OS X 10.7 and 10.8 meanwhile run really badly on older hardware with 2GB of RAM. I find performance pretty average with even 4GB RAM. Bumping it up to 8GB and OS X feels a lot more usable. OS X is now 64 bit only. So Apple has moved in the opposite direction to Microsoft in requiring faster computers and modern CPUs with each update.
Doing anything on 2GB of RAM sucks. Most apps need a chunk more than they used to as well, so it's not like even if Mountain Lion only ate up a gig and left the rest for everything else you'd be happy. RAM is cheap now and is a huge bottleneck for older machines trying to run newer software when you're dealing with those amounts of memory.
But if you have the skills to change out some socket LGA 771 xeons
Here is what you need to do:
Excellent post! Don't need to do this myself as I'm on a 5,1 but it's very informative for those who never thought about a hardware pimp, so to speak. And props to your 'don't freak out if...' part; that is always such welcome info before doing a surgery like this.
You installed new processors but you are still at only 6GB RAM?
Noticed that too. Though I must admit, I upgraded my 6GB when I ordered PCIeSSD card from OWC, only because it was cheap. Turned out I don't need more RAM as I watch AM occasionally, and don't get a lot of page outs.
I haven't done any concrete testing yet, but on my first battery outing on 10.8.3 and I'm seeing numbers back to Snow Leopard levels. Been on battery for an hour and a half and it still says I have another 4+ remaining. Probably won't actually be that much, but prior to this update, lately I've been taking my Mac out on battery and immediately seeing ~3 hrs and dropping rapidly, sometimes not even getting that much out of it. Was waiting to get a new SSD and do a completely fresh install of everything and see if that fixed it since dealing with this after Lion and Mountain Lion, but I'll take this for now.
FWIW:
2011 MBP quad 2.3 i7, 16gb/7200 750gb HD
So not a scientific test, but it just finally died on me after about 5 hours with a 30 minute sleep in the middleish. That's minimal brightness and mostly web/terminal and a few background apps running for the most part, but in general I haven't gotten anywhere close to that since 10.6. Usually closer to half that before it would sleep. I'd say that's an improvement!
BTW - coconutBattery says current capacity is 5588/6900 with 193 load cycles after 24 months, so I am factoring a bit of that wear and tear into these positive results.
This is one area where Microsoft has done a much better job than Apple. Microsoft's operating systems used to get progressively more bloated and resource hungry with every release. But since Windows 7 they have done an outstanding job of making their stuff run on older computers. Windows 8 runs perfectly on an ageing 6 year old PC here. I hate Windows 8 personally, but it does run remarkably well in terms of performance on older hardware. And they have continued to support both 32 bit and 64 bit.
OS X 10.7 and 10.8 meanwhile run really badly on older hardware with 2GB of RAM. I find performance pretty average with even 4GB RAM. Bumping it up to 8GB and OS X feels a lot more usable. OS X is now 64 bit only. So Apple has moved in the opposite direction to Microsoft in requiring faster computers and modern CPUs with each update.
But windows 8 is exactly the same OS that was 7, vista and XP.
Apple is making a lot of under the hood improvements/new features that demand newer hardware. You need 2010 processors (or newer) for airplay, there's no way around it, you need full 64 bit compatibility for OSX, Apple is adding tons of web services/new processes for the OS and they are making an amazing job for the thing to be as light as it is (10.8.3 vs 10.6.8. There's hundred more processes and services). You can buy a 2gb ram air (1333mhz and more) and ML will run just fine. Apple is just cleaning things up now, but they added tons of features/processes on 10.7 and 10.8. I must say, 10.8.3 on a macbook air 2011 is lightyears ahead of any windows laptop being sold right now...
It's like going from a huyara to a fiat punto.
On the other hand, what do you have with windows?
"Win7: 64bit memory extension plugin for 32bit graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8bit operating system coded for a 4bit microprocessor". Windows 8 just changes the interface. Give it a few cycles so it creates more and more cache, more updates etc and you will see the thing starting to crawl... Over 40gb of shit!
It's a tradeoff and isn't worthy. Software companies know that they can't toy with Apple anymore. As Apple becomes more powerful/builds their position, you will see companies like Adobe s*cking it up and delivering timely updates for Apple. After all, if they use the best laptops for work, they need rMBP
Windows is a second tier OS, a second tier option. Now more than ever.
This is one area where Microsoft has done a much better job than Apple. Microsoft's operating systems used to get progressively more bloated and resource hungry with every release. But since Windows 7 they have done an outstanding job of making their stuff run on older computers. Windows 8 runs perfectly on an ageing 6 year old PC here. I hate Windows 8 personally, but it does run remarkably well in terms of performance on older hardware. And they have continued to support both 32 bit and 64 bit.
OS X 10.7 and 10.8 meanwhile run really badly on older hardware with 2GB of RAM. I find performance pretty average with even 4GB RAM. Bumping it up to 8GB and OS X feels a lot more usable. OS X is now 64 bit only. So Apple has moved in the opposite direction to Microsoft in requiring faster computers and modern CPUs with each update.
So in other words...you want Apple to make OS X backwards compatibility with older hardware? I think this is where Microsoft fails. They try to make everything backwards compatible and it hurts their progress. Apple is always pushing forward and I think thats a good thing. I think it creates less of a hassle for Apple and makes it so they can keep pushing forward with new technologies. Anything thats 4yrs old or newer runs OS X 10.8 just fine, even with 2 GB of RAM. If you have anything older than 4yrs old its time to upgrade anyways.
You also have to remember Microsoft waits FOREVER to release a new OS and when they do release it, its not quality stuff. You don't see people flying to stores (online or physical) to get Windows 8 now do you? People are very unhappy with the software. There's a big difference here. If people don't like the software thats being put out and doesn't really matter what hardware it runs on now does it?
Thanks for that really helpful post. Although I'll probably still replace our old MP 1,1 when its replacement emerges, it would still be nice to update and repurpose it.
Did you upgrade the processors simply for performance reasons, or is there some compatibility issue with the originals?
And isn't there one more thing to do? I believe that the original video card isn't compatible either. The "good" news is that most of them will have failed by now and been replaced with something better anyway! On ours I used an Apple version Radeon 5770, $250 or so from Amazon.
Your comment needs some clarity. You have a $4200.00 mac pro and it won't run 10.8, with out hic ups , right? Um, what year is it?
Now, I can on say I spent $5000.00 on a kanga and that it won't run 10.8.
Ok, don't come on here trolling!
Perhaps before you accuse someone of trolling you should take the trouble to read and understand the subsequent posts. The issues have already been identified and discussed.
I have no pity for someone with a 5 year old box complaining about EFI 32bit limitations on the firmware of that system. It wasn't until several years later that UEFI 64 bit was adopted.
Coming up on seven years old in August. Time keeps on slippin, slippin into the future...
I have no pity for someone with a 5 year old box complaining about EFI 32bit limitations on the firmware of that system. It wasn't until several years later that UEFI 64 bit was adopted.
Coming up on seven years old in August. Time keeps on slippin, slippin into the future...
Yeah, if Apple didn't make such industrial grade hardware we would all have to buy new equipment every couple years. The Mac Pro will probably run for a few more decades. As long as you are content with the current software, just keep using it.
The ability to redeem iTunes gift cards in the Mac App Store using Mac?s built-in camera
This is interesting in that it's a weird addition. Hopefully this will expand. Greatly. Hopefully this is the start of an Apple-created, curated, and approved solution for photoscanning all sorts of things, from gift cards to checks to those stupid QR codes.
Boot Camp support for installing Windows 8
FINALLY. Maybe I'll be able to actually restart my computer now instead of shutting it down every time I leave Windows.
2 Flash your Mac Pro 1, 1 to a 2, 1. The machines are identical as far as hardware. The flash upgrades your Mac Pro firmware to a 2008 Firmware and makes it compatible with Lion and Snow Leopard. Its super easy and wont hurt your machine at all and it will still run with the 2,1 Firmware on your stock processors and you can flash it back to a 1, 1 if you want just as easy. Note: when you flash the firmware you will need to restart your machine 2 times to get the second Xeon to show up but it will and does every time. So dont freak if you dont see the second processor on the first reboot.
It is also a good idea to reset pram command+option+p+r keys on reboot after the firmware flash.
The cheapest place on the web to purchase X 5365 3.0 Ghz Clovertown xeons. Currently ranging from $148.00 to 210.00 per X 5365 Xeon New. Buy two. They will send you a matched set if you buy two. There are only 3 versions of the X 5365's. My sSPEC on my two are SLAED. It is very important there the same sSPEC. It is printed right on the top of the Xeon Chip itself.
Oh one more thing I almost forgot you will need a really long 9" 3mm hex key wrench which you can buy on amazon for about 4 bucks, to remove the Xeon heat syncs.
Also use Artic Silver Heat sync paste also available at amazon for your heat syncs... After a thorough cleaning of the old paste off your heat syncs for your new Xeons.
I hope you read the part where Anand burned out the CPU mobo the first time. Apple has used chips with no plastic outer shell for better heat transfer, and when the heatsinks are tightened all the way, the chips, and board, shorted out.
Does this fix the Safari issue where if you search Google and then click on the links displayed in the results, the results show in the history as garbage?
I hope you read the part where Anand burned out the CPU mobo the first time. Apple has used chips with no plastic outer shell for better heat transfer, and when the heatsinks are tightened all the way, the chips, and board, shorted out.
Although the attraction of doing is obvious, I would not be planning to upgrade the processors. We have seven Mac Pros in service currently, and it would be administratively convenient simply to to remove the ML limitation in the oldest one.
I hope you read the part where Anand burned out the CPU mobo the first time. Apple has used chips with no plastic outer shell for better heat transfer, and when the heatsinks are tightened all the way, the chips, and board, shorted out.
I was reading everything I could find about it and the CPU switch is pretty difficult apparently. I was thinking of trying it but now I decided as long as the machine in question is still in production I don't want to risk ruining it. I looked on ebay and you can basically buy the lowest machine for around $400 and then another $400 for the fastest new CPUs and a few hundred more for new hard drives and memory which totals out at over $1,000 just for an experiment. I don't think I will screw around with that right now. If the new ones come out soon I'll be getting one and then I can just hand down my current Mac Pro. At that point I may give it a try once the oldest machine has been decommissioned.
Although the attraction of doing is obvious, I would not be planning to upgrade the processors. We have seven Mac Pros in service currently, and it would be administratively convenient simply to to remove the ML limitation in the oldest one.
I have the 2009 model, and I was about to do it when I read his article back then. The problem is that it's difficult, even for experienced electronics people such as myself to tell when to stop tightening. He could tell as he blew it out before. But the web site paid for it. I would have to pay for the mistake myself, and it's too much money to take the chance.
Now, if a third party, such as Newer, for example, offered the service at a reasonable price, I might take them up on it. But prices to do this are way too high.
Does this fix the Safari issue where if you search Google and then click on the links displayed in the results, the results show in the history as garbage?
And before people start blaming Google, note that other browsers don't have this issue.
Nope, just checked. Dammit.
I was also waiting for a fix another thing I submitted long ago. When you download a file froma link, the "safari icon" that jumps from the link location down to the Downloads folder in the Dock — Works fine but when connected to second monitor, the animation jumps from some random spot on the display that has the Dock, but not necessarily the Safari window if it's in another display. This happens when I have my ACD30" plugged in, which is physically (and virtually) arranged directly above my MBP's screen. The Safari window is on the 30" above with the system menu, the Dock is down on my MBP screen below.
I was reading everything I could find about it and the CPU switch is pretty difficult apparently. I was thinking of trying it but now I decided as long as the machine in question is still in production I don't want to risk ruining it. I looked on ebay and you can basically buy the lowest machine for around $400 and then another $400 for the fastest new CPUs and a few hundred more for new hard drives and memory which totals out at over $1,000 just for an experiment. I don't think I will screw around with that right now. If the new ones come out soon I'll be getting one and then I can just hand down my current Mac Pro. At that point I may give it a try once the oldest machine has been decommissioned.
I think Cook said in the spring. I hope that's right. I'll wait a few weeks to see if there are any show stoppers. But this had better be a REALLY good upgrade. I expect Express 3, two Thunderbolt ports, several USB 3 ports, at least one FW800 port, though that can go if I could get a card. USB 3 cards don't work properly in the Mac Pro now. At least 4 drive bays, and maybe more if we get 2.5" bays. I also expect at least one optical bay, and hopefully two. A bigger power supply to support newer graphics cards, with two four pin power cables for a card. At least three card slots. Possibly, though it's still pretty expensive, Ethernet 10G. One port, at least, and one 1G port, if we can't have two 10G ports. Remember that Apple has introduced the fastest Ethernet standards when they were still quite expensive, so it's not an impossible dream. I also expect Apple to support 801.ac. New routers for it as well, of course.
I hope you read the part where Anand burned out the CPU mobo the first time. Apple has used chips with no plastic outer shell for better heat transfer, and when the heatsinks are tightened all the way, the chips, and board, shorted out.
Oh, a TopTip. If I ever feel my MP is slow, I'll save to buy a new one and won't be doing any pimpin'. Thanks.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by eksodos
OS X 10.7 and 10.8 meanwhile run really badly on older hardware with 2GB of RAM. I find performance pretty average with even 4GB RAM. Bumping it up to 8GB and OS X feels a lot more usable. OS X is now 64 bit only. So Apple has moved in the opposite direction to Microsoft in requiring faster computers and modern CPUs with each update.
Doing anything on 2GB of RAM sucks. Most apps need a chunk more than they used to as well, so it's not like even if Mountain Lion only ate up a gig and left the rest for everything else you'd be happy. RAM is cheap now and is a huge bottleneck for older machines trying to run newer software when you're dealing with those amounts of memory.
Excellent post! Don't need to do this myself as I'm on a 5,1 but it's very informative for those who never thought about a hardware pimp, so to speak. And props to your 'don't freak out if...' part; that is always such welcome info before doing a surgery like this.
Noticed that too. Though I must admit, I upgraded my 6GB when I ordered PCIeSSD card from OWC, only because it was cheap. Turned out I don't need more RAM as I watch AM occasionally, and don't get a lot of page outs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fastasleep
I haven't done any concrete testing yet, but on my first battery outing on 10.8.3 and I'm seeing numbers back to Snow Leopard levels. Been on battery for an hour and a half and it still says I have another 4+ remaining. Probably won't actually be that much, but prior to this update, lately I've been taking my Mac out on battery and immediately seeing ~3 hrs and dropping rapidly, sometimes not even getting that much out of it. Was waiting to get a new SSD and do a completely fresh install of everything and see if that fixed it since dealing with this after Lion and Mountain Lion, but I'll take this for now.
FWIW:
2011 MBP quad 2.3 i7, 16gb/7200 750gb HD
So not a scientific test, but it just finally died on me after about 5 hours with a 30 minute sleep in the middleish. That's minimal brightness and mostly web/terminal and a few background apps running for the most part, but in general I haven't gotten anywhere close to that since 10.6. Usually closer to half that before it would sleep. I'd say that's an improvement!
BTW - coconutBattery says current capacity is 5588/6900 with 193 load cycles after 24 months, so I am factoring a bit of that wear and tear into these positive results.
Quote:
Originally Posted by eksodos
This is one area where Microsoft has done a much better job than Apple. Microsoft's operating systems used to get progressively more bloated and resource hungry with every release. But since Windows 7 they have done an outstanding job of making their stuff run on older computers. Windows 8 runs perfectly on an ageing 6 year old PC here. I hate Windows 8 personally, but it does run remarkably well in terms of performance on older hardware.
OS X 10.7 and 10.8 meanwhile run really badly on older hardware with 2GB of RAM. I find performance pretty average with even 4GB RAM. Bumping it up to 8GB and OS X feels a lot more usable. OS X is now 64 bit only. So Apple has moved in the opposite direction to Microsoft in requiring faster computers and modern CPUs with each update.
But windows 8 is exactly the same OS that was 7, vista and XP.
Apple is making a lot of under the hood improvements/new features that demand newer hardware. You need 2010 processors (or newer) for airplay, there's no way around it, you need full 64 bit compatibility for OSX, Apple is adding tons of web services/new processes for the OS and they are making an amazing job for the thing to be as light as it is (10.8.3 vs 10.6.8. There's hundred more processes and services). You can buy a 2gb ram air (1333mhz and more) and ML will run just fine. Apple is just cleaning things up now, but they added tons of features/processes on 10.7 and 10.8. I must say, 10.8.3 on a macbook air 2011 is lightyears ahead of any windows laptop being sold right now...
It's like going from a huyara to a fiat punto.
On the other hand, what do you have with windows?
"Win7: 64bit memory extension plugin for 32bit graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8bit operating system coded for a 4bit microprocessor". Windows 8 just changes the interface. Give it a few cycles so it creates more and more cache, more updates etc and you will see the thing starting to crawl... Over 40gb of shit!
It's a tradeoff and isn't worthy. Software companies know that they can't toy with Apple anymore. As Apple becomes more powerful/builds their position, you will see companies like Adobe s*cking it up and delivering timely updates for Apple. After all, if they use the best laptops for work, they need rMBP
Windows is a second tier OS, a second tier option. Now more than ever.
Quote:
Originally Posted by eksodos
This is one area where Microsoft has done a much better job than Apple. Microsoft's operating systems used to get progressively more bloated and resource hungry with every release. But since Windows 7 they have done an outstanding job of making their stuff run on older computers. Windows 8 runs perfectly on an ageing 6 year old PC here. I hate Windows 8 personally, but it does run remarkably well in terms of performance on older hardware.
OS X 10.7 and 10.8 meanwhile run really badly on older hardware with 2GB of RAM. I find performance pretty average with even 4GB RAM. Bumping it up to 8GB and OS X feels a lot more usable. OS X is now 64 bit only. So Apple has moved in the opposite direction to Microsoft in requiring faster computers and modern CPUs with each update.
So in other words...you want Apple to make OS X backwards compatibility with older hardware? I think this is where Microsoft fails. They try to make everything backwards compatible and it hurts their progress. Apple is always pushing forward and I think thats a good thing. I think it creates less of a hassle for Apple and makes it so they can keep pushing forward with new technologies. Anything thats 4yrs old or newer runs OS X 10.8 just fine, even with 2 GB of RAM. If you have anything older than 4yrs old its time to upgrade anyways.
You also have to remember Microsoft waits FOREVER to release a new OS and when they do release it, its not quality stuff. You don't see people flying to stores (online or physical) to get Windows 8 now do you? People are very unhappy with the software. There's a big difference here. If people don't like the software thats being put out and doesn't really matter what hardware it runs on now does it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mechanic
Accelerate Your mac can help you with all that. http://www.xlr8yourmac.com/
<snip>
Thanks for that really helpful post. Although I'll probably still replace our old MP 1,1 when its replacement emerges, it would still be nice to update and repurpose it.
Did you upgrade the processors simply for performance reasons, or is there some compatibility issue with the originals?
And isn't there one more thing to do? I believe that the original video card isn't compatible either. The "good" news is that most of them will have failed by now and been replaced with something better anyway! On ours I used an Apple version Radeon 5770, $250 or so from Amazon.
Your comment needs some clarity. You have a $4200.00 mac pro and it won't run 10.8, with out hic ups , right? Um, what year is it?
Now, I can on say I spent $5000.00 on a kanga and that it won't run 10.8.
Ok, don't come on here trolling!
Quote:
Originally Posted by maccherry
Your comment needs some clarity. You have a $4200.00 mac pro and it won't run 10.8, with out hic ups , right? Um, what year is it?
Now, I can on say I spent $5000.00 on a kanga and that it won't run 10.8.
Ok, don't come on here trolling!
Perhaps before you accuse someone of trolling you should take the trouble to read and understand the subsequent posts. The issues have already been identified and discussed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer
I have no pity for someone with a 5 year old box complaining about EFI 32bit limitations on the firmware of that system. It wasn't until several years later that UEFI 64 bit was adopted.
Coming up on seven years old in August. Time keeps on slippin, slippin into the future...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Conrail
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer
I have no pity for someone with a 5 year old box complaining about EFI 32bit limitations on the firmware of that system. It wasn't until several years later that UEFI 64 bit was adopted.
Coming up on seven years old in August. Time keeps on slippin, slippin into the future...
Yeah, if Apple didn't make such industrial grade hardware we would all have to buy new equipment every couple years. The Mac Pro will probably run for a few more decades. As long as you are content with the current software, just keep using it.
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
The ability to redeem iTunes gift cards in the Mac App Store using Mac?s built-in camera
This is interesting in that it's a weird addition. Hopefully this will expand. Greatly. Hopefully this is the start of an Apple-created, curated, and approved solution for photoscanning all sorts of things, from gift cards to checks to those stupid QR codes.
Boot Camp support for installing Windows 8
FINALLY. Maybe I'll be able to actually restart my computer now instead of shutting it down every time I leave Windows.
Includes Safari 6.0.3
????????
OS X 10.8.3 is a 540.46MB download (793.69MB for the Combo version)…
What the heck happened to delta updating?
I hope you read the part where Anand burned out the CPU mobo the first time. Apple has used chips with no plastic outer shell for better heat transfer, and when the heatsinks are tightened all the way, the chips, and board, shorted out.
Does this fix the Safari issue where if you search Google and then click on the links displayed in the results, the results show in the history as garbage?
http://ask.metafilter.com/201154/Google-results-arent-recorded-inSafari-history
And before people start blaming Google, note that other browsers don't have this issue.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
I hope you read the part where Anand burned out the CPU mobo the first time. Apple has used chips with no plastic outer shell for better heat transfer, and when the heatsinks are tightened all the way, the chips, and board, shorted out.
Although the attraction of doing is obvious, I would not be planning to upgrade the processors. We have seven Mac Pros in service currently, and it would be administratively convenient simply to to remove the ML limitation in the oldest one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
I hope you read the part where Anand burned out the CPU mobo the first time. Apple has used chips with no plastic outer shell for better heat transfer, and when the heatsinks are tightened all the way, the chips, and board, shorted out.
I was reading everything I could find about it and the CPU switch is pretty difficult apparently. I was thinking of trying it but now I decided as long as the machine in question is still in production I don't want to risk ruining it. I looked on ebay and you can basically buy the lowest machine for around $400 and then another $400 for the fastest new CPUs and a few hundred more for new hard drives and memory which totals out at over $1,000 just for an experiment. I don't think I will screw around with that right now. If the new ones come out soon I'll be getting one and then I can just hand down my current Mac Pro. At that point I may give it a try once the oldest machine has been decommissioned.
Now, if a third party, such as Newer, for example, offered the service at a reasonable price, I might take them up on it. But prices to do this are way too high.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggar
Does this fix the Safari issue where if you search Google and then click on the links displayed in the results, the results show in the history as garbage?
http://ask.metafilter.com/201154/Google-results-arent-recorded-inSafari-history
And before people start blaming Google, note that other browsers don't have this issue.
Nope, just checked. Dammit.
I was also waiting for a fix another thing I submitted long ago. When you download a file froma link, the "safari icon" that jumps from the link location down to the Downloads folder in the Dock — Works fine but when connected to second monitor, the animation jumps from some random spot on the display that has the Dock, but not necessarily the Safari window if it's in another display. This happens when I have my ACD30" plugged in, which is physically (and virtually) arranged directly above my MBP's screen. The Safari window is on the 30" above with the system menu, the Dock is down on my MBP screen below.
Not fixed in 10.8.3, resubmitted the bug...
I think Cook said in the spring. I hope that's right. I'll wait a few weeks to see if there are any show stoppers. But this had better be a REALLY good upgrade. I expect Express 3, two Thunderbolt ports, several USB 3 ports, at least one FW800 port, though that can go if I could get a card. USB 3 cards don't work properly in the Mac Pro now. At least 4 drive bays, and maybe more if we get 2.5" bays. I also expect at least one optical bay, and hopefully two. A bigger power supply to support newer graphics cards, with two four pin power cables for a card. At least three card slots. Possibly, though it's still pretty expensive, Ethernet 10G. One port, at least, and one 1G port, if we can't have two 10G ports. Remember that Apple has introduced the fastest Ethernet standards when they were still quite expensive, so it's not an impossible dream. I also expect Apple to support 801.ac. New routers for it as well, of course.
I'm sure you can think of things I've missed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
I'm sure you can think of things I've missed.
No you pretty much nailed it. We'll see. I'm ready for a computer to last me another 5 years.
Nice physical setup!
Oh, a TopTip. If I ever feel my MP is slow, I'll save to buy a new one and won't be doing any pimpin'. Thanks.
Ah, you're going to be so happy when Apple releases a new model. Good times ahead.