During this last year I visited many forums like AI and was generally treated with contempt by some of the pompous asses who spend their time here. I know they're a minority, but it was shameless nonetheless. Someone even called me a PC fanboy. Nice way to attract switchers, eh?
I'm sorry you got treated poorly but as you said they are only a minority. I'm a new switcher to Mac and my experience has been very different.
But I don't why this should really affect anyone, the most arrogant computer users I have ever met happen to be all Windows fanboys, they are also huge trolls who come to Mac sites to call everyone homosexuals, I personally have never seen any Mac user go to a Windows site and start insulting all the users... (I was a Windows user until a few months back and spent lots of time at sites where the majority if not all have been Windows user.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kukito
Then there was the distasteful Microsoft bashing at a conference dedicated to developers. Microsoft happens to be one the Mac's biggest developers. Very tacky. I don't blame MS for pulling support for VBA in their next version of Office for Mac. I'm also not at all happy about Apple's neglect for the environment, the iMac's unrecyclable monitor
I'm sorry Apple poking fun at Microsoft was such a huge deal for your, I guess you have never teased a person in your life anyways IMHO Apples teasing was not distasteful and it has nothing to do with Microsoft pulling support for VBA...
Quote:
Yeah, we have to sit through Apple Keynotes bashing our company, but it’s kinda fun putting on a Darth Vader helmet and using our force powers to throw Dell desktop machines at Windows Office guys.
The Mac BU guys (and Gals) don't seem to have a problem with it ... read there new bog maybe you won't make such assumptions in the future.
I guess you haven't been keeping up, it has been proven that they are not sweatshops, plus if you haven't noticed most product now in days are made in places like China.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kukito
Jobs' attempted demolition of the Jackling House, etc. The Apple has lost its luster. As much as I hate Microsoft, Apple doesn't seem to be doing much better. At least Bill Gates gives substantial amounts of money to worthwhile charities. Steve Jobs is just happy being a prick. I will continue to have an open mind about the Mac, and recommend it to people for whom I feel it is a better platform, but after a year of careful consideration I just don't feel it's the best platform for me.
About the Jackling House I don't know anything so I can't comment on it, but about Bill Gates ya he gives huge amounts of money to charity but perhaps he does it to make his conscience feel better since he did steal plenty of money from everyone by abusing his companies power... that or he wants the places he gives charity to feel debt to him to buy his products in a future...
And if you don't believe me he donated 10 million for education here where I live to buy.. guess? Yup computers running Windows and Software developed by Microsoft.
Looks like a great place for a little fire. 10 gallons of kerosene (with a quart of gas mixed in) and a match would solve that problem. California has a much greater heritage of land-owners rights more so than any heritage this building represents. The landowner's heritage to manage your own affairs without some group of do-gooder's suing you in court.
I applaud Steve standing up to these people who contribute nothing to society other than lining some lawyer's pocket, to protect a worthless building that means absolutely nothing to anybody.
In rememberance I invite you to listen to my playlist on your ipod. I would post it here, but it's really short and easy to do. Just put your iPod on repeat on this one song.
i was planning on getting a 20" at some point in the near future and if the price is right i'll happy spend a few extra pennies for a bigger HD screen.
i'd imagine the 17" will become the eductation only model.
so really it's only the price that's in question...
....if they're gonna use merom as a drop in replacement i doubt the insides will change much, the 23" cinema display (which i'm guessing they'll use the same panels as) have recently dropped in price and the fact that the last few apple products have been released at (surprisingly) competitive prices (i'm thinking mac pro...i expected it to be alot more) i've got my fingers crossed for it not costing too much more than the current 20"
while conroe would have been nice from my experience the current core duos are fast enough for (my) everyday use so i'm sure merom will do me just fine
as an upgrade from a 12" powerbook this all sounds very nice.
It won't be a Mac, unfortunately, but I will be able to overclock it to my heart's content, something that Apple doesn't allow. I got a high-end motherboard, a high-end case, a high-end CPU and it all cost me less than $800.
Yes and its unlikely there will ever be a $800 barebox mac. So enjoy.
Quote:
I was looking forward to switching back to Mac since it's the platform that got me interested in computers in the first place, back in 1985. I was a Mac evangelist then. But it just wasn't meant to be this time around. During this last year I visited many forums like AI and was generally treated with contempt by some of the pompous asses who spend their time here. I know they're a minority, but it was shameless nonetheless. Someone even called me a PC fanboy.
Please. What did you want? An engraved invitation? Any Conroe based mac would be far more expensive than your $800 rig and a mini. If you wanted a Mac you would have bought one. You didn't so you found an excuse.
Quote:
Nice way to attract switchers, eh? Then there was the distasteful Microsoft bashing at a conference dedicated to developers. Microsoft happens to be one the Mac's biggest developers. Very tacky. I don't blame MS for pulling support for VBA in their next version of Office for Mac.
Get over yourself. I'm a .NET developer. I work on a 3D project on my MBP and VS2005 is compiling in the background as I speak.
Quote:
As much as I hate Microsoft, Apple doesn't seem to be doing much better.
And why would you hate microsoft? If you do hate Microsoft I hope your $800 conroe box will primarily boot linux or better, FreeBSD.
Quote:
At least Bill Gates gives substantial amounts of money to worthwhile charities. Steve Jobs is just happy being a prick. I will continue to have an open mind about the Mac, and recommend it to people for whom I feel it is a better platform, but after a year of careful consideration I just don't feel it's the best platform for me.
I admire Bill Gates but I have no illusions about either man. Note that Rockefeller, Vanderbilt, Morgan, Carnagie, Gould and other Robber Barons of an earlier age were also very into philantrophy. Morgan one said "I owe the public nothing" but eventually donated quite a bit to art museums and Harvard.
Jobs' intended legacy appears to me to be embodied in his companies. As such I guess he feels less philantrophic need...at least for now.
It just shows that some people don't leave an option unused to whine about their beloved headless Mac.
There, untill later in the G5 life, used to be a PowerMac in the $1299-$1599 range to fill this void, that was fine, there were no complaints about this hole in the lineup then, but the only headles Macs are a sub-$1000 Mini -- a headless laptop for all practical purposes and a Base-~$2500 workstation, if you do not see the gapeing hole in the lineup, you are fooling yourself.
You have 2 kids, you can either drive a moped or a semi, which do you choose?
It would be pretty sweet if the 20-inch was the low end at $1,299, and the 23-inch was the new high end at $1,699. Meanwhile, the 17-inch would be relegated to the education market at $799 or maybe even $699? What are the chances?
There, untill later in the G5 life, used to be a PowerMac in the $1299-$1599 range to fill this void, that was fine, there were no complaints about this hole in the lineup then, but the only headles Macs are a sub-$1000 Mini -- a headless laptop for all practical purposes and a Base-~$2500 workstation, if you do not see the gapeing hole in the lineup, you are fooling yourself.
You have 2 kids, you can either drive a moped or a semi, which do you choose?
I don't fool myself but I don't believe Apple will introduce a headless iMac or a minitower soon.
I would expect a lower specced Mac Pro in this gapping hole. Either one dualcore Xeon or a Conroe.
But since Apple will introduce Merom equipped iMacs (according to AI) I'm not sure about the entire Conroe thing anymore.
I don't know if Xeon and Conroe are pin-compatible.
I doubt Apple would design a new mobo especially for this low-end Mac Pro.
And if they would why not design a minitower instead to fill the void.
Damn, I start advocating an Apple branded minitower...
Quote:
Originally Posted by DHagan4755
It would be pretty sweet if the 20-inch was the low end at $1,299, and the 23-inch was the new high end at $1,699. Meanwhile, the 17-inch would be relegated to the education market at $799 or maybe even $699? What are the chances?
Slimmer than Nicole Richie.
I expect the 23" will have the first gen 20"iMacG5 pricepoint of $1,899 or a little higher.
The 20"iMac can come down to $1,499 and the 17" to $1,199.
I don't expect the edu 17"iMac to go down in price soon and certainly not to $799.
There, untill later in the G5 life, used to be a PowerMac in the $1299-$1599 range to fill this void
Apple rarely had a $1299 headless option. There was what? One? I forget the time period but it was for a couple years? It was a G4 when the G5 were out? Somehow I don't think you'd be happy with a crippled $1299 Yonah tower.
Mostly $1499+ with the majority IMHO on the + side.
I don't fool myself but I don't believe Apple will introduce a headless iMac or a minitower soon.
I would expect a lower specced Mac Pro in this gapping hole. Either one dualcore Xeon or a Conroe.
But since Apple will introduce Merom equipped iMacs (according to AI) I'm not sure about the entire Conroe thing anymore.
I don't know if Xeon and Conroe are pin-compatible.
I doubt Apple would design a new mobo especially for this low-end Mac Pro.
Intel never made a non-Xeon branded chip that would work in a Xeon socket. Besides, the chipsets for Xeon are expensive, so it would be well worth making a separate board for it
And what's your point? If you buy a 23" iMac today, you'll pay a premium for the latest display, not "outdated, cheap enough" prices. When I buy a monitor, I plan to get 5+ years use out of it; it's only the computers that are outdated by next year. I have a 10 year old 20" CRT, that I still use from time to time, which has about the same resoultion as the 23" cinema display. Let's say I paid $1000 for it 10 years ago. If in the meantime, I had bought 4 iMacs, I'd have thrown away ~$2000 just on the throw-away built-in displays. You can't even hook anything up to them. For about the same price today, you can buy up to 1080p LCD TV monitors with HDCP that connect to everything and will for years to come. That's what I upgraded to. Buy a good monitor today and you can keep it for years to come. Buy an iMac today and you'll want a new one next year. This is just even more absurd with a 23" display that could easily do HDTV and have plenty of other uses.
A speed bump and a price drop on the mini would be great, but Apple can do that anytime without slowing their delivery schedule (which is the cause for the rumors).
That's a fallacious argument.
If you would buy a new machine every year, or every two years, then you can certainly afford a medium $2,500 Mac Pro. Then you could keep it for four years. Since it's so much more powerful than any mini tower Apple would have, if they did have one, after four years it would still be very usuable. It would cost no more over that time.
It also would take little more floor or desk space than a mini tower would take, as the footprint would be only a few square inches more, and the height takes up no room.
That would cost about as much as two 23" iMac's over the same time period.
...still have my 17" ACD hooked to my G4 733, my 22" ACD hooked to my Dual GHz G4 and my 23" ACD hooked to my original Dual 2 GHz G5 and planning on a 30" ACD for my 3 GHZ Mac Pro...
Yes, but note their own words on that very first page:
"The high power dissipation levels of the high clock rate parts and small exposed area of the PPC970FX die dictate the need to carefully select the heatsink, thermal interface materials, and mounting methods for each intended application. "
If one looks at the power disapation of cpu's it can be seen that the power usage goes up more quickly than the speed does.
So, you can look at a 1.8 GHz part at 34 watts, 2 GHz part at 39 watts, a 2.2 GHz part at 48 watts, and a 2.5 GHz part at 65 watts to see what is happening. A 2.7 part is about 90 watts. These are NOT all maximum ratings.
The reason why this is so, is because power is not linearly related to the voltage used to drive the chips, and the usual way to make them run faster.
It's surprising that they even have that number in an open document, because IBM normally only releases max ratings on a non-disclosure basis. Their public ratings are all average ratings. And while thermal dissipation ratings are very important, the power useage ratings are also important, and are about 15 to 20% higher.
FB-DIMMS are faster, but they have a much higher latency due to the memory buffer/controller built-into the chip. It's complex, but depending on where in the line a particular chip or Dimm is, the latency could be more or less, but will still be high. It's that latency that causes problems.
DDR2 has the same problem relating to DDR1. It's faster, but has greater latency. That's why equally spec'd parts for speed will see DDR1 being faster overall. 400 DDR1 DIMMs and 533 DDR2 DIMMs perform about the same. At 667 speeds DDR2 pulls ahead, as that speed is difficult to make in a DDR1 DIMM, which is the reason why DDR2 came out.
The same thing is true for FB-DIMM. They can be made in a higher speed part than can DDR2?eventually.
Right now, the 5000 chipset and cpu's using, it can handle FB-DIMMs running at 800 speeds, but there aren't any machines using those very new, and rare, parts yet. When they do, the experience using FB-DIMMs will be much better. When they get to 1000 next year, things will be even better, and will leave regular DIMMs in the dust!
By the way. The new 16GB DIMMs cost $15,000 apiece. That's not an error!
It's an interesting point. As there haven't been many 64 bit programs out there, other than the scientific and accounting ones, we don't know just what to expect from software using 64 bits.
While I don't expect much in the way of performance, there could be other innovative functionality enabled by the wider path.
I remember a long time ago when the 16 bit machines came out. Many were saying that they served no purpose because, after all, how much faster did we need our (non menu driven) word processors (anyone remember XYWrite) to go?
The same thing happened upon the 32 bit rollout.
What happened wasn't that things got faster because of the wider paths, but we saw software that couldn't be written on the older machines, for various reasons.
We'll just have to wait and see if the same things can happen here as well.
It just takes one insightful person to see a way around the architecture that others don't see, to make this happen.
It would be pretty sweet if the 20-inch was the low end at $1,299, and the 23-inch was the new high end at $1,699. Meanwhile, the 17-inch would be relegated to the education market at $799 or maybe even $699? What are the chances?
if APPLE can get very good price from suppliers for their Displays, that is possible.
17" dead cheap nowadays, 20" just picking up in the market.
(i guess cinema displays are costlier now compared to other displays from dell, viewsonic & lg, philips by atleast $200)
whether to reduce the price or to include better parts like GPU, increased HDD size and so on...
Sigh! You know, these site names get more confusing all the time. I'm trying to respond in the middle of my daughters birthday party, with both her, and her friends, constantly popping into my computer room, asking me what I'm doing, hoping it's something interesting (I guess this doesn't count )
So, you're right, I am getting them mixed up.
Ok, macrumors is the one that repeats everyone else's info, macosrumors is the hopeless one, and macosxrumors is a decent site overall.
I hope that straightens things out before I get another rush of teenage girls in here, and I become confused again!
You're complaining about teenage girls walking into your room???
Anyway, about the screens, if apple are ordering enough 23" screens to put in iMacs as well as Cinema Displays now, then thats a big increase in their order, and probably cheaper per unit than when they were just for the Cinema Displays, it all counts to getting the price down for the 23" iMac. So here's hoping for a straight swap from 17/20" to 20/23" at the same prices :P . 17" for education.
Comments
During this last year I visited many forums like AI and was generally treated with contempt by some of the pompous asses who spend their time here. I know they're a minority, but it was shameless nonetheless. Someone even called me a PC fanboy.
I'm sorry you got treated poorly but as you said they are only a minority. I'm a new switcher to Mac and my experience has been very different.
But I don't why this should really affect anyone, the most arrogant computer users I have ever met happen to be all Windows fanboys, they are also huge trolls who come to Mac sites to call everyone homosexuals, I personally have never seen any Mac user go to a Windows site and start insulting all the users... (I was a Windows user until a few months back and spent lots of time at sites where the majority if not all have been Windows user.)
Then there was the distasteful Microsoft bashing at a conference dedicated to developers. Microsoft happens to be one the Mac's biggest developers. Very tacky. I don't blame MS for pulling support for VBA in their next version of Office for Mac. I'm also not at all happy about Apple's neglect for the environment, the iMac's unrecyclable monitor
I'm sorry Apple poking fun at Microsoft was such a huge deal for your, I guess you have never teased a person in your life anyways IMHO Apples teasing was not distasteful and it has nothing to do with Microsoft pulling support for VBA...
Yeah, we have to sit through Apple Keynotes bashing our company, but it’s kinda fun putting on a Darth Vader helmet and using our force powers to throw Dell desktop machines at Windows Office guys.
The Mac BU guys (and Gals) don't seem to have a problem with it ... read there new bog maybe you won't make such assumptions in the future.
Quote I quoted (hehe) http://blogs.msdn.com/macmojo/archiv...01/736025.aspx
Main Page of the Blog http://blogs.msdn.com/macmojo/default.aspx
the sweat shops
I guess you haven't been keeping up, it has been proven that they are not sweatshops, plus if you haven't noticed most product now in days are made in places like China.
Jobs' attempted demolition of the Jackling House, etc. The Apple has lost its luster. As much as I hate Microsoft, Apple doesn't seem to be doing much better. At least Bill Gates gives substantial amounts of money to worthwhile charities. Steve Jobs is just happy being a prick. I will continue to have an open mind about the Mac, and recommend it to people for whom I feel it is a better platform, but after a year of careful consideration I just don't feel it's the best platform for me.
About the Jackling House I don't know anything so I can't comment on it, but about Bill Gates ya he gives huge amounts of money to charity but perhaps he does it to make his conscience feel better since he did steal plenty of money from everyone by abusing his companies power... that or he wants the places he gives charity to feel debt to him to buy his products in a future...
And if you don't believe me he donated 10 million for education here where I live to buy.. guess? Yup computers running Windows and Software developed by Microsoft.
Jobs' attempted demolition of the Jackling House, etc.
Looks like a great place for a little fire. 10 gallons of kerosene (with a quart of gas mixed in) and a match would solve that problem. California has a much greater heritage of land-owners rights more so than any heritage this building represents. The landowner's heritage to manage your own affairs without some group of do-gooder's suing you in court.
I applaud Steve standing up to these people who contribute nothing to society other than lining some lawyer's pocket, to protect a worthless building that means absolutely nothing to anybody.
In rememberance I invite you to listen to my playlist on your ipod. I would post it here, but it's really short and easy to do. Just put your iPod on repeat on this one song.
"Burn Baby Burn, Jackling House Inferno"
just my 2 cents
Why? you can't fit more than 2GB RAM anyway?
Extra memory registers, more SIMD power (SSE4), crunching bigger numbers, macro-op fusion...
Merom brings more to the table than using more than 4 gb of RAM.
i was planning on getting a 20" at some point in the near future and if the price is right i'll happy spend a few extra pennies for a bigger HD screen.
i'd imagine the 17" will become the eductation only model.
so really it's only the price that's in question...
....if they're gonna use merom as a drop in replacement i doubt the insides will change much, the 23" cinema display (which i'm guessing they'll use the same panels as) have recently dropped in price and the fact that the last few apple products have been released at (surprisingly) competitive prices (i'm thinking mac pro...i expected it to be alot more) i've got my fingers crossed for it not costing too much more than the current 20"
while conroe would have been nice from my experience the current core duos are fast enough for (my) everyday use so i'm sure merom will do me just fine
as an upgrade from a 12" powerbook this all sounds very nice.
It won't be a Mac, unfortunately, but I will be able to overclock it to my heart's content, something that Apple doesn't allow. I got a high-end motherboard, a high-end case, a high-end CPU and it all cost me less than $800.
Yes and its unlikely there will ever be a $800 barebox mac. So enjoy.
I was looking forward to switching back to Mac since it's the platform that got me interested in computers in the first place, back in 1985. I was a Mac evangelist then. But it just wasn't meant to be this time around. During this last year I visited many forums like AI and was generally treated with contempt by some of the pompous asses who spend their time here. I know they're a minority, but it was shameless nonetheless. Someone even called me a PC fanboy.
Please. What did you want? An engraved invitation? Any Conroe based mac would be far more expensive than your $800 rig and a mini. If you wanted a Mac you would have bought one. You didn't so you found an excuse.
Nice way to attract switchers, eh? Then there was the distasteful Microsoft bashing at a conference dedicated to developers. Microsoft happens to be one the Mac's biggest developers. Very tacky. I don't blame MS for pulling support for VBA in their next version of Office for Mac.
Get over yourself. I'm a .NET developer. I work on a 3D project on my MBP and VS2005 is compiling in the background as I speak.
As much as I hate Microsoft, Apple doesn't seem to be doing much better.
And why would you hate microsoft? If you do hate Microsoft I hope your $800 conroe box will primarily boot linux or better, FreeBSD.
At least Bill Gates gives substantial amounts of money to worthwhile charities. Steve Jobs is just happy being a prick. I will continue to have an open mind about the Mac, and recommend it to people for whom I feel it is a better platform, but after a year of careful consideration I just don't feel it's the best platform for me.
I admire Bill Gates but I have no illusions about either man. Note that Rockefeller, Vanderbilt, Morgan, Carnagie, Gould and other Robber Barons of an earlier age were also very into philantrophy. Morgan one said "I owe the public nothing" but eventually donated quite a bit to art museums and Harvard.
Jobs' intended legacy appears to me to be embodied in his companies. As such I guess he feels less philantrophic need...at least for now.
Vinea
No it doesn't.
It just shows that some people don't leave an option unused to whine about their beloved headless Mac.
There, untill later in the G5 life, used to be a PowerMac in the $1299-$1599 range to fill this void, that was fine, there were no complaints about this hole in the lineup then, but the only headles Macs are a sub-$1000 Mini -- a headless laptop for all practical purposes and a Base-~$2500 workstation, if you do not see the gapeing hole in the lineup, you are fooling yourself.
You have 2 kids, you can either drive a moped or a semi, which do you choose?
There, untill later in the G5 life, used to be a PowerMac in the $1299-$1599 range to fill this void, that was fine, there were no complaints about this hole in the lineup then, but the only headles Macs are a sub-$1000 Mini -- a headless laptop for all practical purposes and a Base-~$2500 workstation, if you do not see the gapeing hole in the lineup, you are fooling yourself.
You have 2 kids, you can either drive a moped or a semi, which do you choose?
I don't fool myself but I don't believe Apple will introduce a headless iMac or a minitower soon.
I would expect a lower specced Mac Pro in this gapping hole. Either one dualcore Xeon or a Conroe.
But since Apple will introduce Merom equipped iMacs (according to AI) I'm not sure about the entire Conroe thing anymore.
I don't know if Xeon and Conroe are pin-compatible.
I doubt Apple would design a new mobo especially for this low-end Mac Pro.
And if they would why not design a minitower instead to fill the void.
Damn, I start advocating an Apple branded minitower...
It would be pretty sweet if the 20-inch was the low end at $1,299, and the 23-inch was the new high end at $1,699. Meanwhile, the 17-inch would be relegated to the education market at $799 or maybe even $699? What are the chances?
Slimmer than Nicole Richie.
I expect the 23" will have the first gen 20"iMacG5 pricepoint of $1,899 or a little higher.
The 20"iMac can come down to $1,499 and the 17" to $1,199.
I don't expect the edu 17"iMac to go down in price soon and certainly not to $799.
There, untill later in the G5 life, used to be a PowerMac in the $1299-$1599 range to fill this void
Apple rarely had a $1299 headless option. There was what? One? I forget the time period but it was for a couple years? It was a G4 when the G5 were out? Somehow I don't think you'd be happy with a crippled $1299 Yonah tower.
Mostly $1499+ with the majority IMHO on the + side.
Vinea
I don't fool myself but I don't believe Apple will introduce a headless iMac or a minitower soon.
I would expect a lower specced Mac Pro in this gapping hole. Either one dualcore Xeon or a Conroe.
But since Apple will introduce Merom equipped iMacs (according to AI) I'm not sure about the entire Conroe thing anymore.
I don't know if Xeon and Conroe are pin-compatible.
I doubt Apple would design a new mobo especially for this low-end Mac Pro.
Intel never made a non-Xeon branded chip that would work in a Xeon socket. Besides, the chipsets for Xeon are expensive, so it would be well worth making a separate board for it
And what's your point? If you buy a 23" iMac today, you'll pay a premium for the latest display, not "outdated, cheap enough" prices. When I buy a monitor, I plan to get 5+ years use out of it; it's only the computers that are outdated by next year. I have a 10 year old 20" CRT, that I still use from time to time, which has about the same resoultion as the 23" cinema display. Let's say I paid $1000 for it 10 years ago. If in the meantime, I had bought 4 iMacs, I'd have thrown away ~$2000 just on the throw-away built-in displays. You can't even hook anything up to them. For about the same price today, you can buy up to 1080p LCD TV monitors with HDCP that connect to everything and will for years to come. That's what I upgraded to. Buy a good monitor today and you can keep it for years to come. Buy an iMac today and you'll want a new one next year. This is just even more absurd with a 23" display that could easily do HDTV and have plenty of other uses.
A speed bump and a price drop on the mini would be great, but Apple can do that anytime without slowing their delivery schedule (which is the cause for the rumors).
That's a fallacious argument.
If you would buy a new machine every year, or every two years, then you can certainly afford a medium $2,500 Mac Pro. Then you could keep it for four years. Since it's so much more powerful than any mini tower Apple would have, if they did have one, after four years it would still be very usuable. It would cost no more over that time.
It also would take little more floor or desk space than a mini tower would take, as the footprint would be only a few square inches more, and the height takes up no room.
That would cost about as much as two 23" iMac's over the same time period.
Mind you, this is MacOSXRumors we talk about, NOT MacOSRumors.
Yeah, I didn't notice the lack of the X.
But macosrumors is basically just repeating what is found on other sites. They rarely come up with anything on their own.
But, macosXrumors?ugh!
Yeah, I didn't notice the lack of the X.
But macosrumors is basically just repeating what is found on other sites. They rarely come up with anything on their own.
But, macosXrumors?ugh!
Now you're completely confusing the two.
The 2.0Ghz 970FX is rated at 39W MAX by IBM. See http://www-306.ibm.com/chips/techlib...256E4B005E43EC
Yes, but note their own words on that very first page:
"The high power dissipation levels of the high clock rate parts and small exposed area of the PPC970FX die dictate the need to carefully select the heatsink, thermal interface materials, and mounting methods for each intended application. "
If one looks at the power disapation of cpu's it can be seen that the power usage goes up more quickly than the speed does.
So, you can look at a 1.8 GHz part at 34 watts, 2 GHz part at 39 watts, a 2.2 GHz part at 48 watts, and a 2.5 GHz part at 65 watts to see what is happening. A 2.7 part is about 90 watts. These are NOT all maximum ratings.
The reason why this is so, is because power is not linearly related to the voltage used to drive the chips, and the usual way to make them run faster.
It's surprising that they even have that number in an open document, because IBM normally only releases max ratings on a non-disclosure basis. Their public ratings are all average ratings. And while thermal dissipation ratings are very important, the power useage ratings are also important, and are about 15 to 20% higher.
Citation?
I read the opposite about FB-DIMM...
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...item=495&num=1
FB-DIMMS are faster, but they have a much higher latency due to the memory buffer/controller built-into the chip. It's complex, but depending on where in the line a particular chip or Dimm is, the latency could be more or less, but will still be high. It's that latency that causes problems.
DDR2 has the same problem relating to DDR1. It's faster, but has greater latency. That's why equally spec'd parts for speed will see DDR1 being faster overall. 400 DDR1 DIMMs and 533 DDR2 DIMMs perform about the same. At 667 speeds DDR2 pulls ahead, as that speed is difficult to make in a DDR1 DIMM, which is the reason why DDR2 came out.
The same thing is true for FB-DIMM. They can be made in a higher speed part than can DDR2?eventually.
Right now, the 5000 chipset and cpu's using, it can handle FB-DIMMs running at 800 speeds, but there aren't any machines using those very new, and rare, parts yet. When they do, the experience using FB-DIMMs will be much better. When they get to 1000 next year, things will be even better, and will leave regular DIMMs in the dust!
By the way. The new 16GB DIMMs cost $15,000 apiece. That's not an error!
Why? you can't fit more than 2GB RAM anyway?
It's an interesting point. As there haven't been many 64 bit programs out there, other than the scientific and accounting ones, we don't know just what to expect from software using 64 bits.
While I don't expect much in the way of performance, there could be other innovative functionality enabled by the wider path.
I remember a long time ago when the 16 bit machines came out. Many were saying that they served no purpose because, after all, how much faster did we need our (non menu driven) word processors (anyone remember XYWrite) to go?
The same thing happened upon the 32 bit rollout.
What happened wasn't that things got faster because of the wider paths, but we saw software that couldn't be written on the older machines, for various reasons.
We'll just have to wait and see if the same things can happen here as well.
It just takes one insightful person to see a way around the architecture that others don't see, to make this happen.
It would be pretty sweet if the 20-inch was the low end at $1,299, and the 23-inch was the new high end at $1,699. Meanwhile, the 17-inch would be relegated to the education market at $799 or maybe even $699? What are the chances?
if APPLE can get very good price from suppliers for their Displays, that is possible.
17" dead cheap nowadays, 20" just picking up in the market.
(i guess cinema displays are costlier now compared to other displays from dell, viewsonic & lg, philips by atleast $200)
whether to reduce the price or to include better parts like GPU, increased HDD size and so on...
Now you're completely confusing the two.
Sigh! You know, these site names get more confusing all the time. I'm trying to respond in the middle of my daughters birthday party, with both her, and her friends, constantly popping into my computer room, asking me what I'm doing, hoping it's something interesting (I guess this doesn't count
So, you're right, I am getting them mixed up.
Ok, macrumors is the one that repeats everyone else's info, macosrumors is the hopeless one, and macosxrumors is a decent site overall.
I hope that straightens things out before I get another rush of teenage girls in here, and I become confused again!
Anyway, about the screens, if apple are ordering enough 23" screens to put in iMacs as well as Cinema Displays now, then thats a big increase in their order, and probably cheaper per unit than when they were just for the Cinema Displays, it all counts to getting the price down for the 23" iMac. So here's hoping for a straight swap from 17/20" to 20/23" at the same prices :P . 17" for education.