or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by backtomac

You know good and well I feel the iMac should be using the low power desk top Peryn cpus. I'd make it simple. 20" 2.6 ghz Quad 24" 2.6 ghz Quad 24" 2.8 ghz Quad If you like you can have a dual core 20" at 2.8 ghz. The mini ought to have 2.0 ghz quad core mobile cpu asa BTO for the high end, IMO. These machines would give as good performance in most if not all applications and in those able to take advantage of multiple cores it would be superior to what we now have to...
Of course not. But Apple keep adding features that are more resource intensive. It's only natural that users would then desire more powerful machines to do these tasks. Apple can and arguable should provide better tools to do this. The technology already exists. They don't have to go to the drawing board to develop the cpus to do this. They *already* exist.
Those people don't need to pay extra to be on the Mac platform. Those tasks are easily and done equally as well on Linux and Windows. The advantage of the Mac platform, IMO, is that iLife and other Mac apps make difficult tasks (video editing in particular and photo editing and management) easier and more enjoyable.
I believe he's saying that current machines aren't powerful enough (or more powerful machines would be welcomed) for some of these common tasks that an average ordinary consumer could be expected to do. Its a false claim by many that the average Mac user could never benefit from machines more powerful than the ones we have today. That's just not true. It'll be interesting to see if Apple will harness the power of GC and Open Gl in their own apps. Certainly some of them...
There is a similar thread at Ars on this topic. Most of the programmers there don't think GC or Open Cl will be *all* that. Most are pretty meh over them. From what I'm reading I expect SL will make an incredible difference in a small number of apps/instances and will otherwise have little benefit. Apple will naturally harp on the occasions where GC and Open Cl make a difference. What'll be interesting is to what extent Apple leverages GC and Open Cl in their apps....
I not sure I agree with that. There are laptop quad core cpus. A 2.0 ghz and 2.5 ghz variety IIRC. They are quite expensive though, at least the 2.5 ghz frequency. But the real cpu for the iMac is the low power desk top cpu. Yes they are 65 watt TDP but I have a hard time believing that a company that can engineer the MB Air can't figure out a way to fit these cpus into an AIO form factor. It appears that Dell figured it out. Are there engineers better? Even Anand...
My daughter has quite a collection of Sims games but on Windows. They don't look very resource intensive so I bet that they could be played in windows even as a virtual machine. Especially if both cores are enable but perhaps even with just one core enabled. I could always just install windows via boot camp but I actually feel the machine will be easier to take care of and trouble shoot if I run windows via VMware. I have been looking at Mac Pros at eBay. They seem to...
What apps do your wife and daughter run on their 24" 3.06 ghz iMacs? Do they use VMware or Parallels to run windows? How does it do? Can they do some light gaming, in particular play Sims games?
We've not always agreed on things but I couldn't agree more with what you've just said and the articulate way in which you said it. In the debates raging here I can't tell you how many posters have fallen back on the "wait till Snow Leopard arrives" defense of these 'new' machines. I'm as hopeful as next guy that SL will bring meaningful improvements in everyday performance. But I'm a realist and I'm not going to expect magic code out of Apple. Its not that hard to give...
I wouldn't get your hopes up. Sure it would be great. And it makes perfect sense to me. But somebody at Apple doesn't think that non-professional users need or deserve more than dual core power in their computer. Wanting it won't necessarily make it happen.
New Posts  All Forums: