The 13" could very well play effectively against those machines. It is just about the minimal size for a notebook for many people so why not make it a light a possible.
The only software I've recently installed, via a CD optical disk on my MBP, came from Apple. Everything else is downloaded and installed from the net. Of course part of that is due to my using open source software but purchasing software over the net is not unheard of either.
At work it is much the same much of what I need to install on my Windows PC can be downloaded from the net. If not the original install the updates can be.
The point is the optical doesn't need to be in the laptop everyday.
It is so nice of you to feel sorry for those that take a different approach in life.
In any event It doesn't take much effort to burn up a lot of disk space with software. Just install XCode, Eclipse or even Open Office and see your free space drift away. Besides those of us into content consumption via their PC's aren't the only ones needing space, if you are into content production the more disk space you have the better. Of course if you are into content production you will most likely have a larger laptop with a built in optical.
Of course it would be a new machine, the deletion of the optical just allows for a thinner machine when it comes to a redesign.
If I thought I was wrong I wouldn't have brought it up. The iPad might be a better choice for some people but it will not replace a laptop for people that need a laptop. In fact their is little overlap.
In my estimation the AIR was a waste of time. A lighter, higher performance, 13" MBP would be very attractive to a number of users.
Dave
Somehow, I get the feeling that we're not going to agree on this one, so I'm going to let it go.
Yeah. The Mac Mini. Less a stop gap. More a door step.
It's nice in person, though. But the entry model is a complete rip off.
Buy an iPad instead.
Lemon Bon Bon.
That sounds awful...and I say this an owner of a 2007 C2D base model Mini, that I felt was overpriced at the time, but it can at least run full-blown programs.
The iPad is a nice toy IMO, but I just don't see the point of it. But for all its warts, the Mini can still run OSX and almost all programs for it. The iPad just seems like a big version of my iPod Touch.
That sounds awful...and I say this an owner of a 2007 C2D base model Mini, that I felt was overpriced at the time, but it can at least run full-blown programs.
The iPad is a nice toy IMO, but I just don't see the point of it. But for all its warts, the Mini can still run OSX and almost all programs for it. The iPad just seems like a big version of my iPod Touch.
You have to use an iPad to see the point of it. It's anything but a toy. There's already an accumulating number of heavy hitters in the business world with apps for it.
The iPad is a nice toy IMO, but I just don't see the point of it. But for all its warts, the Mini can still run OSX and almost all programs for it. The iPad just seems like a big version of my iPod Touch.
Dripping with irony from a Mac Mini owner. Give it a Radeon 4850 as a mere £50 upgrade and it would fly. But no...Apple want us to pay £2000 for an entry Mac Pro with a proportionately crapper gpu capabilities.
iPad, a toy?
It's the most affordable and fully featured Mac for 'non Geeks' ever. And unlike the Mini, you get a free keyboard and screen!
You have to use an iPad to see the point of it. It's anything but a toy. There's already an accumulating number of heavy hitters in the business world with apps for it.
There's an awful lot of snobbery going around regarding the iPad.
The same thing was said about the Mac for years, and it isn't fully accepted yet.
What he said.
Lemon Bon Bon.
PS. That 'full acceptance' isn't far away. My school secretary was coo-ing about the 'feel' and 'smell' of a Macbook Pro...that a friend had bought. Er. Yeah.
To clarify, it wasn't long ago that Apple mocked integrated graphics for their inferior capabilities. Offering decent gpus as standard has been an Apple weakness for some years.
From the Mac Pro to the iMac. eg the iMac's top end gpu is the 4850. A budget card these days. And something that should go into the entry model. Let alone the high end model.
And don't get me started on Apple's pretend 'workstation' like with their cutting edge gpus 'as standard.'
If Apple offered decent gpus with their overpriced desktops, it would at least go someway to appeasing the outrageous prices. But more galling it that they don't offer a 'cheap' upgrade to cards that would greatly enhance the mini and iMac range.
If I was an Apple shareholder, I may disagree with what I wrote because Apple are selling premium prices machines...but not all the parts are premium. See use of out of date Core Duo, out of date gpus and offering dual core when quad core was standard ages ago on budget PC machines.
You have to use an iPad to see the point of it. It's anything but a toy.
I can understand that the iPad will find its use in some domains (healthcare, education and media/publishing come into mind), but for my own personal and professional use any tablet device is just a toy and nothing more. I am not going to buy any unless my needs change.
Dripping with irony from a Mac Mini owner. Give it a Radeon 4850 as a mere £50 upgrade and it would fly. But no...Apple want us to pay £2000 for an entry Mac Pro with a proportionately crapper gpu capabilities.
iPad, a toy?
It's the most affordable and fully featured Mac for 'non Geeks' ever. And unlike the Mini, you get a free keyboard and screen!
Lemon Bon Bon.
I assume you're sold your Mac then, now that you have an iPad?
My Mini is a toy too...all I've ever really done with it, is browse the web, check e-mail, and edit some photos. I made the attempt to use it for tasks like Excel, but the SW isn't up to the task, although Pages is decent, although that was mainly to do with the awfulness of Mac Office and Numbers.
I don't just see the point of tablets ATM; I have plenty of devices to browse the web and check my mail with: a PC desktop, laptop, netbook, Mac Mini, iPod Touch, my phone (with mobile hotspot tethering), and my PSP can even get online (although it's painfully slow).
When I was still in school, an e-reader/iPad type device might have been great, but knowing publishers, the digital textbooks would have been just as expensive, and I would have lost out on the resale value that selling back textbooks brings.
For typing notes, I don't think it would have been as useful as my laptop was at the time; I was a heavy OneNote user, and from what I've read about the iPad dock/KB, it only works in portrait mode, doesn't fold flat, doesn't work with the Apple-designed iPad case, and basically reminds people, the BT KB would be a better option.
I can see uses of tablets in certain markets, I just don't fall into any of those, and I don't want another device, to sit on my ass, browse the web, check my mail, and run some other apps. It's just a big iPod Touch to me, with some expanded features. Great for content consumption, specific needs and limitations for creation, and if anyone ever complains, they just say it's not a computer, it's a paradigm shift or something (a actual point another poster made, when someone else wondered why the iPad couldn't save PDFs from within Safari), which I think is a legitimate use of the device.
I can understand that the iPad will find its use in some domains (healthcare, education and media/publishing come into mind), but for my own personal and professional use any tablet device is just a toy and nothing more. I am not going to buy any unless my needs change.
Without stating your personal and professional needs, it's hard to judge from anyone else's perspective. Of course, it's your business to keep to yourself. But when people make statements without letting us know specifically why, it's pretty meaningless, and I say that without making it an insult.
I've had plenty of people over the years tell me the same thing about Macs, but when I knew what their needs were, most of the time, I could make a good case for switching over, and more than a few did. That doesn't mean that in your case it would be true for a tablet, but at some point, it might.
Of course, the iPad is still very new. When personal computers were very new, almost no one thought they were of any use to them either.
I assume you're sold your Mac then, now that you have an iPad?
My Mini is a toy too...all I've ever really done with it, is browse the web, check e-mail, and edit some photos. I made the attempt to use it for tasks like Excel, but the SW isn't up to the task, although Pages is decent, although that was mainly to do with the awfulness of Mac Office and Numbers.
I don't just see the point of tablets ATM; I have plenty of devices to browse the web and check my mail with: a PC desktop, laptop, netbook, Mac Mini, iPod Touch, my phone (with mobile hotspot tethering), and my PSP can even get online (although it's painfully slow).
When I was still in school, an e-reader/iPad type device might have been great, but knowing publishers, the digital textbooks would have been just as expensive, and I would have lost out on the resale value that selling back textbooks brings.
For typing notes, I don't think it would have been as useful as my laptop was at the time; I was a heavy OneNote user, and from what I've read about the iPad dock/KB, it only works in portrait mode, doesn't fold flat, doesn't work with the Apple-designed iPad case, and basically reminds people, the BT KB would be a better option.
I can see uses of tablets in certain markets, I just don't fall into any of those, and I don't want another device, to sit on my ass, browse the web, check my mail, and run some other apps. It's just a big iPod Touch to me, with some expanded features. Great for content consumption, specific needs and limitations for creation, and if anyone ever complains, they just say it's not a computer, it's a paradigm shift or something (a actual point another poster made, when someone else wondered why the iPad couldn't save PDFs from within Safari), which I think is a legitimate use of the device.
So then, we can assume that you've used an iPad enough by this time to know all of this about it? Or are you just saying it without any actual decent hands on experience?
Without stating your personal and professional needs, it's hard to judge from anyone else's perspective. Of course, it's your business to keep to yourself. But when people make statements without letting us know specifically why, it's pretty meaningless, and I say that without making it an insult.
Yet, with my life and professional experience at my age, I keep the right to know what fits my personal needs and what not. Tablets are just out of the question.
Yet, with my life and professional experience at my age, I keep the right to know what fits my personal needs and what not. Tablets are just out of the question.
Ok. You don't have to be forthcoming. It's just not helping the conversation overall.
Ok. You don't have to be forthcoming. It's just not helping the conversation overall.
Especially considering all the limitations iPad brings to the game. Personally I find the device extremely frustrating because I could see the device being useful for me personally and even at work if it wasn't so limited. What are some of the limitations I see, well:
The lack of RAM is huge as it impacts personal use and also business use. Especially if you want to write custom software for the unit.
The lack of a built in scripting platform, either Python or Ruby. Or something else, it doesn't really matter as long as it has Apple behind it. This would vastly expand the business use possibilities.
While likely unneeded and unwanted by personal users, multiple accounts would be very useful for business users.
Lets face it IPhone 3.2 is an interim OS, however we don't know what 4.0 will look like on iPad especially with respect to memory usage.
While it is easy to end up blinded by the glowing reports, iPad is not a performance power house. Any app that stresses a desktop app will be truely wanting on iPad. The next gen iPad is likely to be much faster but I don't expect the gap to ever truely close.
Those are considerations off the top of my head. If any of the above are important to somebody then the iPad is a bad choice. It doesn't really matter if it feels great or is "magical" if it can't yet do what you need done then it is a poor investment. I know current owners take that personally but they really shouldn't. It is great that iPad works really well for so many but many isn't all.
Oh the constant responses that ask have you used one are meaningless. Especially to a professional with a well managed work flow.
Especially considering all the limitations iPad brings to the game. Personally I find the device extremely frustrating because I could see the device being useful for me personally and even at work if it wasn't so limited. What are some of the limitations I see, well:
The lack of RAM is huge as it impacts personal use and also business use. Especially if you want to write custom software for the unit.
The lack of a built in scripting platform, either Python or Ruby. Or something else, it doesn't really matter as long as it has Apple behind it. This would vastly expand the business use possibilities.
While likely unneeded and unwanted by personal users, multiple accounts would be very useful for business users.
Lets face it IPhone 3.2 is an interim OS, however we don't know what 4.0 will look like on iPad especially with respect to memory usage.
While it is easy to end up blinded by the glowing reports, iPad is not a performance power house. Any app that stresses a desktop app will be truely wanting on iPad. The next gen iPad is likely to be much faster but I don't expect the gap to ever truely close.
Those are considerations off the top of my head. If any of the above are important to somebody then the iPad is a bad choice. It doesn't really matter if it feels great or is "magical" if it can't yet do what you need done then it is a poor investment. I know current owners take that personally but they really shouldn't. It is great that iPad works really well for so many but many isn't all.
Oh the constant responses that ask have you used one are meaningless. Especially to a professional with a well managed work flow.
Dave
You obviously haven't read any of the links I posted, or any articles about the iPad in business.
That link doesn't lead to any test that I could see. Could you be more specific with it?
There's one on the AMD website.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
That's not really possible. But I am seeing conflicting numbers.
These size comparisons counts the L2 cache for Westmere/SB, which is included in some measurements and not included in others.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
Yeah, I saw a review of the new 6-core AMD this morning and the i7-980 was 30% faster in some tests and I was ready to have the usual dismissive reaction but the price difference hit home. The chips were 30% slower only in the worst case but are under 1/3 of the price so as you say, Apple could build a 12-core Mac Pro $1400 cheaper than they could with Intel's chips (depending on which Intel ones they chose).
I'd much rather have an $1800 6-core AMD Mac Pro than an Intel one at $2500 when you're only going to see 30% improvement doing the long rendering stuff, which you're going to be waiting for anyway.
Plus, the 12-core AMD machine would be cheaper than a 6-core Intel so in terms of performance-per-dollar, the AMD offering will win in most cases.
I wonder if Apple will make the jump at this refresh. I expected the Mac Pro update to be out by now.
Anyone think that's why the Mac Pro update is "late"? Maybe they considered Westmere but then went to Magny-Cours. I don't think that's the case, but it just sneaked into my mind.
What I like the most about Magny-Cours is that they give a large performance increase over its predecessors without switching to a new process or using a new microarchitecture, but from their design decisions which are primarily outside of the chip itself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PB
I possibly missed some power consumption numbers, but is there any chance to see a 6-core iMac next year? The AMD prices obviously make this possible but what about heat? Probably the 27" model could stand it?
There are 95 W 6-core Thubans so it's possible with AMD now. With Intel, the B2 socket variants (Bloomfield/Gulftown successor) is to be 95/80/<80 W, so seeing 8 cores for 95 W is quite good.
Comments
It's nice in person, though. But the entry model is a complete rip off.
Buy an iPad instead.
Lemon Bon Bon.
The 13" could very well play effectively against those machines. It is just about the minimal size for a notebook for many people so why not make it a light a possible.
The only software I've recently installed, via a CD optical disk on my MBP, came from Apple. Everything else is downloaded and installed from the net. Of course part of that is due to my using open source software but purchasing software over the net is not unheard of either.
At work it is much the same much of what I need to install on my Windows PC can be downloaded from the net. If not the original install the updates can be.
The point is the optical doesn't need to be in the laptop everyday.
It is so nice of you to feel sorry for those that take a different approach in life.
In any event It doesn't take much effort to burn up a lot of disk space with software. Just install XCode, Eclipse or even Open Office and see your free space drift away. Besides those of us into content consumption via their PC's aren't the only ones needing space, if you are into content production the more disk space you have the better. Of course if you are into content production you will most likely have a larger laptop with a built in optical.
Of course it would be a new machine, the deletion of the optical just allows for a thinner machine when it comes to a redesign.
If I thought I was wrong I wouldn't have brought it up. The iPad might be a better choice for some people but it will not replace a laptop for people that need a laptop. In fact their is little overlap.
In my estimation the AIR was a waste of time. A lighter, higher performance, 13" MBP would be very attractive to a number of users.
Dave
Somehow, I get the feeling that we're not going to agree on this one, so I'm going to let it go.
Yeah. The Mac Mini. Less a stop gap. More a door step.
It's nice in person, though. But the entry model is a complete rip off.
Buy an iPad instead.
Lemon Bon Bon.
That sounds awful...and I say this an owner of a 2007 C2D base model Mini, that I felt was overpriced at the time, but it can at least run full-blown programs.
The iPad is a nice toy IMO, but I just don't see the point of it. But for all its warts, the Mini can still run OSX and almost all programs for it. The iPad just seems like a big version of my iPod Touch.
That sounds awful...and I say this an owner of a 2007 C2D base model Mini, that I felt was overpriced at the time, but it can at least run full-blown programs.
The iPad is a nice toy IMO, but I just don't see the point of it. But for all its warts, the Mini can still run OSX and almost all programs for it. The iPad just seems like a big version of my iPod Touch.
You have to use an iPad to see the point of it. It's anything but a toy. There's already an accumulating number of heavy hitters in the business world with apps for it.
http://www.computerworld.com/s/artic..._hw_2010-04-05
http://www.macpractice.com/mp/ipad/
http://www.computerworld.com/s/artic...mac_2010-04-06
http://www.informationweek.com/news/...leID=224600217
http://news.yahoo.com/s/zd/20100427/tc_zd/250376
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2363200,00.asp
This is just a little bit.
There's an awful lot of snobbery going around regarding the iPad.
The same thing was said about the Mac for years, and it isn't fully accepted yet.
Somehow, I get the feeling that we're not going to agree on this one, so I'm going to let it go.
Lemon Bon Bon.
The iPad is a nice toy IMO, but I just don't see the point of it. But for all its warts, the Mini can still run OSX and almost all programs for it. The iPad just seems like a big version of my iPod Touch.
Dripping with irony from a Mac Mini owner. Give it a Radeon 4850 as a mere £50 upgrade and it would fly. But no...Apple want us to pay £2000 for an entry Mac Pro with a proportionately crapper gpu capabilities.
iPad, a toy?
It's the most affordable and fully featured Mac for 'non Geeks' ever. And unlike the Mini, you get a free keyboard and screen!
Lemon Bon Bon.
You have to use an iPad to see the point of it. It's anything but a toy. There's already an accumulating number of heavy hitters in the business world with apps for it.
http://www.computerworld.com/s/artic..._hw_2010-04-05
http://www.macpractice.com/mp/ipad/
http://www.computerworld.com/s/artic...mac_2010-04-06
http://www.informationweek.com/news/...leID=224600217
http://news.yahoo.com/s/zd/20100427/tc_zd/250376
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2363200,00.asp
This is just a little bit.
There's an awful lot of snobbery going around regarding the iPad.
The same thing was said about the Mac for years, and it isn't fully accepted yet.
What he said.
Lemon Bon Bon.
PS. That 'full acceptance' isn't far away. My school secretary was coo-ing about the 'feel' and 'smell' of a Macbook Pro...that a friend had bought. Er. Yeah.
From the Mac Pro to the iMac. eg the iMac's top end gpu is the 4850. A budget card these days. And something that should go into the entry model. Let alone the high end model.
And don't get me started on Apple's pretend 'workstation' like with their cutting edge gpus 'as standard.'
If Apple offered decent gpus with their overpriced desktops, it would at least go someway to appeasing the outrageous prices. But more galling it that they don't offer a 'cheap' upgrade to cards that would greatly enhance the mini and iMac range.
If I was an Apple shareholder, I may disagree with what I wrote because Apple are selling premium prices machines...but not all the parts are premium. See use of out of date Core Duo, out of date gpus and offering dual core when quad core was standard ages ago on budget PC machines.
Lemon Bon Bon.
But then, I'd be a hypocrite for lauding the virtues of Intel performance (because I, along with Apple, used to be a PPC spouting fan boy...)
iPad rocks. It is the Mac for the 21st Century. For the 'rest of us.'
Lemon Bon Bon.
You have to use an iPad to see the point of it. It's anything but a toy.
I can understand that the iPad will find its use in some domains (healthcare, education and media/publishing come into mind), but for my own personal and professional use any tablet device is just a toy and nothing more. I am not going to buy any unless my needs change.
Dripping with irony from a Mac Mini owner. Give it a Radeon 4850 as a mere £50 upgrade and it would fly. But no...Apple want us to pay £2000 for an entry Mac Pro with a proportionately crapper gpu capabilities.
iPad, a toy?
It's the most affordable and fully featured Mac for 'non Geeks' ever. And unlike the Mini, you get a free keyboard and screen!
Lemon Bon Bon.
I assume you're sold your Mac then, now that you have an iPad?
My Mini is a toy too...all I've ever really done with it, is browse the web, check e-mail, and edit some photos. I made the attempt to use it for tasks like Excel, but the SW isn't up to the task, although Pages is decent, although that was mainly to do with the awfulness of Mac Office and Numbers.
I don't just see the point of tablets ATM; I have plenty of devices to browse the web and check my mail with: a PC desktop, laptop, netbook, Mac Mini, iPod Touch, my phone (with mobile hotspot tethering), and my PSP can even get online (although it's painfully slow).
When I was still in school, an e-reader/iPad type device might have been great, but knowing publishers, the digital textbooks would have been just as expensive, and I would have lost out on the resale value that selling back textbooks brings.
For typing notes, I don't think it would have been as useful as my laptop was at the time; I was a heavy OneNote user, and from what I've read about the iPad dock/KB, it only works in portrait mode, doesn't fold flat, doesn't work with the Apple-designed iPad case, and basically reminds people, the BT KB would be a better option.
I can see uses of tablets in certain markets, I just don't fall into any of those, and I don't want another device, to sit on my ass, browse the web, check my mail, and run some other apps. It's just a big iPod Touch to me, with some expanded features. Great for content consumption, specific needs and limitations for creation, and if anyone ever complains, they just say it's not a computer, it's a paradigm shift or something (a actual point another poster made, when someone else wondered why the iPad couldn't save PDFs from within Safari), which I think is a legitimate use of the device.
I can understand that the iPad will find its use in some domains (healthcare, education and media/publishing come into mind), but for my own personal and professional use any tablet device is just a toy and nothing more. I am not going to buy any unless my needs change.
Without stating your personal and professional needs, it's hard to judge from anyone else's perspective. Of course, it's your business to keep to yourself. But when people make statements without letting us know specifically why, it's pretty meaningless, and I say that without making it an insult.
I've had plenty of people over the years tell me the same thing about Macs, but when I knew what their needs were, most of the time, I could make a good case for switching over, and more than a few did. That doesn't mean that in your case it would be true for a tablet, but at some point, it might.
Of course, the iPad is still very new. When personal computers were very new, almost no one thought they were of any use to them either.
I assume you're sold your Mac then, now that you have an iPad?
My Mini is a toy too...all I've ever really done with it, is browse the web, check e-mail, and edit some photos. I made the attempt to use it for tasks like Excel, but the SW isn't up to the task, although Pages is decent, although that was mainly to do with the awfulness of Mac Office and Numbers.
I don't just see the point of tablets ATM; I have plenty of devices to browse the web and check my mail with: a PC desktop, laptop, netbook, Mac Mini, iPod Touch, my phone (with mobile hotspot tethering), and my PSP can even get online (although it's painfully slow).
When I was still in school, an e-reader/iPad type device might have been great, but knowing publishers, the digital textbooks would have been just as expensive, and I would have lost out on the resale value that selling back textbooks brings.
For typing notes, I don't think it would have been as useful as my laptop was at the time; I was a heavy OneNote user, and from what I've read about the iPad dock/KB, it only works in portrait mode, doesn't fold flat, doesn't work with the Apple-designed iPad case, and basically reminds people, the BT KB would be a better option.
I can see uses of tablets in certain markets, I just don't fall into any of those, and I don't want another device, to sit on my ass, browse the web, check my mail, and run some other apps. It's just a big iPod Touch to me, with some expanded features. Great for content consumption, specific needs and limitations for creation, and if anyone ever complains, they just say it's not a computer, it's a paradigm shift or something (a actual point another poster made, when someone else wondered why the iPad couldn't save PDFs from within Safari), which I think is a legitimate use of the device.
So then, we can assume that you've used an iPad enough by this time to know all of this about it? Or are you just saying it without any actual decent hands on experience?
Without stating your personal and professional needs, it's hard to judge from anyone else's perspective. Of course, it's your business to keep to yourself. But when people make statements without letting us know specifically why, it's pretty meaningless, and I say that without making it an insult.
Yet, with my life and professional experience at my age, I keep the right to know what fits my personal needs and what not. Tablets are just out of the question.
Yet, with my life and professional experience at my age, I keep the right to know what fits my personal needs and what not. Tablets are just out of the question.
Ok. You don't have to be forthcoming. It's just not helping the conversation overall.
Here is some interesting things.
www.r4i-dshc.com
www.ndsill.net
www.edgei-ds.cn (many movies to download)
Ok. You don't have to be forthcoming. It's just not helping the conversation overall.
Especially considering all the limitations iPad brings to the game. Personally I find the device extremely frustrating because I could see the device being useful for me personally and even at work if it wasn't so limited. What are some of the limitations I see, well:
- The lack of RAM is huge as it impacts personal use and also business use. Especially if you want to write custom software for the unit.
- The lack of a built in scripting platform, either Python or Ruby. Or something else, it doesn't really matter as long as it has Apple behind it. This would vastly expand the business use possibilities.
- While likely unneeded and unwanted by personal users, multiple accounts would be very useful for business users.
- Lets face it IPhone 3.2 is an interim OS, however we don't know what 4.0 will look like on iPad especially with respect to memory usage.
- While it is easy to end up blinded by the glowing reports, iPad is not a performance power house. Any app that stresses a desktop app will be truely wanting on iPad. The next gen iPad is likely to be much faster but I don't expect the gap to ever truely close.
Those are considerations off the top of my head. If any of the above are important to somebody then the iPad is a bad choice. It doesn't really matter if it feels great or is "magical" if it can't yet do what you need done then it is a poor investment. I know current owners take that personally but they really shouldn't. It is great that iPad works really well for so many but many isn't all.Oh the constant responses that ask have you used one are meaningless. Especially to a professional with a well managed work flow.
Dave
Especially considering all the limitations iPad brings to the game. Personally I find the device extremely frustrating because I could see the device being useful for me personally and even at work if it wasn't so limited. What are some of the limitations I see, well:
- The lack of RAM is huge as it impacts personal use and also business use. Especially if you want to write custom software for the unit.
- The lack of a built in scripting platform, either Python or Ruby. Or something else, it doesn't really matter as long as it has Apple behind it. This would vastly expand the business use possibilities.
- While likely unneeded and unwanted by personal users, multiple accounts would be very useful for business users.
- Lets face it IPhone 3.2 is an interim OS, however we don't know what 4.0 will look like on iPad especially with respect to memory usage.
- While it is easy to end up blinded by the glowing reports, iPad is not a performance power house. Any app that stresses a desktop app will be truely wanting on iPad. The next gen iPad is likely to be much faster but I don't expect the gap to ever truely close.
Those are considerations off the top of my head. If any of the above are important to somebody then the iPad is a bad choice. It doesn't really matter if it feels great or is "magical" if it can't yet do what you need done then it is a poor investment. I know current owners take that personally but they really shouldn't. It is great that iPad works really well for so many but many isn't all.Oh the constant responses that ask have you used one are meaningless. Especially to a professional with a well managed work flow.
Dave
You obviously haven't read any of the links I posted, or any articles about the iPad in business.
That link doesn't lead to any test that I could see. Could you be more specific with it?
There's one on the AMD website.
That's not really possible. But I am seeing conflicting numbers.
These size comparisons counts the L2 cache for Westmere/SB, which is included in some measurements and not included in others.
Yeah, I saw a review of the new 6-core AMD this morning and the i7-980 was 30% faster in some tests and I was ready to have the usual dismissive reaction but the price difference hit home. The chips were 30% slower only in the worst case but are under 1/3 of the price so as you say, Apple could build a 12-core Mac Pro $1400 cheaper than they could with Intel's chips (depending on which Intel ones they chose).
I'd much rather have an $1800 6-core AMD Mac Pro than an Intel one at $2500 when you're only going to see 30% improvement doing the long rendering stuff, which you're going to be waiting for anyway.
Plus, the 12-core AMD machine would be cheaper than a 6-core Intel so in terms of performance-per-dollar, the AMD offering will win in most cases.
I wonder if Apple will make the jump at this refresh. I expected the Mac Pro update to be out by now.
Anyone think that's why the Mac Pro update is "late"? Maybe they considered Westmere but then went to Magny-Cours. I don't think that's the case, but it just sneaked into my mind.
What I like the most about Magny-Cours is that they give a large performance increase over its predecessors without switching to a new process or using a new microarchitecture, but from their design decisions which are primarily outside of the chip itself.
I possibly missed some power consumption numbers, but is there any chance to see a 6-core iMac next year? The AMD prices obviously make this possible but what about heat? Probably the 27" model could stand it?
There are 95 W 6-core Thubans so it's possible with AMD now. With Intel, the B2 socket variants (Bloomfield/Gulftown successor) is to be 95/80/<80 W, so seeing 8 cores for 95 W is quite good.