iPod Touch" did this:
http://www.geekwire.com/2011/microsoft-profits-top-expectations-xbox-office-trump-pc-slump
In its quarterly filing, Microsoft indicated that the consumer PC market was the primary culprit for the decline � pointing in particular to a 40 percent decline in netbook sales in the consumer market. That�s more evidence of the iPad�s impact on the market. Many consumers are opting for the Apple slate rather than Windows-based netbooks to fill the gap between the PC and the phone.
40% decline in netbooks, huh?
Remember seeing articles like these a while back?
David Carnoy, February 2009: "Why Apple Must Do a Netbook Now"
Preston Gralla, March 2009: "Why Apple Will Have to Release a Netbook"
Charles Moore, March 2010: "Apple Still Needs a Sub-$700 Conventional Notebook"
Apple TOOK A RISK and did the iPad instead. And look what happened.
Cheap netbook junk is circling the drain and major players are suddenly in the tablet game full-tilt. AFTER Apple laid the groundwork. Apple's big risks pay off. Whether Apple thinks they're a "sure thing" is a different story. They're likely pretty confident in what they produce because they know better than everyone else, whether it's the other major industry players, pundits, etc.
MS' backbone is their universal licensing racket. Winblows on PCs. No need to innovate. Blame netbook decline. Blame a "market reset." Blame your mom. But never blame your aging cash cow whose udders are now almost completely dry. MS is NOT a risk-taker. Especially in the enterprise. Especially in operating systems. Especially by copying Apple 3 years late ALMOST EVERY TIME. Let Apple take the risks, and then Zune it! Or release a smartphone no one really gives a damn about.
Please, don't go talking about risks. Because the only one to have any friggin' shred of creativity in the industry and the power to mass produce the fruits of it is Apple. Their moves for the past decade have been nothing less than complete and total daring. They often come out of left field with products that no one initially understands, that are laughingly dismissed by other major players (Ballmer on the iPhone, nearly everyone on the iPod), but that we end up using and everyone else ends up copying shortly after. Part of the reason an industry player that does the exact opposite of the other major players is about to surpass Exxon Mobil as the most valuable company on the planet.
Chundles
Sep 8, 09:13 AM
Ok so in other words you DON'T need a Core 2 Duo to run Leopard, right?
Hell no, Leopard will run on G4s, G5s, Core Duos, Core 2 Duos, maybe even the old G3s but we'll have to wait and see on that one.
Hell no, Leopard will run on G4s, G5s, Core Duos, Core 2 Duos, maybe even the old G3s but we'll have to wait and see on that one.
iGary
Sep 19, 03:00 PM
I downloaded Enemy of the State for the heck of it. Sound and video quality were very good, and the $9.99 price is right, too, especially since I do not have to have a DVD box taking up shelf space. Looking forward to the set-top box, whatever it ends up being called.
GFLPraxis
Apr 28, 03:33 PM
I'd be rather concerned about Apple's margins considering we're comparing a hardware company to a software company (free duplication of your product, once you've gotten past the millions in R&D to develop it) that has a captive market as large as Microsoft's (guaranteed sales to pay for your R&D easy, and a very large price point at $200-$300 a pop for Windows and Office).
However, maybe it's Microsoft that should be concerned; either Apple has disgusting margins, or Microsoft's other divisions are simply squandering their revenue so bad that they are essentially subsidizing the entire company with Windows/Office.
However, maybe it's Microsoft that should be concerned; either Apple has disgusting margins, or Microsoft's other divisions are simply squandering their revenue so bad that they are essentially subsidizing the entire company with Windows/Office.
11thIndian
Apr 25, 01:16 PM
Hilarious to all those people who jumped on the THUNDERBOLT bandwagon. No thunderbolt devices yet and they have the hideous old case design.
:rolleyes:
Yeah... I'm just crying I didn't wait for an update that may or may not come in a year. Damn this blistering speed. Damn it!
:rolleyes:
Yeah... I'm just crying I didn't wait for an update that may or may not come in a year. Damn this blistering speed. Damn it!
BWhaler
Sep 14, 02:37 AM
This product cannot come soon enough.
Every single phone on the market stinks.
My wife buster her phone today, and called me for a recommendation. All she wants as a Mom is a phone with a long battery life and great reception.
She left the Cingular store with a crappy phone with a million features she will never use.
Every single phone on the market stinks.
My wife buster her phone today, and called me for a recommendation. All she wants as a Mom is a phone with a long battery life and great reception.
She left the Cingular store with a crappy phone with a million features she will never use.
DRewPi
Sep 2, 03:52 PM
MacBook for 999$ with some up features would be the deal for me !!!!!
Otherwise just throw in some of that C2D chips and let it rock !!!! :D
Otherwise just throw in some of that C2D chips and let it rock !!!! :D
peharri
Sep 18, 09:00 AM
You are right. I make a call. i expect to pay for it. i dont expect the person im calling to get billed for the damn call.
The other way of looking at it is that the mobile user has made a technology choice. They shouldn't expect other people to pay for their technology choice. A system where each person pays to connect to the network and decides how they want to pay for that is inherently fairer, even if it makes it harder for people to choose to subsidize the systems of others.
(Remember too that in the majority of cases, most US users have a fixed bill because of the high number of bundled minutes coupled with the huge unmetered portions of their bills. It's not the case that we get billed for the incoming call in the majority of cases. If it's made at peak time, from a different network, then yeah, we'll use bundled minutes, but most of us end up with large amounts of bundled minutes free at the end of the month despite this. And you never have to accept an incoming call.)
and. as for pricing. yes, vodafone have a 1c/sec flat rate on calls. but. i pay $79/month and at the end of the my account has a automatic refund (of sorts) applied, so anything up to $500 in calls/txt/etc is included in the $79.
That doesn't sound like a bad plan, that's unusually good outside of the US from what I've researched, though most of my research has been limited to the UK.
i DO use my mobile for most calls. i use my landline maybe once a week, because it has a better speakerphone if im using it for a long time.
If I were back in Britain, I couldn't substitute a cellphone for a landline because of the incoming calls issue. It's simply not fair to my family or friends to make them pay through the nose to contact me. I might use one for the bulk of my outgoing calls, but for incoming calls, it wouldn't be right.
An ideal compromise, in my view, would be for the operators to provide two numbers on every phone, a caller pays and a mobile party pays (with the latter being treated as ordinary airtime, or unmetered according to a fixed monthly charge), but alas I don't think the operators would ever do something that could potentially undermine their interconnect revenues like that.
Neither solution is perfect. The US seems better at the moment because of the emphasis on unmetered usage. At least unmetered incoming calls are an option here. But the downside is the lack of a practical PAYG system.
The other way of looking at it is that the mobile user has made a technology choice. They shouldn't expect other people to pay for their technology choice. A system where each person pays to connect to the network and decides how they want to pay for that is inherently fairer, even if it makes it harder for people to choose to subsidize the systems of others.
(Remember too that in the majority of cases, most US users have a fixed bill because of the high number of bundled minutes coupled with the huge unmetered portions of their bills. It's not the case that we get billed for the incoming call in the majority of cases. If it's made at peak time, from a different network, then yeah, we'll use bundled minutes, but most of us end up with large amounts of bundled minutes free at the end of the month despite this. And you never have to accept an incoming call.)
and. as for pricing. yes, vodafone have a 1c/sec flat rate on calls. but. i pay $79/month and at the end of the my account has a automatic refund (of sorts) applied, so anything up to $500 in calls/txt/etc is included in the $79.
That doesn't sound like a bad plan, that's unusually good outside of the US from what I've researched, though most of my research has been limited to the UK.
i DO use my mobile for most calls. i use my landline maybe once a week, because it has a better speakerphone if im using it for a long time.
If I were back in Britain, I couldn't substitute a cellphone for a landline because of the incoming calls issue. It's simply not fair to my family or friends to make them pay through the nose to contact me. I might use one for the bulk of my outgoing calls, but for incoming calls, it wouldn't be right.
An ideal compromise, in my view, would be for the operators to provide two numbers on every phone, a caller pays and a mobile party pays (with the latter being treated as ordinary airtime, or unmetered according to a fixed monthly charge), but alas I don't think the operators would ever do something that could potentially undermine their interconnect revenues like that.
Neither solution is perfect. The US seems better at the moment because of the emphasis on unmetered usage. At least unmetered incoming calls are an option here. But the downside is the lack of a practical PAYG system.
matttrick
Sep 1, 11:38 AM
gah i love how mention of the merom rumor has to be thrown into every other rumor :(
TangoCharlie
Jul 14, 09:25 AM
[snip]The new processors, code named Conroe, are the desktop versions of the Core Duo processors which currently reside in Apple's MacBook, MacBook Pro and iMac computers.[snip]
Der. No! The Conroe CPU is the desktop version of the the Merom CPU which is not currently used in any Mac.
The Core 2 Duo and Core 2 Extreme are widely expected to make their Mac debut in Apple's PowerMac computers which are rumored to be released on August 7th 2006 at the World Wide Developers Conference.
Der. No! The Woodcrest CPU is widely expected to make its debut in Apple's PowerMac replacement computer (widely expected to be called Mac Pro) on
August 7th 2006 at the World Wide Developers' Conference.
Intel is expected to start shipping the new processors on July 23rd with an official announcement on July 27th. The Core 2 Duo will have clock speeds of 1.86GHz, 2.13GHz, 2.4GHz and 2.67GHz while the Core 2 Extreme will clock in at 2.93GHz. ALl share a 1066MHz front side bus with between 2-4MB of L2 cache. Pricing for the chips range from $183 to $999 per chip.
At last, something concrete!
As mentioned above, a number of benchmarks of the new chips have been released today, with DailyTech providing a roundup (http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=3319) of many reviews.
The bench marks show that the Conroe based CPU's are going to smoke the AMD competition. :)
Der. No! The Conroe CPU is the desktop version of the the Merom CPU which is not currently used in any Mac.
The Core 2 Duo and Core 2 Extreme are widely expected to make their Mac debut in Apple's PowerMac computers which are rumored to be released on August 7th 2006 at the World Wide Developers Conference.
Der. No! The Woodcrest CPU is widely expected to make its debut in Apple's PowerMac replacement computer (widely expected to be called Mac Pro) on
August 7th 2006 at the World Wide Developers' Conference.
Intel is expected to start shipping the new processors on July 23rd with an official announcement on July 27th. The Core 2 Duo will have clock speeds of 1.86GHz, 2.13GHz, 2.4GHz and 2.67GHz while the Core 2 Extreme will clock in at 2.93GHz. ALl share a 1066MHz front side bus with between 2-4MB of L2 cache. Pricing for the chips range from $183 to $999 per chip.
At last, something concrete!
As mentioned above, a number of benchmarks of the new chips have been released today, with DailyTech providing a roundup (http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=3319) of many reviews.
The bench marks show that the Conroe based CPU's are going to smoke the AMD competition. :)
Multimedia
Sep 12, 05:32 AM
I, for one, would be happy to spread the Word to the ignorant masses if Apple came out with a cute little white tower to match everyone's cute little white iPod. :P The Mini's nice, and the new iMac is nice too, but I think this thing could help Apple a lot in the desktop segment. I'd say something like that's bound to come out at some point, but when is the big question.
Also, it's probably been mentioned earlier in the thread, but does anyone know how long after Kentsfield Clovertown is supposed to come out? I heard "early 2007" a while ago, but with Kentsfield coming out so early, I would think Clovertown won't take that long.In two weeks at the Intel Developer's Conference in San Francisco, I think Intel will tell us exactly. But from what I've read recently, looks like Clovertown will be shipping no later than November. So looks like worst case scenario will force Steve to have to introduce 8 core Mac Pros in four months at the MacWorld Expo San Francisco SteveNote January 9, 2007. I don't see how he could wait any longer than that.
Sure they will cost more than any previous Mac ever has, $4k is my guess, but to imagine there isn't a market for such a goliath is myopic in the extreme.
Also, it's probably been mentioned earlier in the thread, but does anyone know how long after Kentsfield Clovertown is supposed to come out? I heard "early 2007" a while ago, but with Kentsfield coming out so early, I would think Clovertown won't take that long.In two weeks at the Intel Developer's Conference in San Francisco, I think Intel will tell us exactly. But from what I've read recently, looks like Clovertown will be shipping no later than November. So looks like worst case scenario will force Steve to have to introduce 8 core Mac Pros in four months at the MacWorld Expo San Francisco SteveNote January 9, 2007. I don't see how he could wait any longer than that.
Sure they will cost more than any previous Mac ever has, $4k is my guess, but to imagine there isn't a market for such a goliath is myopic in the extreme.
.png "Black And White Wallpaper")
0815
Apr 25, 01:26 PM
This just threw a spanner into my plans !
I've got a late 2007 non-unibody MBP - the "ultimate" which I've been updating as much as possible (Hybrid SSD 512Gb drive, 4Gb memory, etc etc) - I love my MBP but my applecare warranty just ran out last month. Which, I thought, was plenty timely so I could get the new MBP that just refreshed - quad core, 16Gb RAM seems like a LOT more power !
But, I didn't "jump" immediately - I always wait a couple of months to see what issues develop with the product line (the 17" range seems to have some graphics issues evidently, which seem to be resolved now) - BUT, with this rumor, do I plump down $4k for a maxed-out MBP now or wait until this new case design ?!?!?!
My current MBP is working great. The keyboard has a sticky "D" key, but apart from that, its been the best laptop I've ever owned, and the second longest I've owned before a refresh (the prior record holder was a Sony Vaio PCG-V505BX which I used/upgraded/refreshed a full 5 years before needing to upgrade !)
So what do I do ? I wasn't planning on buying the MBP until next month, after I got back from vacation...
If your current MacBook is still doing everything you want it to do, I wouldn't upgrade and wait (maybe 2-3 month after the new one is out) .... Of course the current one will also probably do more than you need, but if you can wait, it's always nice to have the latest design.
I've got a late 2007 non-unibody MBP - the "ultimate" which I've been updating as much as possible (Hybrid SSD 512Gb drive, 4Gb memory, etc etc) - I love my MBP but my applecare warranty just ran out last month. Which, I thought, was plenty timely so I could get the new MBP that just refreshed - quad core, 16Gb RAM seems like a LOT more power !
But, I didn't "jump" immediately - I always wait a couple of months to see what issues develop with the product line (the 17" range seems to have some graphics issues evidently, which seem to be resolved now) - BUT, with this rumor, do I plump down $4k for a maxed-out MBP now or wait until this new case design ?!?!?!
My current MBP is working great. The keyboard has a sticky "D" key, but apart from that, its been the best laptop I've ever owned, and the second longest I've owned before a refresh (the prior record holder was a Sony Vaio PCG-V505BX which I used/upgraded/refreshed a full 5 years before needing to upgrade !)
So what do I do ? I wasn't planning on buying the MBP until next month, after I got back from vacation...
If your current MacBook is still doing everything you want it to do, I wouldn't upgrade and wait (maybe 2-3 month after the new one is out) .... Of course the current one will also probably do more than you need, but if you can wait, it's always nice to have the latest design.
BoyBach
Aug 28, 12:27 PM
I expect to see a speed bump across the entire range (excluding the Mac Pro) within the coming weeks.
houttbe
Sep 10, 12:53 AM
I stopped at the Apple store this morning and tried out the 24 inch iMac and the Mac Pro. These are sweet machines. No did not buy anything.
Is the 24" as quiet as the MacPro? Have you been able to compare to the 20"?
Is the 24" as quiet as the MacPro? Have you been able to compare to the 20"?
wwworry
Sep 9, 06:25 AM
I am curious about the iMovie benchmarks. One might think the mac pro would be over twice as fast but it's not. Is that because of software limitations in iMovie?
I am about to make a purchase of either an iMac or a 2.0Ghz. MacPro for monthly workouts in Final Cut. Hard to decide.
I am about to make a purchase of either an iMac or a 2.0Ghz. MacPro for monthly workouts in Final Cut. Hard to decide.
KnightWRX
Apr 22, 01:22 PM
Because part of releasing a new, backwards approaching, IGP in the 13" MBP required saving face for both its MacBook "PRO" name and Intel's IGP capabilities itself.
If the resolution is upgraded to 1440x900, the IGP is going to perform worse in comparison to the prior 13" MBP...
Hum... that's the point, you wouldn't even notice that in regular desktop usage, only in gaming and then only if you usually game on the internal display.
The framebuffer resolutions required for desktop usage have been pushed by GPUs much less than the SB graphics. Again, my Matrox G200 could power a 1600x1200 monitor with ease with about 1% of the processing power of a 9400M, much less that of the 320M or the Intel 3000HD.
These GPUs can power 30" monitors at 2560x1600 and their internal display on the laptops without breaking a sweat, at the same time. You wouldn't notice a degradation in performance. I'm writing this right now with my MBA connected to a 2048x1156 monitor and it's also powering its own 1440x900 display where iTunes is displayed. I'm not seeing this "degradation" you speak of.
This, again, only applies to 3D gaming. We don't know why the MBP didn't get the resolution upgrade and I can garantee you it has nothing to do with the GPU.
If the resolution is upgraded to 1440x900, the IGP is going to perform worse in comparison to the prior 13" MBP...
Hum... that's the point, you wouldn't even notice that in regular desktop usage, only in gaming and then only if you usually game on the internal display.
The framebuffer resolutions required for desktop usage have been pushed by GPUs much less than the SB graphics. Again, my Matrox G200 could power a 1600x1200 monitor with ease with about 1% of the processing power of a 9400M, much less that of the 320M or the Intel 3000HD.
These GPUs can power 30" monitors at 2560x1600 and their internal display on the laptops without breaking a sweat, at the same time. You wouldn't notice a degradation in performance. I'm writing this right now with my MBA connected to a 2048x1156 monitor and it's also powering its own 1440x900 display where iTunes is displayed. I'm not seeing this "degradation" you speak of.
This, again, only applies to 3D gaming. We don't know why the MBP didn't get the resolution upgrade and I can garantee you it has nothing to do with the GPU.
infidel69
Apr 14, 05:36 PM
Glad to hear it:D
Im really stoked to see the Ivy Bridge benchmarks...the i72600k blew my mind:eek: I feel bad for the enthusiast folks who bought a 980x :(
Enthusiasts had the 980 for atleast 6 months now and it's still faster than any sb cpu. Alot of those guys already had x58 mobo's anyway. Now if you purchased a brand new 12 core Mac Pro then then I agree with you.
Im really stoked to see the Ivy Bridge benchmarks...the i72600k blew my mind:eek: I feel bad for the enthusiast folks who bought a 980x :(
Enthusiasts had the 980 for atleast 6 months now and it's still faster than any sb cpu. Alot of those guys already had x58 mobo's anyway. Now if you purchased a brand new 12 core Mac Pro then then I agree with you.
DeaconGraves
Apr 11, 07:50 AM
That's nice.
::Goes back to listening to podcasts streaming from his iPhone to his AppleTV::
::Goes back to listening to podcasts streaming from his iPhone to his AppleTV::
cube
Apr 22, 12:02 PM
Err... and how is that relevant? I'm sure Blu-Ray will live on in other notebooks, but Apple's? Unlikely.
There were 100GB BDXL when Apple refreshed the MacBook Pro's this year.
There are no BDXL notebook drives yet.
Just preempting any claim that there's no place for optical drives because "BD is obsolete".
Even DVDs and CDs are not obsolete. They are mainstream distribution media.
Optical drives at not at all at "floppy time".
There were 100GB BDXL when Apple refreshed the MacBook Pro's this year.
There are no BDXL notebook drives yet.
Just preempting any claim that there's no place for optical drives because "BD is obsolete".
Even DVDs and CDs are not obsolete. They are mainstream distribution media.
Optical drives at not at all at "floppy time".
twoodcc
Sep 5, 01:45 PM
wow. well this confirms it then. man this is gonna be a long week of waiting
Lesser Evets
Mar 22, 03:45 PM
I wonder when Apple will do that again re: GPUs. Ever.
Is it necessary these days? Back in 1999 it was still difficult days to just get video going at a good rate. These days it isn't hard to get good graphics.
What would be the use of redundant graphics? It must be a very small wedge of the market.
Is it necessary these days? Back in 1999 it was still difficult days to just get video going at a good rate. These days it isn't hard to get good graphics.
What would be the use of redundant graphics? It must be a very small wedge of the market.