The current behavior is unacceptable! Let us HOPE Apple will update the OS and/or firmware to enable this switch WITHOUT logging out in the CURRENT generation of Macbook Pros!!!
I suspect we will not see Blu-Ray on Macs UNTIL 1080P content appears on iTunes, and lots of it...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Parkettpolitur
No it wouldn't, that's what's so hilarious and frustrating about Apple's horrible stance on Blu-Ray. I mean, does anyone believe that iTunes' crappy "HD" seriously competes with Blu-Ray's quality? The two products are aimed at completely different customers! iTunes-movies are all about convenience, not about quality, and Blu-Ray is simply about offering the best quality with no compromises. The two formats do not compete, they complement each other. They will only start competing once Apple offers true 1080p in their iTunes store. (and once the iTunes store offers video content outside the US. The world does not consist of the United States).
i agree. but it is frustrating to have Blu-Ray get stonewalled by corporate agenda instead of putting the customers first.
its beyond ridiculous that Blu-Ray has Digital Copies of movies for itunes, but itunes is showing no love back to BD. Apple just doesn't want BD.
And don't get me started on General Mao... he can license almost anything he wants. music/movies/books etc.... but its only when he has a corporate agenda do they stonewall Blu-Ray.
sad to say, if apple made a MBP with a BD Superdrive... i'd buy it in an instant. but Apple just won't let me buy that.
alot of us need BD for storage also, ie backing up photography and video to BD discs. getting them off hard drives.
Apparently Apple doesn't like paying licensing fees hence no Blu-Ray.
Interesante. So Intel shot Nvidia and itself in the foot and put a major setback in the innovation of graphics because it felt that NVidia was encroaching on their turf. Now NVidia is once again innovating and making life easier, while intel has not done much in the meantime (on the GPU side I mean). Hope Intel does not sue nVidia over this Optimus solution.
First, the Core 2010 series has integrated graphics which offer advantages over the current NVIDIA integrated graphics in the existing MacBook & MacBook Pros.
The Intel integrated graphics improves things by first shrinking the die to 45nm. It's then placed on the chip itself making it an SOC. This eliminates bandwidth and control overhead as well as making it more power and heat efficient.
People are confusing "discrete graphics are better" with "Intel's integrated graphics in the Core 2010 series with prior NVIDIA integrated graphics".
The integrated graphics in the Core 2010 series is a significant step forward in integrated graphics.
And, not only doesn't it prevent Apple or others from including discrete graphics, but the Core 2010 series actually has benefits for systems with discrete graphics. One of which is highlighted in this article. That is, on the fly switching.
There are actually 3 states for when you have a Core 2010 and discrete graphics:
1) Use integrated graphics and shut down the GPU (fine for a lot of use and save a lot of power).
2) Use the GPU for graphics and bypass the integrated graphics (great for games, animation, etc...).
3) Use the integrated graphics for display and the GPU for additional processing power (great for things like encoding video or other complex computational tasks).
I really hope Apple comes out with the new Core 2010 MacBook Pros soon, and includes discrete graphics in the 13" as well. They'll be a huge bump in power/energy efficiency, and it's a shame that it's taking them so long to bring to market.
As far as changes to the graphics layer. Both OSX and Windows abstract the hardware which means you can use different vendors product and they work fine.
Of course, but the Windows abstraction layers seem to go further than that of OS X because you can switch GPUs on the fly without the applications even noticing (and which allows to recover crashed drivers transparently). OS X still requires you to log out first which indicate some significant differences how the applications/frameworks access the drivers (e.g. AFAIK Windows Vista/7 virtualizes the graphic card memory). I doubt that this can/will be handled in a simple 1.6.x update as I believe that Apple will have to do some heavy plumbing to allow for this kind of functionality.
Yep your heard it, publicly bitch slap Intel for screw up the industry with really pathetic GPU's and then making those mandatory!
Unfortunately AMD's best solution is still in the works but their ATI GPU's are so much better than Intels that it should be a no brainer. Besides that AMD's Three core offerings have very interesting performance characteristics up against Intels mobile dual cores. I'm not saying they are better just that they really aren't that bad and would make very decent Mac Books.
First, the Core 2010 series has integrated graphics which offer advantages over the current NVIDIA integrated graphics in the existing MacBook & MacBook Pros.
Not really! The GPU still sucks performance wise. Further it is a very poor OpenCL processor.
Quote:
The Intel integrated graphics improves things by first shrinking the die to 45nm. It's then placed on the chip itself making it an SOC. This eliminates bandwidth and control overhead as well as making it more power and heat efficient.
Well no again. The GPU is still a second chip mounted along side a CPU chip. This makes the solution a multichip module. The only manufacture with a publicly offered up road map for a x86 SoC as you describe is AMD/ATI.
Quote:
People are confusing "discrete graphics are better" with "Intel's integrated graphics in the Core 2010 series with prior NVIDIA integrated graphics".
No that is not the case what we are saying is that the 2010 Intel offering will still be a step backwards. In many cases an extreme step backwards.
Quote:
The integrated graphics in the Core 2010 series is a significant step forward in integrated graphics.
Where did you get this crap? Every indication is that it will not perform any better than the three year old 9400M and in many cases much worst.
Quote:
And, not only doesn't it prevent Apple or others from including discrete graphics, but the Core 2010 series actually has benefits for systems with discrete graphics. One of which is highlighted in this article. That is, on the fly switching.
Well on the fly isn't an Intel only tech.
Quote:
There are actually 3 states for when you have a Core 2010 and discrete graphics:
1) Use integrated graphics and shut down the GPU (fine for a lot of use and save a lot of power).
2) Use the GPU for graphics and bypass the integrated graphics (great for games, animation, etc...).
3) Use the integrated graphics for display and the GPU for additional processing power (great for things like encoding video or other complex computational tasks).
You should see that this is not all that great if you have to compromise with the Intel tech. The fact that the chip sucks as a GPU and as an OpenCL processor means that it is virtually useless for modern OS'es. Thus it is dead weight.
Quote:
I really hope Apple comes out with the new Core 2010 MacBook Pros soon, and includes discrete graphics in the 13" as well. They'll be a huge bump in power/energy efficiency, and it's a shame that it's taking them so long to bring to market.
Might you not think that the long delivery schedule is in fact the result of having to deal with crap Intel technology or work arounds for it? Further the power profile of discrete GPU's is so low now that it doesn't even make sense to have an integrated GPU. Even in a thirteen inch Mac Book Pro, the Intel hardware is basically wasted energy.
I don't see this as a popular solution. As a matter of fact I think it's stupid. Why have two chips when they can just have one and throttle it up or down as needed just like a regular CPU?
throttling a CPU really doesn't save that much more power, the best power saving solution is still to completely switch to a chipset that uses much less power overall. Wonder if Apple will come out with any GPU chip of their own, that would make things even more interesting.
The OTHER stupid thing is that shouldn't I be able to select the integrated video (Better battery life) as the option for Battery power and the discrete video (Higher performance) for the Power Adapter. NO, you can only select one or the other for BOTH. HOW DUMB IS THAT?!?!
The OTHER stupid thing is that shouldn't I be able to select the integrated video (Better battery life) as the option for Battery power and the discrete video (Higher performance) for the Power Adapter. NO, you can only select one or the other for BOTH. HOW DUMB IS THAT?!?!
Since it requires a restart to switch, it's not stupid. Now, once dynamic switching is in place then it would be stupid not to auto-switch based on power input, but I have a feeling that option will be there zero day.
So perhaps this is why Apple is too busy to fix that screen blinking issues with MBP. When settings are set to "better battery life" the upper half or screen would occasionally blink out and back on again. Temporary black screen.
I have this problem with my late 2008 unibody MBP. It only happens when using the integrated graphic chip and based on my research it is a hardware issue. Apple replaced the logic board for many and in some cases replaced the MBP.
I have this problem with my late 2008 unibody MBP. It only happens when using the integrated graphic chip and based on my research it is a hardware issue. Apple replaced the logic board for many and in some cases replaced the MBP.
Took my Mac in for a new battery. They also gave me a new battery cover since it was missing a foot and a new trackpad since the battery pressing on it affected the usage after the new battery was inserted. Not sure if the other two were my fault or not since I am rough with my machines.
All consumer electronics will have issues, but not all consumer electronic companies will offer such great service.
Took my Mac in for a new battery. They also gave me a new battery cover since it was missing a foot and a new trackpad since the battery pressing on it affected the usage after the new battery was inserted. Not sure if the other two were my fault or not since I am rough with my machines.
All consumer electronics will have issues, but not all consumer electronic companies will offer such great service.
Agreed. When my daughter began to have issues with her black G3 Macbook, and Apple tried several times to fix the problem, for a small price differential, they exchanged the G3 for a new G4.
When I got my iPod Shuffle and wanted an extra set of silicone ear plugs, Apple gave me a set for free--no questions asked.
Took my Mac in for a new battery. They also gave me a new battery cover since it was missing a foot and a new trackpad since the battery pressing on it affected the usage after the new battery was inserted. Not sure if the other two were my fault or not since I am rough with my machines.
All consumer electronics will have issues, but not all consumer electronic companies will offer such great service.
One of the many reasons I am welling to pay more for Apple products is service. One of the most important factor is the availability of brick and mortar Apple stores for service, at least in the US.
Comments
My ... i am hoping this is only part 1 of the upgrades.
Its time Apple integrated Blu-Ray into MBP's. at least on the higher end models. give the consumers the options to decide between.
No it wouldn't, that's what's so hilarious and frustrating about Apple's horrible stance on Blu-Ray. I mean, does anyone believe that iTunes' crappy "HD" seriously competes with Blu-Ray's quality? The two products are aimed at completely different customers! iTunes-movies are all about convenience, not about quality, and Blu-Ray is simply about offering the best quality with no compromises. The two formats do not compete, they complement each other. They will only start competing once Apple offers true 1080p in their iTunes store. (and once the iTunes store offers video content outside the US. The world does not consist of the United States).
i agree. but it is frustrating to have Blu-Ray get stonewalled by corporate agenda instead of putting the customers first.
its beyond ridiculous that Blu-Ray has Digital Copies of movies for itunes, but itunes is showing no love back to BD. Apple just doesn't want BD.
And don't get me started on General Mao... he can license almost anything he wants. music/movies/books etc.... but its only when he has a corporate agenda do they stonewall Blu-Ray.
sad to say, if apple made a MBP with a BD Superdrive... i'd buy it in an instant. but Apple just won't let me buy that.
alot of us need BD for storage also, ie backing up photography and video to BD discs. getting them off hard drives.
Apparently Apple doesn't like paying licensing fees hence no Blu-Ray.
Yea, I will not buy another new Mac until Blu-Ray is at least an option.
And then there's the HD iMac without Blu-Ray- what a waste, right?
Yea, I will not buy another new Mac until Blu-Ray is at least an option.
iMac will get blue ray around the same time Verizon gets iPhone
iMac will get blue ray around the same time Verizon gets iPhone
First, the Core 2010 series has integrated graphics which offer advantages over the current NVIDIA integrated graphics in the existing MacBook & MacBook Pros.
The Intel integrated graphics improves things by first shrinking the die to 45nm. It's then placed on the chip itself making it an SOC. This eliminates bandwidth and control overhead as well as making it more power and heat efficient.
People are confusing "discrete graphics are better" with "Intel's integrated graphics in the Core 2010 series with prior NVIDIA integrated graphics".
The integrated graphics in the Core 2010 series is a significant step forward in integrated graphics.
And, not only doesn't it prevent Apple or others from including discrete graphics, but the Core 2010 series actually has benefits for systems with discrete graphics. One of which is highlighted in this article. That is, on the fly switching.
There are actually 3 states for when you have a Core 2010 and discrete graphics:
1) Use integrated graphics and shut down the GPU (fine for a lot of use and save a lot of power).
2) Use the GPU for graphics and bypass the integrated graphics (great for games, animation, etc...).
3) Use the integrated graphics for display and the GPU for additional processing power (great for things like encoding video or other complex computational tasks).
I really hope Apple comes out with the new Core 2010 MacBook Pros soon, and includes discrete graphics in the 13" as well. They'll be a huge bump in power/energy efficiency, and it's a shame that it's taking them so long to bring to market.
As far as changes to the graphics layer. Both OSX and Windows abstract the hardware which means you can use different vendors product and they work fine.
Of course, but the Windows abstraction layers seem to go further than that of OS X because you can switch GPUs on the fly without the applications even noticing (and which allows to recover crashed drivers transparently). OS X still requires you to log out first which indicate some significant differences how the applications/frameworks access the drivers (e.g. AFAIK Windows Vista/7 virtualizes the graphic card memory). I doubt that this can/will be handled in a simple 1.6.x update as I believe that Apple will have to do some heavy plumbing to allow for this kind of functionality.
Unfortunately AMD's best solution is still in the works but their ATI GPU's are so much better than Intels that it should be a no brainer. Besides that AMD's Three core offerings have very interesting performance characteristics up against Intels mobile dual cores. I'm not saying they are better just that they really aren't that bad and would make very decent Mac Books.
Dave
There's a lot of misinformation here.
First, the Core 2010 series has integrated graphics which offer advantages over the current NVIDIA integrated graphics in the existing MacBook & MacBook Pros.
Not really! The GPU still sucks performance wise. Further it is a very poor OpenCL processor.
The Intel integrated graphics improves things by first shrinking the die to 45nm. It's then placed on the chip itself making it an SOC. This eliminates bandwidth and control overhead as well as making it more power and heat efficient.
Well no again. The GPU is still a second chip mounted along side a CPU chip. This makes the solution a multichip module. The only manufacture with a publicly offered up road map for a x86 SoC as you describe is AMD/ATI.
People are confusing "discrete graphics are better" with "Intel's integrated graphics in the Core 2010 series with prior NVIDIA integrated graphics".
No that is not the case what we are saying is that the 2010 Intel offering will still be a step backwards. In many cases an extreme step backwards.
The integrated graphics in the Core 2010 series is a significant step forward in integrated graphics.
Where did you get this crap? Every indication is that it will not perform any better than the three year old 9400M and in many cases much worst.
And, not only doesn't it prevent Apple or others from including discrete graphics, but the Core 2010 series actually has benefits for systems with discrete graphics. One of which is highlighted in this article. That is, on the fly switching.
Well on the fly isn't an Intel only tech.
There are actually 3 states for when you have a Core 2010 and discrete graphics:
1) Use integrated graphics and shut down the GPU (fine for a lot of use and save a lot of power).
2) Use the GPU for graphics and bypass the integrated graphics (great for games, animation, etc...).
3) Use the integrated graphics for display and the GPU for additional processing power (great for things like encoding video or other complex computational tasks).
You should see that this is not all that great if you have to compromise with the Intel tech. The fact that the chip sucks as a GPU and as an OpenCL processor means that it is virtually useless for modern OS'es. Thus it is dead weight.
I really hope Apple comes out with the new Core 2010 MacBook Pros soon, and includes discrete graphics in the 13" as well. They'll be a huge bump in power/energy efficiency, and it's a shame that it's taking them so long to bring to market.
Might you not think that the long delivery schedule is in fact the result of having to deal with crap Intel technology or work arounds for it? Further the power profile of discrete GPU's is so low now that it doesn't even make sense to have an integrated GPU. Even in a thirteen inch Mac Book Pro, the Intel hardware is basically wasted energy.
Dave
I don't see this as a popular solution. As a matter of fact I think it's stupid. Why have two chips when they can just have one and throttle it up or down as needed just like a regular CPU?
throttling a CPU really doesn't save that much more power, the best power saving solution is still to completely switch to a chipset that uses much less power overall. Wonder if Apple will come out with any GPU chip of their own, that would make things even more interesting.
The OTHER stupid thing is that shouldn't I be able to select the integrated video (Better battery life) as the option for Battery power and the discrete video (Higher performance) for the Power Adapter. NO, you can only select one or the other for BOTH. HOW DUMB IS THAT?!?!
Since it requires a restart to switch, it's not stupid. Now, once dynamic switching is in place then it would be stupid not to auto-switch based on power input, but I have a feeling that option will be there zero day.
So perhaps this is why Apple is too busy to fix that screen blinking issues with MBP. When settings are set to "better battery life" the upper half or screen would occasionally blink out and back on again. Temporary black screen.
I have this problem with my late 2008 unibody MBP. It only happens when using the integrated graphic chip and based on my research it is a hardware issue. Apple replaced the logic board for many and in some cases replaced the MBP.
I have this problem with my late 2008 unibody MBP. It only happens when using the integrated graphic chip and based on my research it is a hardware issue. Apple replaced the logic board for many and in some cases replaced the MBP.
Took my Mac in for a new battery. They also gave me a new battery cover since it was missing a foot and a new trackpad since the battery pressing on it affected the usage after the new battery was inserted. Not sure if the other two were my fault or not since I am rough with my machines.
All consumer electronics will have issues, but not all consumer electronic companies will offer such great service.
Took my Mac in for a new battery. They also gave me a new battery cover since it was missing a foot and a new trackpad since the battery pressing on it affected the usage after the new battery was inserted. Not sure if the other two were my fault or not since I am rough with my machines.
All consumer electronics will have issues, but not all consumer electronic companies will offer such great service.
Agreed. When my daughter began to have issues with her black G3 Macbook, and Apple tried several times to fix the problem, for a small price differential, they exchanged the G3 for a new G4.
When I got my iPod Shuffle and wanted an extra set of silicone ear plugs, Apple gave me a set for free--no questions asked.
Took my Mac in for a new battery. They also gave me a new battery cover since it was missing a foot and a new trackpad since the battery pressing on it affected the usage after the new battery was inserted. Not sure if the other two were my fault or not since I am rough with my machines.
All consumer electronics will have issues, but not all consumer electronic companies will offer such great service.
One of the many reasons I am welling to pay more for Apple products is service. One of the most important factor is the availability of brick and mortar Apple stores for service, at least in the US.