hyperpasta
Sep 1, 03:02 PM
Apple used to have all-in-ones, consumer towers, pro towers, etc. Remember the PowerMac 6400? Too many products is too confusing for the consumer. If that means that a couple of people can't get the exact configuration they want, so be it.
Not more products... more BTO options. Here's my ideal line.
Mac Cube - $499
Low-end Conroe
512MB RAM
80GB HD (full-size)
Superdrive
Intel Graphics
Mac Cube - $699
Mid-end Conroe
1GB RAM
120GB HD
Superdrive
Intel Graphics
All BTO... up to mid-end Conroe, 4GB of RAM, real video card, and even a 500GB HD!
iMac
As it is now, but modernized specs and low to mid-Conroe. BTO DOWNgradable to the current "education" model.
Mac Pro
Also as it is now.
MacBook White - $999
Low-End Merom
1GB RAM
60GB HD
Combo Drive
Intel Graphics
13" Matte Display
MacBook White - $1299
Mid-End Merom
1GB RAM
80GB HD
Superdrive
Intel Graphics
13" Matte Display
BOTH models are equally upgradable... to 2GB RAM, 100GB HD, Low-End Graphics Card.
MacBook Pro 15" - $1799
High-End Merom
1GB RAM
80GB HD
Superdrive
128MB Graphics
15" Matte Display
MacBook Pro 17" - $1999
Same as 15" with 17" screen.
See? FEWER models, more BTO. Much easier to find a Mac you agree with.
Not more products... more BTO options. Here's my ideal line.
Mac Cube - $499
Low-end Conroe
512MB RAM
80GB HD (full-size)
Superdrive
Intel Graphics
Mac Cube - $699
Mid-end Conroe
1GB RAM
120GB HD
Superdrive
Intel Graphics
All BTO... up to mid-end Conroe, 4GB of RAM, real video card, and even a 500GB HD!
iMac
As it is now, but modernized specs and low to mid-Conroe. BTO DOWNgradable to the current "education" model.
Mac Pro
Also as it is now.
MacBook White - $999
Low-End Merom
1GB RAM
60GB HD
Combo Drive
Intel Graphics
13" Matte Display
MacBook White - $1299
Mid-End Merom
1GB RAM
80GB HD
Superdrive
Intel Graphics
13" Matte Display
BOTH models are equally upgradable... to 2GB RAM, 100GB HD, Low-End Graphics Card.
MacBook Pro 15" - $1799
High-End Merom
1GB RAM
80GB HD
Superdrive
128MB Graphics
15" Matte Display
MacBook Pro 17" - $1999
Same as 15" with 17" screen.
See? FEWER models, more BTO. Much easier to find a Mac you agree with.
Tonsko
Jan 23, 04:11 PM
http://homepage.mac.com/mattlike/Chally.jpg
2009 Challenger R/T
Yes, mate. Black stripes every time you go somewhere! (Although that could get pricey :P )
2009 Challenger R/T
Yes, mate. Black stripes every time you go somewhere! (Although that could get pricey :P )
wheezy
Nov 15, 06:37 PM
That really depends on the program, on how "parallelizable" the application is.
The simplest way to think of it is like this: Let's say you have a program that first has to calculate A. Then, when it's done that, it uses the result of A to calculate B. Then, when it's done that, uses the result of B to calculate C, then C to D, and so on. That's a *serial* problem there. The calculation of B can't begin until A is done, so it doesn't matter how many processors you have running, all computation is held up on one spot.
On the other hand, let's say you have an application that needs to calculate A, B, C and D, but those four values are not dependent on each other at all. In that case, you can use four processors at the same time, to calculate all four values at the same time.
Think of it like baking a cake. You can't start putting on the icing until the cake is done baking. And you can't start baking the cake until the ingredients are all mixed together. But you can have people simultaneously getting out and measuring the ingredients.
So that problem is partially parallelizable, but the majority of its workload is a serial process.
Some software applications, just by their very nature, will never be able to do anything useful with multiple processors.
What a very lovely analogy. Thank you.
For me... 8 cores for the bragging rights only... so I guess I won't get one anytime soon. I'm sure 4 would suit me fine though, I need to upgrade my 1Ghz G4!!!
The simplest way to think of it is like this: Let's say you have a program that first has to calculate A. Then, when it's done that, it uses the result of A to calculate B. Then, when it's done that, uses the result of B to calculate C, then C to D, and so on. That's a *serial* problem there. The calculation of B can't begin until A is done, so it doesn't matter how many processors you have running, all computation is held up on one spot.
On the other hand, let's say you have an application that needs to calculate A, B, C and D, but those four values are not dependent on each other at all. In that case, you can use four processors at the same time, to calculate all four values at the same time.
Think of it like baking a cake. You can't start putting on the icing until the cake is done baking. And you can't start baking the cake until the ingredients are all mixed together. But you can have people simultaneously getting out and measuring the ingredients.
So that problem is partially parallelizable, but the majority of its workload is a serial process.
Some software applications, just by their very nature, will never be able to do anything useful with multiple processors.
What a very lovely analogy. Thank you.
For me... 8 cores for the bragging rights only... so I guess I won't get one anytime soon. I'm sure 4 would suit me fine though, I need to upgrade my 1Ghz G4!!!
mambodancer
Jul 18, 10:18 PM
I think you are confusing the term HD in various context.
A movie file (computer file) can be in HD resolution (1280x720 or 1920x1080) encoded in a variety of formats (MPEG2, MPEG4-H.264 aka AVC, Microsoft VC-1).
If the non-DRM'd file is available on your computer, you can view them using a variety of playback software such as Quicktime, Windows Media Player, VLC player, etc.
However, you rented HD-DVD. This is a physical media that requires a blu-laser based HD-DVD player to play it on. Currently only Toshiba sells such a player as a standalone player HD-A1 I believe. They also have a high-end laptop with this player built-in. So, you need a HD-DVD readable drive to playback the HD-DVD disc you rented from Netflix.
What Apple is talking about is authoring HD disks. You can make HD movies using Final Cut Pro or even iMovie by importing a HD movie (probably in HDV format). Then create a DVD image of it that is capable of HD. I have not used this feature - so I don't know the details.
I would have preferred a way to burn H.264 based HD movies into a standard DVD (red laser based single or dual layer DVD) and play it back on a low cost player that can do H.264 decoding (including HD resolution). I guess a Mac Mini is one such beast ;-)
That's what I figured. I knew it was too much to hope that I could play HD-DVD's in my iMac without buying a stand alone player. Oh, well. Thanks for the reply.
A movie file (computer file) can be in HD resolution (1280x720 or 1920x1080) encoded in a variety of formats (MPEG2, MPEG4-H.264 aka AVC, Microsoft VC-1).
If the non-DRM'd file is available on your computer, you can view them using a variety of playback software such as Quicktime, Windows Media Player, VLC player, etc.
However, you rented HD-DVD. This is a physical media that requires a blu-laser based HD-DVD player to play it on. Currently only Toshiba sells such a player as a standalone player HD-A1 I believe. They also have a high-end laptop with this player built-in. So, you need a HD-DVD readable drive to playback the HD-DVD disc you rented from Netflix.
What Apple is talking about is authoring HD disks. You can make HD movies using Final Cut Pro or even iMovie by importing a HD movie (probably in HDV format). Then create a DVD image of it that is capable of HD. I have not used this feature - so I don't know the details.
I would have preferred a way to burn H.264 based HD movies into a standard DVD (red laser based single or dual layer DVD) and play it back on a low cost player that can do H.264 decoding (including HD resolution). I guess a Mac Mini is one such beast ;-)
That's what I figured. I knew it was too much to hope that I could play HD-DVD's in my iMac without buying a stand alone player. Oh, well. Thanks for the reply.
Bigdaddyguido
Apr 26, 12:51 PM
Wirelessly posted (Iphone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
How can it be generic if no one had one before apple created there's? Suddenly everyone calls their market place an app store. There've been digital stores for years, and none were app stores.
How can it be generic if no one had one before apple created there's? Suddenly everyone calls their market place an app store. There've been digital stores for years, and none were app stores.
theBB
Jul 19, 08:52 PM
Lets see Japan lost their GOD, their king after WW2, replaced him with MacArthur who rebuilt their industry
Actually, after WW2 Japan kept the emperor, so they had "one god talking to another [MacArthur]" for a while.
Actually, after WW2 Japan kept the emperor, so they had "one god talking to another [MacArthur]" for a while.
Yebubbleman
Apr 19, 01:40 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
One step closer to a MBA refresh.
Seriously?! How long have you been waiting? Since last refresh?
Please...Please...Please...provide a pro graphics card option (FirePro or Quadro)
Keep dreaming. They couldn't even get a Radeon HD 5770, let alone a 5850. The best that could be done was a 5750 in the 27", and while it's not a terrible GPU, it's certainly nowhere near pro-level.
Not expecting a huge update here other than Sandy Bridge, Thunderbolt, and 6XXX series AMD graphics.
Lulz to that. It's not like those things weren't key to the Early 2011 MacBook Pros being as critically acclaimed as they are now.
Does this mean a Mini update is right behind it?
No. While Mac mini updates could be right around the corner, the two are on different release timelines and aren't always released at the same time. Essentially, it's irrelevant.
6950 6950 6950 6950 6950 6950 6950 6950 6950!
For heavens sake give it a nice GPU!!!!!!!!:eek:
If the 5750 was the best that we got on the highest end model of current, then I'd be shocked if we got anything past 6770. We're definitely not getting cards that use up as much power as the iMac itself or require a second six-pin connector in the Desktop PCIe equivalent.
So, is this the fast iMac refresh in years?
Since July 2010; not even a full year really.
You misunderstood me friend...I meant an HD 6950 2GB (Desktop Card)
Yes, its a pipe dream...but cant a man dream:rolleyes:
Sure, but that doesn't mean it'll ever happen.
Ah yes, well a desktop card would be nice. And the 27" does have the room when compared to the 21". They could engineer it in there if they wanted to.
But yes, I share your dream.
How many of those machines have you seen naked? As in, without the glass or panel with bare innards in full view? My guess is not very many. They don't have the room to engineer a better video card in the 27". It's almost a wonder they even have the room for something like the Radeon HD 5750 in what they have now. It's not like they took the design of the 21.5", gave it a larger chasis and screen and suddenly had more room to play with. Even so, as it stands, both sizes of iMac get extraordinarily hot. Sure, the 5750 in the Mid-2010 27" model draws less heat than the 4850 in the Late-2009 27" model, but that difference is negligible and even with a 6 series GPU's improvement, I doubt the difference will be substantial enough to warrant THAT much more power relative to the 6 series' lineup.
So, no, they couldn't engineer THAT much better of a card if they wanted. Not without making the iMac thicker than it already is. But it's Apple, they never do.
One step closer to a MBA refresh.
Seriously?! How long have you been waiting? Since last refresh?
Please...Please...Please...provide a pro graphics card option (FirePro or Quadro)
Keep dreaming. They couldn't even get a Radeon HD 5770, let alone a 5850. The best that could be done was a 5750 in the 27", and while it's not a terrible GPU, it's certainly nowhere near pro-level.
Not expecting a huge update here other than Sandy Bridge, Thunderbolt, and 6XXX series AMD graphics.
Lulz to that. It's not like those things weren't key to the Early 2011 MacBook Pros being as critically acclaimed as they are now.
Does this mean a Mini update is right behind it?
No. While Mac mini updates could be right around the corner, the two are on different release timelines and aren't always released at the same time. Essentially, it's irrelevant.
6950 6950 6950 6950 6950 6950 6950 6950 6950!
For heavens sake give it a nice GPU!!!!!!!!:eek:
If the 5750 was the best that we got on the highest end model of current, then I'd be shocked if we got anything past 6770. We're definitely not getting cards that use up as much power as the iMac itself or require a second six-pin connector in the Desktop PCIe equivalent.
So, is this the fast iMac refresh in years?
Since July 2010; not even a full year really.
You misunderstood me friend...I meant an HD 6950 2GB (Desktop Card)
Yes, its a pipe dream...but cant a man dream:rolleyes:
Sure, but that doesn't mean it'll ever happen.
Ah yes, well a desktop card would be nice. And the 27" does have the room when compared to the 21". They could engineer it in there if they wanted to.
But yes, I share your dream.
How many of those machines have you seen naked? As in, without the glass or panel with bare innards in full view? My guess is not very many. They don't have the room to engineer a better video card in the 27". It's almost a wonder they even have the room for something like the Radeon HD 5750 in what they have now. It's not like they took the design of the 21.5", gave it a larger chasis and screen and suddenly had more room to play with. Even so, as it stands, both sizes of iMac get extraordinarily hot. Sure, the 5750 in the Mid-2010 27" model draws less heat than the 4850 in the Late-2009 27" model, but that difference is negligible and even with a 6 series GPU's improvement, I doubt the difference will be substantial enough to warrant THAT much more power relative to the 6 series' lineup.
So, no, they couldn't engineer THAT much better of a card if they wanted. Not without making the iMac thicker than it already is. But it's Apple, they never do.
Hisdem
Nov 23, 05:02 PM
It's already in the last edition, but since it's been less than 2 hours since I bought it and I'm still VERY excited about it,
2011 2.5L SEL Fusion. Should be here Saturday! :D
http://carphotos.cardomain.com/ride_images/4/272/3221/38179110001_large.jpg
Not my picture of course.
2011 2.5L SEL Fusion. Should be here Saturday! :D
http://carphotos.cardomain.com/ride_images/4/272/3221/38179110001_large.jpg
Not my picture of course.
SuperMacMan
Oct 4, 01:48 AM
Does anybody know how it will fit in a last gen case?
I have the new iPod Touch, but I am looking for a temporary solution until stores recieve the new cases.
No dice. I have a 1st & 2nd gen touch, tried the cases I have for them on my new one, no way jos�! The new iPod touch is a good 0.5cm narrower, a good bit thinner and shorter than the older models. Old cases just let the iPod slide around in it.
I too am having the problem with a lack of retail stores selling cases. The only store that has them only have a Belkin one I don't like, and it's $35 AUD!! I managed to find a Chinese shopping centre stall that had one for $10, so I got that for in the mean time. It fits, but the volume & sleep/wake buttons don't line up correctly, but I'll deal with it until I get a good one.
I have the new iPod Touch, but I am looking for a temporary solution until stores recieve the new cases.
No dice. I have a 1st & 2nd gen touch, tried the cases I have for them on my new one, no way jos�! The new iPod touch is a good 0.5cm narrower, a good bit thinner and shorter than the older models. Old cases just let the iPod slide around in it.
I too am having the problem with a lack of retail stores selling cases. The only store that has them only have a Belkin one I don't like, and it's $35 AUD!! I managed to find a Chinese shopping centre stall that had one for $10, so I got that for in the mean time. It fits, but the volume & sleep/wake buttons don't line up correctly, but I'll deal with it until I get a good one.
SciFrog
Nov 8, 08:51 PM
Well it is not supported, same as running GPU on Linux... Only difference is that they are so many doing so that they figured it out...
Funkymonk
Apr 2, 11:06 PM
loved the ad. one of apple's best yet and speaks the truth!
unlike those crappy iphone ones. "if you don't have an iphone you can't do this and that!" uhhhh.... yes you can.
this more than makes up for that idiocy though:D
unlike those crappy iphone ones. "if you don't have an iphone you can't do this and that!" uhhhh.... yes you can.
this more than makes up for that idiocy though:D
Aniej
Jan 3, 11:44 AM
Perhaps appleinsider should start to focus on their own site rather than apple's new products as part of their 2007 resolutions. Their homepage is, as you can see from my screenshot, full of useful information complete with an advertisement for vista. Classic:rolleyes:
Carniphage
Nov 30, 03:22 AM
I'll speak loud and clear:
DVR
iTunes Store can't now nor will it likely ever replace Dish Network for me. Just let me record my shows either directly with iTV or via something connected to it. I hope when this is released, HD DVD and Blu-ray make there way into Macs.
No No No No No!
All a DVR is - is a better VHS. A way of watching broadcast TV a little more easily. It's a timeshifter, but it is not revolutionary.
DVRs are popular with the (few) people who have them because they end some of the scheduling tyranny of the broadcasters.
But the problem is not scheduling. The problem is broadcasting itself.
Every modern business has had to face up to the opportunities and challenges of the Internet. One of the most significant is what they call disintermediation. Cutting out the middle men. Buying direct.
TV needs to be disintermediated. The advertisers and the networks get in the way. There needs to be a better pathway between producers and consumers.
Advertisers screw-up television. They influence content. Great shows are pulled, not because they don't have enough enthusiastic viewers, but because they don't attract enough consumers of sanitary towels or tooth whitener.
Lousy shows clog up the airwaves because they attract a large number of bottom-dwelling viewers who might just notice the ad for low-price hemorrhoid cream.
Broadcast TV is a business model from the 50s which needs to die. But if you *really* want your TV content determined by the marketeers of ant-acid remedies then stick with your DVR. Stick with Celebrity Love Spacktard. Cheer it up for American Idle. Wave pom poms like a sixteen year-old for the vacuous, empty spam that the networks churn out, to fill the gaps between revenue-generating advertising.
But while dreaming of Celebutard Love Assault... just for a second, imagine how much better TV could be if we could pay Joss Wheadon for Firefly DIRECTLY, or pay someone to make Star Trek with the same level of integrity as Battlestar.
Hint - if it started to suck, we would stop paying.
I'd prefer my television direct.
Screw the advertisers. Screw the networks. Screw Rupert Murdoch. In fact, pull down your dish and cram it in Rupert Murdoch.
Go iTV
C.
DVR
iTunes Store can't now nor will it likely ever replace Dish Network for me. Just let me record my shows either directly with iTV or via something connected to it. I hope when this is released, HD DVD and Blu-ray make there way into Macs.
No No No No No!
All a DVR is - is a better VHS. A way of watching broadcast TV a little more easily. It's a timeshifter, but it is not revolutionary.
DVRs are popular with the (few) people who have them because they end some of the scheduling tyranny of the broadcasters.
But the problem is not scheduling. The problem is broadcasting itself.
Every modern business has had to face up to the opportunities and challenges of the Internet. One of the most significant is what they call disintermediation. Cutting out the middle men. Buying direct.
TV needs to be disintermediated. The advertisers and the networks get in the way. There needs to be a better pathway between producers and consumers.
Advertisers screw-up television. They influence content. Great shows are pulled, not because they don't have enough enthusiastic viewers, but because they don't attract enough consumers of sanitary towels or tooth whitener.
Lousy shows clog up the airwaves because they attract a large number of bottom-dwelling viewers who might just notice the ad for low-price hemorrhoid cream.
Broadcast TV is a business model from the 50s which needs to die. But if you *really* want your TV content determined by the marketeers of ant-acid remedies then stick with your DVR. Stick with Celebrity Love Spacktard. Cheer it up for American Idle. Wave pom poms like a sixteen year-old for the vacuous, empty spam that the networks churn out, to fill the gaps between revenue-generating advertising.
But while dreaming of Celebutard Love Assault... just for a second, imagine how much better TV could be if we could pay Joss Wheadon for Firefly DIRECTLY, or pay someone to make Star Trek with the same level of integrity as Battlestar.
Hint - if it started to suck, we would stop paying.
I'd prefer my television direct.
Screw the advertisers. Screw the networks. Screw Rupert Murdoch. In fact, pull down your dish and cram it in Rupert Murdoch.
Go iTV
C.
hkim1983
Oct 29, 08:31 PM
Hi everyone, I just recently purchased an Ipod Touch 4G to replace my aging 1G, and have decided to buy a case to help protect my investment (to resell at a later time) this time to avoid the massive damage my 1G went through (long story...it's not pretty anymore, but hey, it does work).
My requirements are as follows:
-It MUST protect the glass on the front if it were to fall face-down onto a hard surface. Now, I'm not expecting miracles here, but it has to offer some protection for this (if you're wondering, this is what happened to my 1G...).
-It must protect the back from scratches and whatnot, but I assume most cases do this by default...
-It must not compromise any ports/buttons at all.
-It must not be too bulky.
-This isn't a major thing, but I'd like to be able to open it up without too much of a hassle if the need arises.
-I'm looking to spend between $20-25 at most.
Right now, I've narrowed it down to the Griffen Reveal, Switcheasy Colors, and the iFrogz Luxe due to their overall positive reputations. Does anyone have any thoughts on the above 3? Does anyone have any other recommendations that I missed? Thanks.
My requirements are as follows:
-It MUST protect the glass on the front if it were to fall face-down onto a hard surface. Now, I'm not expecting miracles here, but it has to offer some protection for this (if you're wondering, this is what happened to my 1G...).
-It must protect the back from scratches and whatnot, but I assume most cases do this by default...
-It must not compromise any ports/buttons at all.
-It must not be too bulky.
-This isn't a major thing, but I'd like to be able to open it up without too much of a hassle if the need arises.
-I'm looking to spend between $20-25 at most.
Right now, I've narrowed it down to the Griffen Reveal, Switcheasy Colors, and the iFrogz Luxe due to their overall positive reputations. Does anyone have any thoughts on the above 3? Does anyone have any other recommendations that I missed? Thanks.
dornoforpyros
Oct 23, 07:55 AM
oh don't worry kids, they WILL be released tomorrow because I just bought on saturday :P
akac
Apr 12, 09:41 PM
Ground up rewrite = a whole load of bugs.
It'll be interesting to see how many shops use this for production work when it's finally released.
Depends on how long and wide the beta goes.
It'll be interesting to see how many shops use this for production work when it's finally released.
Depends on how long and wide the beta goes.
mingspace
Oct 23, 09:10 PM
yes on the 31 we shall have a trick and a treat... ...MACBOO
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j248/jonathaniliff/macboo2-1.jpg
Anyone have a hunch on the price the new macbooks and MBPs?
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j248/jonathaniliff/macboo2-1.jpg
Anyone have a hunch on the price the new macbooks and MBPs?
Tailpike1153
Mar 22, 03:50 PM
The chance that the iPod Classic is updated to 220GB is zero. Apple has no plans to ever update a hard drive based non-touch portable device (they would not waste their time), and they've shown even less interest in increasing the capacity of any device beyond even 64GB flash.
Tony
Is Apple's 64GB falsh memory ceiling a reflection of the market place or that Apple is now run by profit hungry cheapskates?
Tony
Is Apple's 64GB falsh memory ceiling a reflection of the market place or that Apple is now run by profit hungry cheapskates?
ju5tin81
Nov 28, 02:21 PM
zune people don't seem to agree what it is bad. they just deny the true. here what they are ridiculous.
http://www.zunescene.com/forums/index.php?topic=3784.0
I am pro Apple, But I've never read such pro Apple posts in all my life... I doubt many real Zune users got a look in since you linked to that! :D
http://www.zunescene.com/forums/index.php?topic=3784.0
I am pro Apple, But I've never read such pro Apple posts in all my life... I doubt many real Zune users got a look in since you linked to that! :D
windows311
Sep 15, 02:28 AM
CR hasn't been relevant in at least 5 years. Another mag that made a terrible transition to the web. Welcome to the interweb CR, now will you please hire a web designer? Your site is embarrassing.
aznguyen316
Sep 12, 08:39 PM
I got Night Sky (very dark blue).
do you have a picture? I assumed it would be dark blue but the pictures look like violet.
do you have a picture? I assumed it would be dark blue but the pictures look like violet.
Eidorian
Aug 25, 10:26 AM
I can.Only thing holding back better GPU in mini and MacBooks is Intel. Apple needs to stick with IG for cost reasons. Just wating for Intel to start shipping better GPU so they can improve that ASAP. I'm with you guys. Waiting for that to improve as well. But may happen with this refresh. Don't know the IG roadmap so well. Read here the 965 set is delayed until early 2007.
Can anyone here confirm where we're at and going how soon on the Intel Integrated GPU front?We're still going with the GMA950 on the mobile front. The X3000 (965) has made its debut on the desktop platform with Conroe. Still, driver issues and low chipset supply keep it from the mass market. We're not going to see a MOBILE X3000 (965) until Santa Rosa next year. Hopefully Apple can make some good drivers for OS X and the X3000. I don't know anything beyond the 965 in the integrated graphics front.
Can anyone here confirm where we're at and going how soon on the Intel Integrated GPU front?We're still going with the GMA950 on the mobile front. The X3000 (965) has made its debut on the desktop platform with Conroe. Still, driver issues and low chipset supply keep it from the mass market. We're not going to see a MOBILE X3000 (965) until Santa Rosa next year. Hopefully Apple can make some good drivers for OS X and the X3000. I don't know anything beyond the 965 in the integrated graphics front.
jav6454
Mar 24, 02:02 PM
But the GPU still has to decode what was sent and put it on the screen, which is why I asked if the TB itself can do the encoding. If it can how much overhead will that add (again as it has to happen over the PCIe side)?
Or can you send graphics information over DP that still needs to be processed, ie raw frames?
The GPU can do that, no need for CPU. The CPU is just there to tell the GPU what to crunch assuming no FLAGS were thrown regarding a particular DRM-protected data.
Thunderbolt is just the transmission protocol, there is no actual decode or encode besides what is hard wired at the ports.
Or can you send graphics information over DP that still needs to be processed, ie raw frames?
The GPU can do that, no need for CPU. The CPU is just there to tell the GPU what to crunch assuming no FLAGS were thrown regarding a particular DRM-protected data.
Thunderbolt is just the transmission protocol, there is no actual decode or encode besides what is hard wired at the ports.
Chundles
Aug 7, 05:00 AM
You have a point, but it's already 7:40 pm on Monday here so your work day would already be done. Plus I'm in Australia so how much can I really complain?
On a side note:
Maybe some Aussies can help me understand the price difference of computers here. Back home I bought the 17" MacBook Pro for something like $3,300 AUD and I come over here and it's in the $4,500 AUD range. I did get the student discount back home, but that's a huge margin.
Edit:
Hmmm, location still didn't change.
US Store, 17" MBP (no taxes): AUD$3655
AU Store, 17" MBP (no GST): AUD$3999
CAN Store, 17" MBP (no taxes): AUD$3591
You have to add sales tax to the US and Canadian prices as they are not only aren't displayed in the price but the taxes differ from state to state/province to province. Aussie GST is quoted in the price and is that same across the country so a 17" MBP costs exactly the same in every state.
The difference is about $400 which is pretty big but we're not a big market, thus selling to us costs more as the size of the market can't make up for the increased cost of getting the products to us.
We also make more money, I remember a while ago doing a comparison between a waiter on Aussie award wages and US minimum wage in the purchase of an iBook. The US waiter would have to work ~2x as many hours as the aussie waiter to afford an iBook at our respective online Apple Stores.
On a side note:
Maybe some Aussies can help me understand the price difference of computers here. Back home I bought the 17" MacBook Pro for something like $3,300 AUD and I come over here and it's in the $4,500 AUD range. I did get the student discount back home, but that's a huge margin.
Edit:
Hmmm, location still didn't change.
US Store, 17" MBP (no taxes): AUD$3655
AU Store, 17" MBP (no GST): AUD$3999
CAN Store, 17" MBP (no taxes): AUD$3591
You have to add sales tax to the US and Canadian prices as they are not only aren't displayed in the price but the taxes differ from state to state/province to province. Aussie GST is quoted in the price and is that same across the country so a 17" MBP costs exactly the same in every state.
The difference is about $400 which is pretty big but we're not a big market, thus selling to us costs more as the size of the market can't make up for the increased cost of getting the products to us.
We also make more money, I remember a while ago doing a comparison between a waiter on Aussie award wages and US minimum wage in the purchase of an iBook. The US waiter would have to work ~2x as many hours as the aussie waiter to afford an iBook at our respective online Apple Stores.
