11thIndian
Apr 11, 11:24 PM
Looking forward to the new final cut studio.
if apple is smart they will allow access to individual parts of the suite
as seperate Mac App Store downloads.
If it were possible to buy apple Motion on it's own I think many existing After Effects would be very happy to have something else to play with that can take adavantage of their hardware and deliver some fun realtime workflows...
it could be a halo product for such editors as well to end up using the whole suite...
I bought motion for 300 when it used to be sold individually, and I have spent a tonne of money since simply because I love that product.
do it apple. please.
Motion has a funny reputation. I find it quite powerful and very intuitive now that I've been using it almost exclusively for over a year. I know a lot of AE users find it very hard to make the mental leap to the different methodology, and I totally understand that as it took me several months of regular work to really adjust my headspace to the new way of thinking.
How the different parts of the Studio might be merged or changed is one of the more interesting questions for me. You could overload FCP if you tried to cram all the other apps together, but there's no question there's room for tighter integration.
It would be very surprising to see the different programs sold separately thought the appStore. The programs themselves aren't too massive [and may have been streamlined more] but the extra content for loops would make it a HEAFTY download for anyone!
This evening can't come soon enough, glad to have all the speculation over with and concentrate on what it actually is [and isn't].
If anyone comes up with a good liveblog or ustream of the presentation, remember to post it here. So far, the best coverage I can find it twitter feeds for people like Larry Jordan or Philip Hodgetts who will be in attendance.
if apple is smart they will allow access to individual parts of the suite
as seperate Mac App Store downloads.
If it were possible to buy apple Motion on it's own I think many existing After Effects would be very happy to have something else to play with that can take adavantage of their hardware and deliver some fun realtime workflows...
it could be a halo product for such editors as well to end up using the whole suite...
I bought motion for 300 when it used to be sold individually, and I have spent a tonne of money since simply because I love that product.
do it apple. please.
Motion has a funny reputation. I find it quite powerful and very intuitive now that I've been using it almost exclusively for over a year. I know a lot of AE users find it very hard to make the mental leap to the different methodology, and I totally understand that as it took me several months of regular work to really adjust my headspace to the new way of thinking.
How the different parts of the Studio might be merged or changed is one of the more interesting questions for me. You could overload FCP if you tried to cram all the other apps together, but there's no question there's room for tighter integration.
It would be very surprising to see the different programs sold separately thought the appStore. The programs themselves aren't too massive [and may have been streamlined more] but the extra content for loops would make it a HEAFTY download for anyone!
This evening can't come soon enough, glad to have all the speculation over with and concentrate on what it actually is [and isn't].
If anyone comes up with a good liveblog or ustream of the presentation, remember to post it here. So far, the best coverage I can find it twitter feeds for people like Larry Jordan or Philip Hodgetts who will be in attendance.
Eidorian
Aug 27, 07:57 AM
Conroe power consumption (http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core2duo-shootout_11.html)
I also remember another link where it shows the CPU temperature at 100% load being 50� C. (More then likely with a stock heat sink, fan, and in a BTX case.)
I remember my iMac G5 Rev. B hitting 75� C at 100% load. So there's some room for more heat. I don't know if it'll be as quiet though compared to Yonah.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=219310&highlight=970fx+tdp+conroe
I also remember another link where it shows the CPU temperature at 100% load being 50� C. (More then likely with a stock heat sink, fan, and in a BTX case.)
I remember my iMac G5 Rev. B hitting 75� C at 100% load. So there's some room for more heat. I don't know if it'll be as quiet though compared to Yonah.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=219310&highlight=970fx+tdp+conroe
samcraig
Apr 27, 09:00 AM
You really need to get a dumb phone............oh wait.....the NSA will still be able to log every conversation, text and yes your location..........
Either get rid of your phone or quit being such a whiner
Just to be clear - you think someone who wants to question what is and what is not being tracked is a whiner?
Did I read you correctly. Nice name calling.
Either get rid of your phone or quit being such a whiner
Just to be clear - you think someone who wants to question what is and what is not being tracked is a whiner?
Did I read you correctly. Nice name calling.
Snowy_River
Jul 27, 02:55 PM
Pretty cool, but it needs a real name, MAC won't cut it. Maybe Mac Express?
And it wouldn't have FW800 or a second optical slot. Probably a second HD slot instead. And I'd guess it would be more of a pizza box enclosure, but that's wild speculation. Your price is probably way too low, too.
I'm not sure why you're saying this price is way too low. The specs, so far as I can see, are quite similar to the current bottom-end iMac, which has an integrated screen, and it's price is only $300 more. It seems to me that this price is actually about right.
Also, I think that the name 'Mac' is a distinct possibility. Not saying I like it (or that I don't), or that it isn't simplistic, but I think that it's not unreasonable. FWIW, 'Mac Express' is nice, too, but I don't see Apple jumping on a name like that as quickly.
And it wouldn't have FW800 or a second optical slot. Probably a second HD slot instead. And I'd guess it would be more of a pizza box enclosure, but that's wild speculation. Your price is probably way too low, too.
I'm not sure why you're saying this price is way too low. The specs, so far as I can see, are quite similar to the current bottom-end iMac, which has an integrated screen, and it's price is only $300 more. It seems to me that this price is actually about right.
Also, I think that the name 'Mac' is a distinct possibility. Not saying I like it (or that I don't), or that it isn't simplistic, but I think that it's not unreasonable. FWIW, 'Mac Express' is nice, too, but I don't see Apple jumping on a name like that as quickly.
hob
Apr 5, 07:20 PM
- Major revamp of asset cataloguing system with integrated final cut server, something similiar to what Aperture does with photos. This will be it's biggest feature
- Core image fx with integrated Shake-style fx compositing
and the usual obvious things (64 bit, new formats, updated quicktime, etc..)
I would /kill/ for better asset management. The "Aperture" for video is what I've been needing for a while now...
- Core image fx with integrated Shake-style fx compositing
and the usual obvious things (64 bit, new formats, updated quicktime, etc..)
I would /kill/ for better asset management. The "Aperture" for video is what I've been needing for a while now...
emotion
Aug 11, 10:09 AM
My t610 is on it's last legs. Please let this be true.
Kingsly
Aug 11, 12:40 PM
:eek: :)
I hope it is released sooner than later. My Z500 only has about a month of life left in it....
I hope it is released sooner than later. My Z500 only has about a month of life left in it....
Manic Mouse
Aug 27, 04:54 AM
Yup, heat is no problem. :) Cost on the other hand is. Going from a 2.4 GHz Conroe from a 1.83 GHz Yonah on the low-end is roughly a 30% increase in cost JUST for the CPU. As for your "iMac Ultra"...
$1000 - 2.93 GHz Conroe
$800 - 23" Display
$300 - X1900
$400 - Hard Drive, Optical Drive, RAM etc.
+ Build costs, marketing costs, logic board cost, casing costs etc.
+ Apple's profit margin
And you are easily looking at a $3000 machine.
I want to see:
Search: White
A worried smiley gt;:) A devil
Search: White Worried About
Worried Smiley Face. worried smile face Through
Worried Smiley Face. Did not worried smiley,. 작성자: Tuxohuli 시간: 오전 9:13
Worried Smiley Face. worried face smiley,
My first:
Sad+smiley+faces+cartoon
Cool Punk Yellow Smiley Face
Sad Yellow Smiley Face Pouting
Did You Smile Today
$1000 - 2.93 GHz Conroe
$800 - 23" Display
$300 - X1900
$400 - Hard Drive, Optical Drive, RAM etc.
+ Build costs, marketing costs, logic board cost, casing costs etc.
+ Apple's profit margin
And you are easily looking at a $3000 machine.
I want to see:
ergle2
Sep 19, 10:43 PM
why shouldnt it?
Ah, a mature, intelligent, well reasoned reply.
Ah, a mature, intelligent, well reasoned reply.
MACRUS
Apr 10, 03:30 AM
hahaha the is the most ignorant thing I have heard today. where is support for blu-ray?
[QUOTE=ThunderSkunk;12363373]Wow. You'd think a FCP Users group would be able to track down a halfway decent graphic artist to make their banner graphic... No kidding. I could give for free just to stop my eyes from hurting every time I Visit the site... not offen though.
Interesting news, but the bit about booting competitors is downright disgusting.
I do like apple products but ohhhhh boy that one just reminded me of sony and their hackers crusade. boils my blod.
No idea, but I just don't get those tactics. I mean, other than being ruthless business people. :p
Just show your stuff without having to strong arm...
By the wording "Demanded" on the site I would say they twisted arm and leg
Hoping for some better multi-core support(although probably going to have to wait for Lion for the newer QuickTime engine) and a UI that isn't from the 90's:
http://www.candlerblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/03_ambit_fullscreen-300x232.jpg
^ Final Cut on Mac OS 9
Final Cut on Tiger/Leopard/Snow Leopard:
http://adobe-discount.com/product_images/o/apple_final_cut_express_hd_4__90390.jpg
Only thing that's changed is the scroll bars.
it is said that lion will be announced at WWDC to ship on september. so FCS will have to wait at least for the first bug fixing update... talk about old UI. gee.
[QUOTE=ThunderSkunk;12363373]Wow. You'd think a FCP Users group would be able to track down a halfway decent graphic artist to make their banner graphic... No kidding. I could give for free just to stop my eyes from hurting every time I Visit the site... not offen though.
Interesting news, but the bit about booting competitors is downright disgusting.
I do like apple products but ohhhhh boy that one just reminded me of sony and their hackers crusade. boils my blod.
No idea, but I just don't get those tactics. I mean, other than being ruthless business people. :p
Just show your stuff without having to strong arm...
By the wording "Demanded" on the site I would say they twisted arm and leg
Hoping for some better multi-core support(although probably going to have to wait for Lion for the newer QuickTime engine) and a UI that isn't from the 90's:
http://www.candlerblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/03_ambit_fullscreen-300x232.jpg
^ Final Cut on Mac OS 9
Final Cut on Tiger/Leopard/Snow Leopard:
http://adobe-discount.com/product_images/o/apple_final_cut_express_hd_4__90390.jpg
Only thing that's changed is the scroll bars.
it is said that lion will be announced at WWDC to ship on september. so FCS will have to wait at least for the first bug fixing update... talk about old UI. gee.
mkruck
Apr 6, 03:06 PM
Yeesh dude, at least your wife cares enough to do nice things for you. :(
Yes, and my response that you quoted was said tongue in cheek. People really need to lighten up and stop taking themselves so seriously.
Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk
Yes, and my response that you quoted was said tongue in cheek. People really need to lighten up and stop taking themselves so seriously.
Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk
kallisti
Mar 22, 05:35 PM
This is just a preview of the future, Android based tablets will clean the iPads clock. Apple made the so-called iPad 2 as a 1.5. Low res camera, not enough RAM, and low res screen. It's going to be a verrrry long 2012 for Apple. Sure it's selling like hot cakes now, but when buyers see tablets that they don't have to stand inline for, that have better equipment and are cheaper ... Apples house of cards will come crashing down around them.
The only strength that Apple has is the app ecosystem; which is why they are going after Amazon for spiting on the sidewalk. They know the world of hurt coming their way.
I love reading your posts. Some of the most ignorant on the site. Keep living in your little fantasy world.
The only strength that Apple has is the app ecosystem; which is why they are going after Amazon for spiting on the sidewalk. They know the world of hurt coming their way.
I love reading your posts. Some of the most ignorant on the site. Keep living in your little fantasy world.
Virtualball
Apr 19, 02:05 PM
Sorry about the caps but everyone should see this:
EVERYONE: THE PICTURE POSTED HERE IS STRAIGHT FUD. THE F700 WAS NOT ANNOUNCED AT CEBIT 2006! THIS IS A LIE!
Here are the phones they announced: http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_at_cebit_2006-news-177.php
So, is it possible for a mod to get rid of this? It's trolling and FUD at its finest.
EVERYONE: THE PICTURE POSTED HERE IS STRAIGHT FUD. THE F700 WAS NOT ANNOUNCED AT CEBIT 2006! THIS IS A LIE!
Here are the phones they announced: http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_at_cebit_2006-news-177.php
So, is it possible for a mod to get rid of this? It's trolling and FUD at its finest.
yg17
Apr 28, 04:48 PM
Because there was never a question of wither or not any of those men were born in the US, with Obama the past was always a bit hazy as to if he was actually born in Hawaii or thats just what his parents told him. Obviously he doesn’t remember BEING BORN in hawaii..his parents could have just told him that.
But now we have proof and its all over with there’s no need to be calling names about it.
It never was hazy, there was never any shred of evidence to suggest he was born elsewhere. The ONLY thing they had was the fact that his father was born in Kenya, but if having one parent from another country disqualifies you for being president, then that would disqualify a lot of past presidents, and disqualify Donald Trump.
But now we have proof and its all over with there’s no need to be calling names about it.
It never was hazy, there was never any shred of evidence to suggest he was born elsewhere. The ONLY thing they had was the fact that his father was born in Kenya, but if having one parent from another country disqualifies you for being president, then that would disqualify a lot of past presidents, and disqualify Donald Trump.
Burnt_Toast
Apr 11, 01:58 PM
it'd be nice if iPhone 5 was available this Fall, when I'm eligible for an upgrade.
But if not, no worries.
I'm still reeling from happiness that I don't have to carry around a laptop, a phone, a PDA, a flash drive, an ipod, etc.
Just the 3GS and a flash drive.
But if not, no worries.
I'm still reeling from happiness that I don't have to carry around a laptop, a phone, a PDA, a flash drive, an ipod, etc.
Just the 3GS and a flash drive.
mcgillmaine
Jun 22, 10:32 AM
I just got off the phone with a radio shack in the area I live in (Raleigh-Durham, NC). The guy (Alex) seemed to be well informed on what's going to happen in the next few days. This is a sum of what was told to me.
Our area sent out 251 pin request (or something like that). And only got back 96. Which leaves each store at about 3-5 phones. So he went on and talked about the "pre order" list that didn't really mean you would have one on the 24h and said it's about a 1-50 chance most people will get there phone on Thursday. Not good news for me. I hope this can help!!
Our area sent out 251 pin request (or something like that). And only got back 96. Which leaves each store at about 3-5 phones. So he went on and talked about the "pre order" list that didn't really mean you would have one on the 24h and said it's about a 1-50 chance most people will get there phone on Thursday. Not good news for me. I hope this can help!!
nunes013
Mar 25, 11:41 PM
If they start pumping out release candidates now, I think late July is is too far away. WWDC early June is more likely.
Major OS releases have historically been $129. I don't think that'll happen this time--$99 or $79 makes more sense (Apple likes people to upgrade, and their software prices aren't as high as they used to be). But that's just me speculating.
i was thinking and kind of hoping for that. wwdc release and them saying that it is a great price. apple has definitely been done a lot with pricing lately with the ipad starting at $500, snow leopard and ilife prices pretty cheap and maybe mobileme coming down in price. apple is getting better with pricing imo. they are more reasonable for many things lately.
Major OS releases have historically been $129. I don't think that'll happen this time--$99 or $79 makes more sense (Apple likes people to upgrade, and their software prices aren't as high as they used to be). But that's just me speculating.
i was thinking and kind of hoping for that. wwdc release and them saying that it is a great price. apple has definitely been done a lot with pricing lately with the ipad starting at $500, snow leopard and ilife prices pretty cheap and maybe mobileme coming down in price. apple is getting better with pricing imo. they are more reasonable for many things lately.
bryanc
Aug 26, 06:12 PM
... those who understand binary and those who do not.
Just sell Merom as "64 bit", that's twice as much as "32 bit".
64 bits is not twice as big as 32 bits.... it's 2^32 (roughly 4.3 billion) times as big. Just like 1000 is not twice as big as 10.
33 bits would be twice as big as 32 bits.
But yes, you're right, the important thing here is not that merom is 20% faster (or 20% more power efficient), it's that it's 64 bit.
Leopard will be 64 bit, and you can bet that once leopard is the shipping OS, there will be 64 bit only software that you will want to run. That's why it's worth having a Core 2 Duo system.
Cheers
Just sell Merom as "64 bit", that's twice as much as "32 bit".
64 bits is not twice as big as 32 bits.... it's 2^32 (roughly 4.3 billion) times as big. Just like 1000 is not twice as big as 10.
33 bits would be twice as big as 32 bits.
But yes, you're right, the important thing here is not that merom is 20% faster (or 20% more power efficient), it's that it's 64 bit.
Leopard will be 64 bit, and you can bet that once leopard is the shipping OS, there will be 64 bit only software that you will want to run. That's why it's worth having a Core 2 Duo system.
Cheers
NoSmokingBandit
Aug 14, 10:46 PM
The gameplay vids show a ton of changes. Damage (to both the cars and tracks it looks like. I think i saw tire tracks in the grass like Motorstorm has), prettier gfx, a whole new physics engine (i read that prologue used an updated gt4 engine and gt5's is completely rebuilt), etc...
I'm really looking forward to it. I enjoyed 4 quite a bit until it got into the super fast races. I have more fun racing a slightly tuned 350z instead of a completely modified GT that is putting 800+hp on the road.
I'm really looking forward to it. I enjoyed 4 quite a bit until it got into the super fast races. I have more fun racing a slightly tuned 350z instead of a completely modified GT that is putting 800+hp on the road.
janstett
Oct 23, 11:44 AM
Unfortunately not many multithreaded apps - yet. For a long time most of the multi-threaded apps were just a select few pro level things. 3D/Visualization software, CAD, database systems, etc.. Those of us who had multiprocessor systems bought them because we had a specific software in mind or group of software applications that could take advantage of multiple processors. As current CPU manufacturing processes started hitting a wall right around the 3GHz mark, chip makers started to transition to multiple CPU cores to boost power - makes sense. Software developers have been lazy for years, just riding the wave of ever-increasing MHz. Now the multi-core CPUs are here and the software is behind as many applications need to have serious re-writes done in order to take advantage of multiple processors. Intel tried to get a jump on this with their HT (Hyper Threading) implementation that essentially simulated dual-cores on a CPU by way of two virtual CPUs. Software developers didn't exactly jump on this and warm up to it. But I also don't think the software industry truly believed that CPUs would go multi-core on a mass scale so fast... Intel and AMD both said they would, don't know why the software industry doubted. Intel and AMD are uncommonly good about telling the truth about upcoming products. Both will be shipping quad-core CPU offerings by year's end.
What you're saying isn't entirely true and may give some people the wrong idea.
First, a multicore system is helpful when running multiple CPU-intensive single-threaded applications on a proper multitasking operating system. For example, right now I'm ripping CDs on iTunes. One processor gets used a lot and the other three are idle. I could be using this CPU power for another app.
The reality is that to take advantage of multiple cores, you had to take advantage of threads. Now, I was doing this in my programs with OS/2 back in 1992. I've been writing multithreaded apps my entire career. But writing a threaded application requires thought and work, so naturally many programmers are lazy and avoid threads. Plus it is harder to debug and synchronize a multithreaded application. Windows and Linux people have been doing this since the stone age, and Windows/Linux have had usable multiprocessor systems for more than a decade (it didn't start with Hyperthreading). I had a dual-processor 486 running NT 3.5 circa 1995. It's just been more of an optional "cool trick" to write threaded applications that the timid programmer avoids. Also it's worth noting that it's possible to go overboard with excessive threading and that leads to problems (context switching, thrashing, synchronization, etc).
Now, on the Mac side, OS 9 and below couldn't properly support SMP and it required a hacked version of the OS and a special version of the application. So the history of the Mac world has been, until recently with OSX, to avoid threading and multiprocessing unless specially called for and then at great pain to do so.
So it goes back to getting developers to write threaded applications. Now that we're getting to 4 and 8 core systems, it also presents a problem.
The classic reason to create a thread is to prevent the GUI from locking up while processing. Let's say I write a GUI program that has a calculation that takes 20 seconds. If I do it the lazy way, the GUI will lock up for 20 seconds because it can't process window messages during that time. If I write a thread, the calculation can take place there and leave the GUI thread able to process messages and keep the application alive, and then signal the other thread when it's done.
But now with more than 4 or 8 cores, the problem is how do you break up the work? 9 women can't have a baby in a month. So if your process is still serialized, you still have to wait with 1 processor doing all the work and the others sitting idle. For example, if you encode a video, it is a very serialized process. I hear some work has been done to simultaneously encode macroblocks in parallel, but getting 8 processors to chew on a single video is an interesting problem.
What you're saying isn't entirely true and may give some people the wrong idea.
First, a multicore system is helpful when running multiple CPU-intensive single-threaded applications on a proper multitasking operating system. For example, right now I'm ripping CDs on iTunes. One processor gets used a lot and the other three are idle. I could be using this CPU power for another app.
The reality is that to take advantage of multiple cores, you had to take advantage of threads. Now, I was doing this in my programs with OS/2 back in 1992. I've been writing multithreaded apps my entire career. But writing a threaded application requires thought and work, so naturally many programmers are lazy and avoid threads. Plus it is harder to debug and synchronize a multithreaded application. Windows and Linux people have been doing this since the stone age, and Windows/Linux have had usable multiprocessor systems for more than a decade (it didn't start with Hyperthreading). I had a dual-processor 486 running NT 3.5 circa 1995. It's just been more of an optional "cool trick" to write threaded applications that the timid programmer avoids. Also it's worth noting that it's possible to go overboard with excessive threading and that leads to problems (context switching, thrashing, synchronization, etc).
Now, on the Mac side, OS 9 and below couldn't properly support SMP and it required a hacked version of the OS and a special version of the application. So the history of the Mac world has been, until recently with OSX, to avoid threading and multiprocessing unless specially called for and then at great pain to do so.
So it goes back to getting developers to write threaded applications. Now that we're getting to 4 and 8 core systems, it also presents a problem.
The classic reason to create a thread is to prevent the GUI from locking up while processing. Let's say I write a GUI program that has a calculation that takes 20 seconds. If I do it the lazy way, the GUI will lock up for 20 seconds because it can't process window messages during that time. If I write a thread, the calculation can take place there and leave the GUI thread able to process messages and keep the application alive, and then signal the other thread when it's done.
But now with more than 4 or 8 cores, the problem is how do you break up the work? 9 women can't have a baby in a month. So if your process is still serialized, you still have to wait with 1 processor doing all the work and the others sitting idle. For example, if you encode a video, it is a very serialized process. I hear some work has been done to simultaneously encode macroblocks in parallel, but getting 8 processors to chew on a single video is an interesting problem.
tekmoe
Sep 19, 07:38 AM
apple store isn't down yet. I don't expect it today like a lot of people do
i agree. i think the store would have went down already. next monday has got to be it.
i agree. i think the store would have went down already. next monday has got to be it.
john123
Sep 19, 09:35 AM
You can get a real speed boost just by compiling to 64-bit (naturally this depends on the source). The 64-bit benefit will increase over time on the Mac platform. On 64-bit Gentoo I had the chance to compare 32-bit & 64-bit binaries on exactly the same PC, & disagree entirely with your statement. Programs that can take advantage of 64-bit architecture, & are subsequently compiled for it, are definitely something to be desired.
Add grudging 32-bit hanger-ons to the spoiled 13 year olds on here.
Sometimes you can; sometimes not. That depends on a lot of factors. It's not universal. On the cluster we designed at my office with Opterons, we are actually using 32 bit (albeit with some software enhancements) because it came out considerably faster than the 64 bit implementations. So it's not a universal thing.
Add grudging 32-bit hanger-ons to the spoiled 13 year olds on here.
Sometimes you can; sometimes not. That depends on a lot of factors. It's not universal. On the cluster we designed at my office with Opterons, we are actually using 32 bit (albeit with some software enhancements) because it came out considerably faster than the 64 bit implementations. So it's not a universal thing.
AngryCorgi
Apr 6, 04:16 PM
Since you have no clue how the sandy bridge airs will perform, I'll take your statement as FUD.
I'll give you some insight into their potential. The desktop i7-2600k has been benchmarked to be roughly equivalent to a 9400m in performance (assuming similar CPU).
i7-2600k GPU clock = 850/1350 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i5-2410m (13" Mac Pro base) GPU clock = 650/1200 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i7-2620m (13" Mac Pro upg) GPU clock = 650/1300 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i5-2537m (theorized 11/13 MBA) GPU clock = 350/900 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i7-2649m (theorized 13 MBA upg) GPU clock = 500/1100 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
As you can see, none of the mobile GPUs run quite as fast as the desktop, but the 13" 2.7GHz upg cpu's comes fairly close. Now, the 2.13 GHz MBA + 320m combo matched or beat out the i7-2620m in 75% of the tests (and only narrowly was defeated in 25%). There is going to be some random inconcistancy regardless, due to driver variances in different apps. The issue here is (and this can be shown in core2 vs. i5/i7 testing on the alienware m11x) the core2 duo really very rarely gets beat by the i5/i7 in gaming/video playback. This is because not many games are single-threaded anymore, and if using 2+ threads, the i5/i7 ULV won't jump the clock speed any. Further, the 2.13GHz was keeping up with and beating a 2.7GHz (27% higher clock!) in that test, because graphics are the bottleneck, not the CPU. Take into account that NONE of the ULV core-i options match the MBP 13" 2.7GHz upg GPU speed and its pretty clear that for graphics-intensive apps, the older 320m would be the way to go. Now for most everything else, the i7-2649m would overtake the core2 2.13GHz. This includes a lot of non-accelerated video playback (high-CPU-overhead).
Something you guys need to be wary of is the 1333MHz memory topic. Likely, Apple will choose to run it down at 1066MHz to conserve battery life. Memory speed hikes = gratuitous battery drain.
I for one am happy Apple is growing with the modern tech, but I hold no illusions as to the benefits/drawbacks of either system.
I'll give you some insight into their potential. The desktop i7-2600k has been benchmarked to be roughly equivalent to a 9400m in performance (assuming similar CPU).
i7-2600k GPU clock = 850/1350 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i5-2410m (13" Mac Pro base) GPU clock = 650/1200 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i7-2620m (13" Mac Pro upg) GPU clock = 650/1300 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i5-2537m (theorized 11/13 MBA) GPU clock = 350/900 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i7-2649m (theorized 13 MBA upg) GPU clock = 500/1100 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
As you can see, none of the mobile GPUs run quite as fast as the desktop, but the 13" 2.7GHz upg cpu's comes fairly close. Now, the 2.13 GHz MBA + 320m combo matched or beat out the i7-2620m in 75% of the tests (and only narrowly was defeated in 25%). There is going to be some random inconcistancy regardless, due to driver variances in different apps. The issue here is (and this can be shown in core2 vs. i5/i7 testing on the alienware m11x) the core2 duo really very rarely gets beat by the i5/i7 in gaming/video playback. This is because not many games are single-threaded anymore, and if using 2+ threads, the i5/i7 ULV won't jump the clock speed any. Further, the 2.13GHz was keeping up with and beating a 2.7GHz (27% higher clock!) in that test, because graphics are the bottleneck, not the CPU. Take into account that NONE of the ULV core-i options match the MBP 13" 2.7GHz upg GPU speed and its pretty clear that for graphics-intensive apps, the older 320m would be the way to go. Now for most everything else, the i7-2649m would overtake the core2 2.13GHz. This includes a lot of non-accelerated video playback (high-CPU-overhead).
Something you guys need to be wary of is the 1333MHz memory topic. Likely, Apple will choose to run it down at 1066MHz to conserve battery life. Memory speed hikes = gratuitous battery drain.
I for one am happy Apple is growing with the modern tech, but I hold no illusions as to the benefits/drawbacks of either system.
wizard
Mar 26, 10:35 AM
Wirelessly posted (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)
It is pretty incredible that the ignorance around Mac OS releases never stops. For one thing if you loose data on a computer, the only person to blame is the one staring at you in the mirror.
Even the whine about nothing worthwhile for the user is a bit old and reflects what we heard about SL. Yet SL on my early 2008 MBP was a drastic improvement for the user right out of the box and just got better with each update. User facing features are the only reason to update, fixes to underlying facilities can go a long way to justifying the software update.
As to the server integration, it hasn't and never will be a product worth $500. It is great that Apple is adding support to the base install but people need to realize a few things. One is that Mac OS is UNIX, people need to get that through their heads. Thus Apples server product only really adds in what is already seen in many UNIX intallations in a base install. Speaking of which much of that functionality is well established open source. Second the pricing of "server" software seems to be tailored to fit the mentality of the corporate world, where they feel they need to pay big bucks for something trivial. It is no wonder that Linux as established itself as a server OS in the SOHO world and at some of the more forward thinking larger corporations. As others have pointed out the basics of UNIX have been around for ages now, very little new territory is being cleared here, thus little justification for up charges on server software.
Finally it is a bit cowardly to avoid the future because you see nothing of value there for you personally. It is frightenly similar to the attitude seen in those that cut their own wrists.
It is pretty incredible that the ignorance around Mac OS releases never stops. For one thing if you loose data on a computer, the only person to blame is the one staring at you in the mirror.
Even the whine about nothing worthwhile for the user is a bit old and reflects what we heard about SL. Yet SL on my early 2008 MBP was a drastic improvement for the user right out of the box and just got better with each update. User facing features are the only reason to update, fixes to underlying facilities can go a long way to justifying the software update.
As to the server integration, it hasn't and never will be a product worth $500. It is great that Apple is adding support to the base install but people need to realize a few things. One is that Mac OS is UNIX, people need to get that through their heads. Thus Apples server product only really adds in what is already seen in many UNIX intallations in a base install. Speaking of which much of that functionality is well established open source. Second the pricing of "server" software seems to be tailored to fit the mentality of the corporate world, where they feel they need to pay big bucks for something trivial. It is no wonder that Linux as established itself as a server OS in the SOHO world and at some of the more forward thinking larger corporations. As others have pointed out the basics of UNIX have been around for ages now, very little new territory is being cleared here, thus little justification for up charges on server software.
Finally it is a bit cowardly to avoid the future because you see nothing of value there for you personally. It is frightenly similar to the attitude seen in those that cut their own wrists.