Lightpeak can have a USB style connector, and in theory be backwards compatible with all of our USB devices. There could be an adaptor for FireWire or maybe even ethernet (although I'll admit the latter is unlikely).
Are you kidding? Apple made a USB to modem dongle and sold it for $30.
They'll take away ALL of their ports, replace them with five LightPeak, and sell $30 dongles for everything. They're GOLDEN.
An all-out blitz on new hardware is always welcome! I remember the 2003 Macworld. I remember Steve saying something to the effect that I asked you to buckle up before, now I need you to put on your shoulder harness. Those were good times.
I think this thread is good because for some reason it's gotten quiet across all forums here lately. Perhaps they have closed up some rumor and leak sources at Apple! Anyhow, I have two concerns regarding 10.7 and purchasing an MBP. I may not buy this next rev. but probably the one after that. And by then I sure hope they will have:
1) Resolution independence. If they keep increasing screen resolution and dpi they need it!!! It's overdue by 10.7, to be kind. Unless of course they only want 20/20 customers (ie, cutting out a big chunk of customers).
2) TRIM support and better OS X settings to accommodate SSDs. I assume they'll start to really fall in price soon. I hope, anyway...I want one. But I've read about stuttering issues, sleep issues, etc. What a pain. And while drives have built-in garbage collection, it would be nice for OS X to automatically optimize itself for SSDs. What is strange is that even though it doesn't, Apple has been selling MBAs with SSDs for years. It'd be about time to get with the program by 10.7.
Also I hope 10.7 continues to build more Touch and gesture support in. And after reading about Inkwell half a decade ago I'd assumed handwriting recognition on the MBP trackpad was imminent. What happened? That'd be so neat. Or at the very least, letting us use it as a tablet to draw with, so we could for instance jot our signature, or manipulate graphics programs, e.g. Photoshop, without needing to plug in an external tablet. It would seem trivial and be a cool selling point. Of course a touch-screen monitor that swivels around and allows the MB/MBP to double as a tablet would be even cooler. When I saw some Dell or something doing that, I was like wow, how come Apple isn't doing that? I guess the market wasn't there for it yet. But I bet it would be now. It could be a third line of laptops perhaps, or an (initially costly, but then coming down) BTO option for MacBook Pros or something. I hope implementing touch like this doesn't take several more generations as hoBIT predicts. But perhaps it will, simply to get production costs down.
1) Resolution independence. If they keep increasing screen resolution and dpi they need it!!! It's overdue by 10.7, to be kind.
I remember seeing a video from an Apple WWDC four or so years ago where they wanted the developers to work on having their apps resolution independent by the Spring of 2008. Here we are in 2011 & yet still no widespread RI. I bought my parents a 17" MacBook Pro because mom wanted a big screen & the first thing she complained about was how dad thought everything was too small on the screen.
I remember seeing a video from an Apple WWDC four or so years ago where they wanted the developers to work on having their apps resolution independent by the Spring of 2008. Here we are in 2011 & yet still no widespread RI. I bought my parents a 17" MacBook Pro because mom wanted a big screen & the first thing she complained about was how dad thought everything was too small on the screen.
DHagan you may be aware of this but I'll throw it out there: setting up Zoom in Universal Access. I use it almost every hour or so to zoom onto a detail on a map or spreadsheet formula or something like that. I like just holding control and giving the trackpad a two-finger flick upward. This is seriously one of the biggest advantages over Windows for my use. Do your parents use this zooming on-the-fly feature?
Also I jacked up most text font sizes around the System with TinkerTool by a few points (just enough so it wouldn't look weird but is a bit bigger). But yes..with the steadily increasing dpi and thus shrinking GUI and text I'm really surprised Res. Indep. didn't make the cut in 10.6. Windows 7 "kind of" has a universal "zoom" but not really. It'd be nice to have a simple slider for the whole computer, kind of the like the Dock. And where it would "just work", like most browsers e.g. Safari now can Zoom in/out without changing any of the formatting. Here's hoping!! Also as to 3rd parties, Apple should encourage developers to get on board but for graphics they haven't vectorized or prepped they could just do an interpolation zoom like Safari does with images now.
As to other hardware/10.7 implications...I wonder if another rumor/leak we will see pop up will be references in 10.7 to LightPeak, USB 3, SSD optimizations, etc. So far it seems like almost no 10.7 Lion info has leaked out??
I think this thread is good because for some reason it's gotten quiet across all forums here lately. Perhaps they have closed up some rumor and leak sources at Apple! Anyhow, I have two concerns regarding 10.7 and purchasing an MBP. I may not buy this next rev. but probably the one after that. And by then I sure hope they will have:
1) Resolution independence. If they keep increasing screen resolution and dpi they need it!!! It's overdue by 10.7, to be kind. Unless of course they only want 20/20 customers (ie, cutting out a big chunk of customers).
This I agree with 100%. I'm not sure what is taking them so long, maybe it is a bigger overhaul than we realize. It is needed though as you say some of use aren't in the 20/20 crowd anymore.
Quote:
2) TRIM support and better OS X settings to accommodate SSDs. I assume they'll start to really fall in price soon. I hope, anyway...I want one. But I've read about stuttering issues, sleep issues, etc. What a pain. And while drives have built-in garbage collection, it would be nice for OS X to automatically optimize itself for SSDs. What is strange is that even though it doesn't, Apple has been selling MBAs with SSDs for years. It'd be about time to get with the program by 10.7.
This I disagree with TRIM was a bad idea from day one. It is far better to use SSDs that resolve these issues internally.
Quote:
Also I hope 10.7 continues to build more Touch and gesture support in. And after reading about Inkwell half a decade ago I'd assumed handwriting recognition on the MBP trackpad was imminent. What happened? That'd be so neat.
I wonder about that myself. It might be related to CPU power or possibly difficulties in distinguishing gestures and hand writing. It would be very useful on iPad if the could get it to work.
Quote:
Or at the very least, letting us use it as a tablet to draw with, so we could for instance jot our signature, or manipulate graphics programs, e.g. Photoshop, without needing to plug in an external tablet. It would seem trivial and be a cool selling point. Of course a touch-screen monitor that swivels around and allows the MB/MBP to double as a tablet would be even cooler. When I saw some Dell or something doing that, I was like wow, how come Apple isn't doing that? I guess the market wasn't there for it yet. But I bet it would be now. It could be a third line of laptops perhaps, or an (initially costly, but then coming down) BTO option for MacBook Pros or something. I hope implementing touch like this doesn't take several more generations as hoBIT predicts. But perhaps it will, simply to get production costs down.
Well I think on the Macs Touch is out as far as active Apple support. That is Touch screens aren't going anywhere right now. It is probably the best as it adds a lot of cost for a facility of use to a small minority of Mac users. A Touch interface Mac OS would be a negative for most users. Well for most unless they can integrate it into the Mac GUI in a streamlined manner.
I came over here from another forum to look for a different POV, and people here sure are grouchy. Allow me to actually answer the OPs question.
The latest macs, and even the previous ones, should all run Lion just fine. They may need extra RAM but thats about it. I would NOT worry about feature support.
Of course no one knows all the Lion features. There may be a few new features, but not too many...its not in Apple's interest to release a new OS and make all the computers they have been selling for a 2-3 years unable to use a hi-profile feature. And it would be stupid of Apple to update their entire macbook pro line....and make it not 100% lion capable. So major, great features will almost surely be compatible with a lot of macs, while little ones may not be. Keep in mind the current trackpad/touch interface is much more well developed than the old ones, so theres not much more to add, unless its going to be like a whole ten finger touch pad or something crazy.
I expect Lion will be much like Snow Leopard was (for me)...a minor re-skinning, changing a few UI elements, and integrating touch and app stores a little better.
If you can wait for the next revision, wait. I would be VERY surprised if they weren't 100% Lion compatible (in terms of hardware). If you can't, well, it won't be a big deal.
I'm waiting for a new MBP just cause I can. If I had the cash and need, I'd get one right now. If I miss out on quintiple swipe+wink to turn on facetime, I don't really care. But thats me.
In summary: Lion will surely be at least as capable as Snow Leopard, so unless Snow Leopard has some glaring-to-you-but-minor-to-everyone-else UI problem you are hoping gets fixed in Lion, and can only be fixed in a certain way, it won't matter.
Welcome to the forums. From the old-timers, thanks for being a rational newbie.
For one he has no idea what the new hardware will be like. Further Apple does have a history of dropping support for old hardware. They also have a history of introducing new hardware that is not backward compatible.
For example if or when Lightpeak comes out backwards compatibility will be next to impossible. Granted there is a limit to what new tech can go into a laptop, but it is just silly to speak in absolute terms about how unreleased hardware and software will interact. It is really being honest and not at all grouchy.
Lightpeak can have a USB style connector, and in theory be backwards compatible with all of our USB devices.
I've heard about this possibility and frankly don't see the big attraction. My position is that USB devices aren't going away anytime soon a thus you do not want to co-op the ports for other uses.
Quote:
There could be an adaptor for FireWire or maybe even ethernet (although I'll admit the latter is unlikely).
There may be some adapters but let's face it an adapter that goes from Lightpeak to a mouse, USB port or even a FireWire port is pretty stupid. The difference in performance is huge and the cost unacceptable.
We are more likely to see Lightpeak going to a hub of device ports. Lightpeak would also be ideal for storage boxes as in many cases transfer rates are now faster than USB or FireWire can handle. In any event one has to balance performance with cost
Quote:
In theory you could make a Mac with 2-4 Lightpeak ports and all other ports are removed ( FireWire, USB, video, maybe even Ethernet) leaving only audio and PC card, and not lose anything in the bargain.
Actually you would loose a lot. That would be low cost expansion, easy access to USB devices and flexibility. The problem is optical interconnects are still expensive. Beyound that legacy USB devices will be used for years and whipping out a dongle to get to them is a no go.
Lightpeak can be additive to a system as long as you don't give up very important legacy interfaces like USB. Frankly I can see USB being used ten years down the road easy. Likewise with Ethernet. The other ports will fad away a lot faster though.
One of the big lessons of CES this year was that USB 3.0 is going to become a dominant standard. Every company that makes any kind of external storage had devices on display. Nearly every computer on display had the ports.
One of the big lessons of CES this year was that USB 3.0 is going to become a dominant standard. Every company that makes any kind of external storage had devices on display. Nearly every computer on display had the ports.
No one is waiting for Intel.
That is I have to wonder if Apple is opposed to USB 3 in any way or is simply waiting for it to be built into a chip set. Since Intel is dragging feet here I do wonder about the potential for AMD to get design ins. Contrary to popular belief AMD does have viable chips to compete against Apples more relaxed Intel implementations.
For example and AMD Mini could be easily designed to out perform the current one. Power usage would be slightly higher but not excessively so.
Before saying much, I will state that Im looking at the current 2.8ghz i7 15" Macbook Pro. The following comparison was done using this spec. vs. what I see as reasonable and realistic estimates of changes to the next generation equivilant (no revision).
After having read this thread, being confused by the ample technical jargon, and eventually withdrawing a number of seemingly reasonable statements I have drawn a number of conclusions.
Asides from a number of probably small changes that the Sandy Bridge (excluding the obvious) line will bring, many of them are not worth me waiting for the new hardware. While I appreciate the power saving, and thus longer battery life, I need a new MacBook soon. There lies uncertainty regarding graphics hardware (and resulting performance), which is a low priority of mine, and asides from the aforementioned battery performance only evolutionary gains in processor will be achieved. Other predicted hardware changes appear to be minimal. Lightpeak, while an interesting technology (which may or may not appear on the next gen), does not appear to have any immediate uses as the standard hasn't be released. Perhaps two generations from the current it will be desirable. Current configuration of screen aspect I believe are beneficial to those of true widescreen ratios (which seems like and unlikely change anyways). Looking at the current Macbook Pro's, they appear to me, to offer what I need. I don't game often, thus, the current adequate but not stunning graphic system is enough.
For future Macbooks, I can foresee greater value offered in either reduced price slightly, or in larger hard drives. Then the change in processor, but with the potential disadvantage of change in graphic hardware manufacturer.
Do these statements seem correct? Like I said, i had to wade through the jargon to best derive my conclusions.
Before saying much, I will state that Im looking at the current 2.8ghz i7 15" Macbook Pro. The following comparison was done using this spec. vs. what I see as reasonable and realistic estimates of changes to the next generation equivilant (no revision).
After having read this thread, being confused by the ample technical jargon, and eventually withdrawing a number of seemingly reasonable statements I have drawn a number of conclusions.
Asides from a number of probably small changes that the Sandy Bridge (excluding the obvious) line will bring, many of them are not worth me waiting for the new hardware. While I appreciate the power saving, and thus longer battery life, I need a new MacBook soon. There lies uncertainty regarding graphics hardware (and resulting performance), which is a low priority of mine, and asides from the aforementioned battery performance only evolutionary gains in processor will be achieved. Other predicted hardware changes appear to be minimal. Lightpeak, while an interesting technology (which may or may not appear on the next gen), does not appear to have any immediate uses as the standard hasn't be released. Perhaps two generations from the current it will be desirable. Current configuration of screen aspect I believe are beneficial to those of true widescreen ratios (which seems like and unlikely change anyways). Looking at the current Macbook Pro's, they appear to me, to offer what I need. I don't game often, thus, the current adequate but not stunning graphic system is enough.
For future Macbooks, I can foresee greater value offered in either reduced price slightly, or in larger hard drives. Then the change in processor, but with the potential disadvantage of change in graphic hardware manufacturer.
Do these statements seem correct? Like I said, i had to wade through the jargon to best derive my conclusions.
First off the overriding consideration is this: do you have a need for a new Mac right now? If so then the rational move is to buy a new Mac. However if your needs aren't pressing I'd strongly suggest waiting.
Why you might ask? Well it is all about potential. You say things like battery life and GPU performance arent important to you but what is your actual experience here? If you have used portable devices much at all you will realize that battery lifetime can be a big deal.
As to things like the GPU and storage we don't know what the new systems will look like, however both can have a bigger impact on the user experience than many give credit for. See Mac Book AIR articles for supporting discussions. If you are looking at a 15" MBP the question of what you will get for a GPU is an open question. Just don't underestimate it's importance.
Why are GPUs important? Because they accelerate more things than people give them credit for. That is right now today, it isn't just games anymore. With the advent of OpenCL, more and more developers are leveraging the GPU in their apps.
How important all of this is to you is pretty much a function of what you expect to do with the machine. Oh and how long you intend to keep it. You didn't go into usage so I will offer this comment on life span. If you are like me you probably use the same machine for many years, if that is the case it pays to buy a state of the art machine. Mainly so that performance degrades gracefully over time. When considering what potentially could be in the coming rev it makes really good sense to hold off.
At this point I'd buy only if I really needed the machine.
I'm going to use it for word processing, powerpoint, a bit of video editing, photo editing, audio editing, a couple of games like rFactor and iRacing, some ESRI GIS map making (fairly intensive but it runs on crappy windoze boxes), and then the daily tasks like music and web surfing.
My current MacBook which performs adequately for most task is of this specification.
Model NametMacBook
Model IdentifiertMacBook2,1
Processor NametIntel Core 2 Duo
Processor Speedt2.16 GHz
Number Of Processorst1
Total Number Of Corest2
L2 Cachet4 MB
Memoryt3 GB
Bus Speedt667 MHz
As i'm sure you know, it really isn't capable of playing games. Also, the screen size is a bit small for some of the things I like to do, especially writing papers where I need a PDF open and the word doc open side by side. Also, making maps requires a decent amount of screen space when you are building documents that are 48 inches wide and up to 60 inches long once plotted.
Why; for one thing the video editing. Anything with a Sandy Bridge processor should run far better due to hardware support of encoding and decoding that is really good. Maybe it would be better to use the phrase "significantly better" with the qualification that software is updated to take advantage of the new hardware.
As for much of your other needs current Macs would do the job and frankly one with an SSD installed would probably really shine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geographer
I'm going to use it for word processing, powerpoint, a bit of video editing, photo editing, audio editing, a couple of games like rFactor and iRacing, some ESRI GIS map making (fairly intensive but it runs on crappy windoze boxes), and then the daily tasks like music and web surfing.
My current MacBook which performs adequately for most task is of this specification.
Model NametMacBook
Model IdentifiertMacBook2,1
Processor NametIntel Core 2 Duo
Processor Speedt2.16 GHz
Number Of Processorst1
Total Number Of Corest2
L2 Cachet4 MB
Memoryt3 GB
Bus Speedt667 MHz
As i'm sure you know, it really isn't capable of playing games. Also, the screen size is a bit small for some of the things I like to do, especially writing papers where I need a PDF open and the word doc open side by side. Also, making maps requires a decent amount of screen space when you are building documents that are 48 inches wide and up to 60 inches long once plotted.
p.s. we have nice SPAM around here.
The best thing I've found for the PDF open or documentation access is a separate screen hooked up to my MBP. It makes a huge difference and these days is a relatively cheap upgrade. To this end I got a Samsung TV with an HDMI input to function as this second monitor. The screen isn't computer class if you ask me but works fine for documentations especially if set to larger than life size. The larger screen does offer other benefits too, for example game play, movie play back at 1080P and it can be useful for programming where you need to digest a big block of code. It is not however recommended for long session as the pixels are a bit blocky.
If you don't have a second monitor I think you will be surprised at how useful it can be in conjunction with a laptop monitor. It can be hard on the GPU to drive for gaming but for static display of text type apps it is not a big deal. If I was more into it I'd flip for a more professional monitor but this works for now. I'd even go so far as to suggest doing this sort of an upgrade first and then look into an updated Mac Book Pro.
There is a big problem with the MBP revs and that is that we don't really know what the Graphics subsystem will be like on the coming machines. As you note gaming is not an issue for you but I suspect multiple monitor support will be. I'd think on this a bit. When it comes right down to it the 15" screen won't help you as much as I think you need, thus the question of doing an upgrade without also looking at how you handle work flow.
i made a program and i have used a visual c++ 6. 0 ,i want to send to mail. output of the program may be written in txt file.
is that possible or not?if possible how?
Please assist me
This forum has become overrun with SPAM. This SPAMmer is here to garner pigeons who will use his sports-betting blog. However, this is one of the dumbest examples of SPAM that I have ever seen.
Comments
Lightpeak can have a USB style connector, and in theory be backwards compatible with all of our USB devices. There could be an adaptor for FireWire or maybe even ethernet (although I'll admit the latter is unlikely).
Are you kidding? Apple made a USB to modem dongle and sold it for $30.
They'll take away ALL of their ports, replace them with five LightPeak, and sell $30 dongles for everything. They're GOLDEN.
1) Resolution independence. If they keep increasing screen resolution and dpi they need it!!! It's overdue by 10.7, to be kind. Unless of course they only want 20/20 customers (ie, cutting out a big chunk of customers).
2) TRIM support and better OS X settings to accommodate SSDs. I assume they'll start to really fall in price soon. I hope, anyway...I want one. But I've read about stuttering issues, sleep issues, etc. What a pain. And while drives have built-in garbage collection, it would be nice for OS X to automatically optimize itself for SSDs. What is strange is that even though it doesn't, Apple has been selling MBAs with SSDs for years. It'd be about time to get with the program by 10.7.
Also I hope 10.7 continues to build more Touch and gesture support in. And after reading about Inkwell half a decade ago I'd assumed handwriting recognition on the MBP trackpad was imminent. What happened? That'd be so neat. Or at the very least, letting us use it as a tablet to draw with, so we could for instance jot our signature, or manipulate graphics programs, e.g. Photoshop, without needing to plug in an external tablet. It would seem trivial and be a cool selling point. Of course a touch-screen monitor that swivels around and allows the MB/MBP to double as a tablet would be even cooler. When I saw some Dell or something doing that, I was like wow, how come Apple isn't doing that? I guess the market wasn't there for it yet. But I bet it would be now. It could be a third line of laptops perhaps, or an (initially costly, but then coming down) BTO option for MacBook Pros or something. I hope implementing touch like this doesn't take several more generations as hoBIT predicts. But perhaps it will, simply to get production costs down.
1) Resolution independence. If they keep increasing screen resolution and dpi they need it!!! It's overdue by 10.7, to be kind.
I remember seeing a video from an Apple WWDC four or so years ago where they wanted the developers to work on having their apps resolution independent by the Spring of 2008. Here we are in 2011 & yet still no widespread RI. I bought my parents a 17" MacBook Pro because mom wanted a big screen & the first thing she complained about was how dad thought everything was too small on the screen.
I remember seeing a video from an Apple WWDC four or so years ago where they wanted the developers to work on having their apps resolution independent by the Spring of 2008. Here we are in 2011 & yet still no widespread RI. I bought my parents a 17" MacBook Pro because mom wanted a big screen & the first thing she complained about was how dad thought everything was too small on the screen.
DHagan you may be aware of this but I'll throw it out there: setting up Zoom in Universal Access. I use it almost every hour or so to zoom onto a detail on a map or spreadsheet formula or something like that. I like just holding control and giving the trackpad a two-finger flick upward. This is seriously one of the biggest advantages over Windows for my use. Do your parents use this zooming on-the-fly feature?
Also I jacked up most text font sizes around the System with TinkerTool by a few points (just enough so it wouldn't look weird but is a bit bigger). But yes..with the steadily increasing dpi and thus shrinking GUI and text I'm really surprised Res. Indep. didn't make the cut in 10.6. Windows 7 "kind of" has a universal "zoom" but not really. It'd be nice to have a simple slider for the whole computer, kind of the like the Dock. And where it would "just work", like most browsers e.g. Safari now can Zoom in/out without changing any of the formatting. Here's hoping!! Also as to 3rd parties, Apple should encourage developers to get on board but for graphics they haven't vectorized or prepped they could just do an interpolation zoom like Safari does with images now.
As to other hardware/10.7 implications...I wonder if another rumor/leak we will see pop up will be references in 10.7 to LightPeak, USB 3, SSD optimizations, etc. So far it seems like almost no 10.7 Lion info has leaked out??
I think this thread is good because for some reason it's gotten quiet across all forums here lately. Perhaps they have closed up some rumor and leak sources at Apple! Anyhow, I have two concerns regarding 10.7 and purchasing an MBP. I may not buy this next rev. but probably the one after that. And by then I sure hope they will have:
1) Resolution independence. If they keep increasing screen resolution and dpi they need it!!! It's overdue by 10.7, to be kind. Unless of course they only want 20/20 customers (ie, cutting out a big chunk of customers).
This I agree with 100%. I'm not sure what is taking them so long, maybe it is a bigger overhaul than we realize. It is needed though as you say some of use aren't in the 20/20 crowd anymore.
2) TRIM support and better OS X settings to accommodate SSDs. I assume they'll start to really fall in price soon. I hope, anyway...I want one. But I've read about stuttering issues, sleep issues, etc. What a pain. And while drives have built-in garbage collection, it would be nice for OS X to automatically optimize itself for SSDs. What is strange is that even though it doesn't, Apple has been selling MBAs with SSDs for years. It'd be about time to get with the program by 10.7.
This I disagree with TRIM was a bad idea from day one. It is far better to use SSDs that resolve these issues internally.
Also I hope 10.7 continues to build more Touch and gesture support in. And after reading about Inkwell half a decade ago I'd assumed handwriting recognition on the MBP trackpad was imminent. What happened? That'd be so neat.
I wonder about that myself. It might be related to CPU power or possibly difficulties in distinguishing gestures and hand writing. It would be very useful on iPad if the could get it to work.
Or at the very least, letting us use it as a tablet to draw with, so we could for instance jot our signature, or manipulate graphics programs, e.g. Photoshop, without needing to plug in an external tablet. It would seem trivial and be a cool selling point. Of course a touch-screen monitor that swivels around and allows the MB/MBP to double as a tablet would be even cooler. When I saw some Dell or something doing that, I was like wow, how come Apple isn't doing that? I guess the market wasn't there for it yet. But I bet it would be now. It could be a third line of laptops perhaps, or an (initially costly, but then coming down) BTO option for MacBook Pros or something. I hope implementing touch like this doesn't take several more generations as hoBIT predicts. But perhaps it will, simply to get production costs down.
Well I think on the Macs Touch is out as far as active Apple support. That is Touch screens aren't going anywhere right now. It is probably the best as it adds a lot of cost for a facility of use to a small minority of Mac users. A Touch interface Mac OS would be a negative for most users. Well for most unless they can integrate it into the Mac GUI in a streamlined manner.
The latest macs, and even the previous ones, should all run Lion just fine. They may need extra RAM but thats about it. I would NOT worry about feature support.
Of course no one knows all the Lion features. There may be a few new features, but not too many...its not in Apple's interest to release a new OS and make all the computers they have been selling for a 2-3 years unable to use a hi-profile feature. And it would be stupid of Apple to update their entire macbook pro line....and make it not 100% lion capable. So major, great features will almost surely be compatible with a lot of macs, while little ones may not be. Keep in mind the current trackpad/touch interface is much more well developed than the old ones, so theres not much more to add, unless its going to be like a whole ten finger touch pad or something crazy.
I expect Lion will be much like Snow Leopard was (for me)...a minor re-skinning, changing a few UI elements, and integrating touch and app stores a little better.
If you can wait for the next revision, wait. I would be VERY surprised if they weren't 100% Lion compatible (in terms of hardware). If you can't, well, it won't be a big deal.
I'm waiting for a new MBP just cause I can. If I had the cash and need, I'd get one right now. If I miss out on quintiple swipe+wink to turn on facetime, I don't really care. But thats me.
In summary: Lion will surely be at least as capable as Snow Leopard, so unless Snow Leopard has some glaring-to-you-but-minor-to-everyone-else UI problem you are hoping gets fixed in Lion, and can only be fixed in a certain way, it won't matter.
The above post
*blink*
Welcome to the forums. From the old-timers, thanks for being a rational newbie.
*blink*
Welcome to the forums. From the old-timers, thanks for being a rational newbie.
For one he has no idea what the new hardware will be like. Further Apple does have a history of dropping support for old hardware. They also have a history of introducing new hardware that is not backward compatible.
For example if or when Lightpeak comes out backwards compatibility will be next to impossible. Granted there is a limit to what new tech can go into a laptop, but it is just silly to speak in absolute terms about how unreleased hardware and software will interact. It is really being honest and not at all grouchy.
Lightpeak can have a USB style connector, and in theory be backwards compatible with all of our USB devices.
I've heard about this possibility and frankly don't see the big attraction. My position is that USB devices aren't going away anytime soon a thus you do not want to co-op the ports for other uses.
There could be an adaptor for FireWire or maybe even ethernet (although I'll admit the latter is unlikely).
There may be some adapters but let's face it an adapter that goes from Lightpeak to a mouse, USB port or even a FireWire port is pretty stupid. The difference in performance is huge and the cost unacceptable.
We are more likely to see Lightpeak going to a hub of device ports. Lightpeak would also be ideal for storage boxes as in many cases transfer rates are now faster than USB or FireWire can handle. In any event one has to balance performance with cost
In theory you could make a Mac with 2-4 Lightpeak ports and all other ports are removed ( FireWire, USB, video, maybe even Ethernet) leaving only audio and PC card, and not lose anything in the bargain.
Actually you would loose a lot. That would be low cost expansion, easy access to USB devices and flexibility. The problem is optical interconnects are still expensive. Beyound that legacy USB devices will be used for years and whipping out a dongle to get to them is a no go.
Lightpeak can be additive to a system as long as you don't give up very important legacy interfaces like USB. Frankly I can see USB being used ten years down the road easy. Likewise with Ethernet. The other ports will fad away a lot faster though.
No one is waiting for Intel.
One of the big lessons of CES this year was that USB 3.0 is going to become a dominant standard. Every company that makes any kind of external storage had devices on display. Nearly every computer on display had the ports.
No one is waiting for Intel.
That is I have to wonder if Apple is opposed to USB 3 in any way or is simply waiting for it to be built into a chip set. Since Intel is dragging feet here I do wonder about the potential for AMD to get design ins. Contrary to popular belief AMD does have viable chips to compete against Apples more relaxed Intel implementations.
For example and AMD Mini could be easily designed to out perform the current one. Power usage would be slightly higher but not excessively so.
After having read this thread, being confused by the ample technical jargon, and eventually withdrawing a number of seemingly reasonable statements I have drawn a number of conclusions.
Asides from a number of probably small changes that the Sandy Bridge (excluding the obvious) line will bring, many of them are not worth me waiting for the new hardware. While I appreciate the power saving, and thus longer battery life, I need a new MacBook soon. There lies uncertainty regarding graphics hardware (and resulting performance), which is a low priority of mine, and asides from the aforementioned battery performance only evolutionary gains in processor will be achieved. Other predicted hardware changes appear to be minimal. Lightpeak, while an interesting technology (which may or may not appear on the next gen), does not appear to have any immediate uses as the standard hasn't be released. Perhaps two generations from the current it will be desirable. Current configuration of screen aspect I believe are beneficial to those of true widescreen ratios (which seems like and unlikely change anyways). Looking at the current Macbook Pro's, they appear to me, to offer what I need. I don't game often, thus, the current adequate but not stunning graphic system is enough.
For future Macbooks, I can foresee greater value offered in either reduced price slightly, or in larger hard drives. Then the change in processor, but with the potential disadvantage of change in graphic hardware manufacturer.
Do these statements seem correct? Like I said, i had to wade through the jargon to best derive my conclusions.
Before saying much, I will state that Im looking at the current 2.8ghz i7 15" Macbook Pro. The following comparison was done using this spec. vs. what I see as reasonable and realistic estimates of changes to the next generation equivilant (no revision).
After having read this thread, being confused by the ample technical jargon, and eventually withdrawing a number of seemingly reasonable statements I have drawn a number of conclusions.
Asides from a number of probably small changes that the Sandy Bridge (excluding the obvious) line will bring, many of them are not worth me waiting for the new hardware. While I appreciate the power saving, and thus longer battery life, I need a new MacBook soon. There lies uncertainty regarding graphics hardware (and resulting performance), which is a low priority of mine, and asides from the aforementioned battery performance only evolutionary gains in processor will be achieved. Other predicted hardware changes appear to be minimal. Lightpeak, while an interesting technology (which may or may not appear on the next gen), does not appear to have any immediate uses as the standard hasn't be released. Perhaps two generations from the current it will be desirable. Current configuration of screen aspect I believe are beneficial to those of true widescreen ratios (which seems like and unlikely change anyways). Looking at the current Macbook Pro's, they appear to me, to offer what I need. I don't game often, thus, the current adequate but not stunning graphic system is enough.
For future Macbooks, I can foresee greater value offered in either reduced price slightly, or in larger hard drives. Then the change in processor, but with the potential disadvantage of change in graphic hardware manufacturer.
Do these statements seem correct? Like I said, i had to wade through the jargon to best derive my conclusions.
First off the overriding consideration is this: do you have a need for a new Mac right now? If so then the rational move is to buy a new Mac. However if your needs aren't pressing I'd strongly suggest waiting.
Why you might ask? Well it is all about potential. You say things like battery life and GPU performance arent important to you but what is your actual experience here? If you have used portable devices much at all you will realize that battery lifetime can be a big deal.
As to things like the GPU and storage we don't know what the new systems will look like, however both can have a bigger impact on the user experience than many give credit for. See Mac Book AIR articles for supporting discussions. If you are looking at a 15" MBP the question of what you will get for a GPU is an open question. Just don't underestimate it's importance.
Why are GPUs important? Because they accelerate more things than people give them credit for. That is right now today, it isn't just games anymore. With the advent of OpenCL, more and more developers are leveraging the GPU in their apps.
How important all of this is to you is pretty much a function of what you expect to do with the machine. Oh and how long you intend to keep it. You didn't go into usage so I will offer this comment on life span. If you are like me you probably use the same machine for many years, if that is the case it pays to buy a state of the art machine. Mainly so that performance degrades gracefully over time. When considering what potentially could be in the coming rev it makes really good sense to hold off.
At this point I'd buy only if I really needed the machine.
My current MacBook which performs adequately for most task is of this specification.
Model Name
Model Identifier
Processor Name
Processor Speed
Number Of Processors
Total Number Of Cores
L2 Cache
Memory
Bus Speed
As i'm sure you know, it really isn't capable of playing games. Also, the screen size is a bit small for some of the things I like to do, especially writing papers where I need a PDF open and the word doc open side by side. Also, making maps requires a decent amount of screen space when you are building documents that are 48 inches wide and up to 60 inches long once plotted.
p.s. we have nice SPAM around here.
As for much of your other needs current Macs would do the job and frankly one with an SSD installed would probably really shine.
I'm going to use it for word processing, powerpoint, a bit of video editing, photo editing, audio editing, a couple of games like rFactor and iRacing, some ESRI GIS map making (fairly intensive but it runs on crappy windoze boxes), and then the daily tasks like music and web surfing.
My current MacBook which performs adequately for most task is of this specification.
Model Name
Model Identifier
Processor Name
Processor Speed
Number Of Processors
Total Number Of Cores
L2 Cache
Memory
Bus Speed
As i'm sure you know, it really isn't capable of playing games. Also, the screen size is a bit small for some of the things I like to do, especially writing papers where I need a PDF open and the word doc open side by side. Also, making maps requires a decent amount of screen space when you are building documents that are 48 inches wide and up to 60 inches long once plotted.
p.s. we have nice SPAM around here.
The best thing I've found for the PDF open or documentation access is a separate screen hooked up to my MBP. It makes a huge difference and these days is a relatively cheap upgrade. To this end I got a Samsung TV with an HDMI input to function as this second monitor. The screen isn't computer class if you ask me but works fine for documentations especially if set to larger than life size. The larger screen does offer other benefits too, for example game play, movie play back at 1080P and it can be useful for programming where you need to digest a big block of code. It is not however recommended for long session as the pixels are a bit blocky.
If you don't have a second monitor I think you will be surprised at how useful it can be in conjunction with a laptop monitor. It can be hard on the GPU to drive for gaming but for static display of text type apps it is not a big deal. If I was more into it I'd flip for a more professional monitor but this works for now. I'd even go so far as to suggest doing this sort of an upgrade first and then look into an updated Mac Book Pro.
There is a big problem with the MBP revs and that is that we don't really know what the Graphics subsystem will be like on the coming machines. As you note gaming is not an issue for you but I suspect multiple monitor support will be. I'd think on this a bit. When it comes right down to it the 15" screen won't help you as much as I think you need, thus the question of doing an upgrade without also looking at how you handle work flow.
Hello all,
i made a program and i have used a visual c++ 6. 0 ,i want to send to mail. output of the program may be written in txt file.
is that possible or not?if possible how?
Please assist me
This forum has become overrun with SPAM. This SPAMmer is here to garner pigeons who will use his sports-betting blog. However, this is one of the dumbest examples of SPAM that I have ever seen.