Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss
Yup, everywhere I go, I hear about the Core i7, the GeForce 275GTX, and non-ECC memory. It's what's on everyone's mind these days.
I know! I was just talking to my brother, and he was all like, "I hear they might be bringing out new iMacs, but whither quad core? I am hungry."
Seriously though, does anyone outside of gear hounds think in terms of "yesterday's technology", especially when it comes to chip sets?
Once upon a time there might have been some awareness of clock speed, but that's just because Intel was flogging same as a metric of awesomeness. Number of cores are a much harder thing to drive into the public consciousness, partly because no one much knows what that even means, and because "4 instead of 2" doesn't have quite the impact of "3GHz overclocked extreme!"
I think the iPhone is a great example of where things are headed, if they're not already there: people react to the entire device, and don't know or care what's inside. In the case of the iPhone, there was a noticeable speed up of system processes in the move from 3G to 3Gs, so people took note of that, still without caring what, exactly, had been done to the internals to make that happen.
Since the move from 2 to 4 cores is not going to have anything like that impact on the day to day use of a desktop or laptop computer, most people really have no reason to care.
What, exactly, are the folks in this thread proposing the impact of quad core is going to be on 95% of what people do with their computers? Is Firefox going to load pages 4 times as fast? Is Office going to make letters appear on the screen before you type them? Will your emails fly off your computer like missiles? Will your music sound better?
For the few that are doing genuinely processor intensive things like batch processing media or editing HD movies or doing 3D animation work, then, yes, you would probably be advised to seek the latest and greatest. But that's the few,
a fact that hasn't been lost on Apple.