That can't be true. The Vista security man, marketing, the wheel of fortune, the upgrade one (where PC is in a gown), the yoga one, just of the top of my head.
Here is a complete list, starting with the latest ads and going to the earliest. Apple really did start picking on Vista a lot. Note that they rarely mentioned Windows when they said Vista.
And obliterate the white plasticy Mighty Mouse as it currently exists.
That's an interesting point. With the whole lineup moving to glass and aluminium, a white plastic mouse is going to look quite odd. I guess the keys are still white plastic but it stands out quite badly.
A metal mouse wouldn't feel very good at all. Desktop users are missing out on the whole touch gestures so I reckon they have to be working on something along those lines.
If it was just a trackpad stuck onto the keyboard like the 20th Century Mac, it would simplify their input products. Just wireless keyboard or wired.
I find it surprising how close the current iMac is to this setup.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipism
They also should make it easier to get to the components. They've had plenty of time to work around the complexities of that design. The current latch mechanism on the new Mac notebooks is excellent!
Yes the hard drive, Ram, battery access is a good step forward in terms of design because it makes components that are widely considered user-replaceable easy to access. This should always be the case.
For a moment, I thought Apple were going the opposite way with the MBP but they pulled it back again. The iMac and Mini are the only machines now with drives that are very difficult to replace.
I'm not sure how they'd manage to do this with the display at all any more - the glass plate on the new Cinema screen doesn't look like it can be removed. If they went this way with the design, they'd have to have the old way of opening the back, which I personally preferred.
They may keep the components external though. If they can fit all that performance into a MBP base with a 9800GT graphics card, including keyboard, battery and trackpad, what's to stop them making a powerful miniature base that runs off a magsafe attached to a Cinema-style display?
It's just one extra cable vs an iMac but so much easier to upgrade. It might not be able to accommodate the higher end chips but they are way too expensive anyway and if the MBP is meant for 'Pro' users then surely the same components will satisfy consumer-level hardware. I really think Apple need to put a firm £1000 cap on all hardware targeted at consumers. They almost manage it with the Macbooks where they top out at £1149 but the iMac goes up to £1389. £999 is a good cap and starting the Pro hardware just above this would work. The MBP used to be £1299 but is now £1399.
The Mac Pro entry point is £1429. If they can get this down to £1299 using Core i7, it would be great.
The modular idea for the iMac keeps the lineup balanced too.
consumer = Macbook (£699-999), Pro = Macbook Pro (£1299+)
consumer = Mac module (£499-999), Pro = Mac Pro (£1299+)
BTO options close the gaps.
People will say that Apple will simply lose display sales using a desktop module as no one will pay the price of the display but they could offer a discount for buying one with a Mac and explain to people why they are better quality screens. They should probably bring out a 20" model too. The current 20" Cinema is £399. The cheapest 20" displays are £120, the average is about £170. If Apple even said £299 for the 20" matte Cinema display when bought with a Mac, I would not hesitate to get one. Extra ports, professional quality color, multiple displays possibly with displayport (though the old Cinemas don't have this).
If you bought a £499 Mini and a £299 display, that's still £100 cheaper than the current lowest iMac. So in fact, they could sell the displays at the same price and if you want to stick to the lowest hardware, you can still opt for a 30" display. Save money on the components and put it on the screen.
Leaving the xMac aside, do you think Apple will tackle the business sector shortly? I think they only have three choices as they move to a saturation point in the +$1000 consumer market: Business, sub-$1000, or more foreign markets.
As much as we'd all like to see it, I doubt it. (But then again, what do I know?) Apple likes big margins. They don't seem to be interested in the sub-$1,000 desktop market. Save for their expensive Xserve blades, Apple continues to behave like a boutique consumer electronics marketer. MacMinis, refreshed or not, won't compete with $500 PC offerings from Dell and others. The hole in Apple's product line (the one that an "xMac" would fill), just doesn't seem to be in the cards. As much as we would like it not to be true, I don't think Apple will ever productize a sub-$1,000, mini-tower anything.
I doubt that the next Mac Pro will get eSATA, except from an after market PCI card.
The Mac Pro doesn't need eSATA because it already has 4 internal SATA bays and PCIe slots. It's single drive, slot-less machines like the iMac that so desperately need full speed expansion capabilities.
I've been a loyal Mac owner since 1992 who went so far as to buy two copies of Mac OS 8 just to help Apple through the tough times, but I'm terribly disillusioned. Back in 2001 I spent over $4500 on a G4 tower, iBook and original AirPort base station. Since then I've upgraded to newer, faster Macs three times and bought two additional Macs for my kids, yet Apple has received less than $300 from me, all of it for iPods and accessories.
The reason is really quite simple. Steve Jobs, much as he did in the early days of Macintosh, has placed an absolutely insane price on expandability. In his world computers are appliances that have no user serviceable parts and an artificially short lifespan.
The recent "greening" of Apple is a combination of clever illusion and modest reality funded by price increases. There's no such thing as a "green" LCD. Making those things releases complex gases that are hundreds of times more damaging to the environment than carbon dioxide. Almost every Mac has a built-in LCD that must be replaced every time the computer part is replaced. My daughter's LCD display is onto it's fifth computer (3 mine, 2 hers) and is still going strong. I shudder to think how much more it would have cost me and the planet to have been forced to toss an LCD display every time one of us upgraded.
Are big towers the answer? Only for true pros. All other desktop buyers really only need two choices: a Mac Nano (MacBook minus its display, keyboard and battery) and a Mac Blade that offers a wide variety of ports, an upgradeable video card, one open PCIe slot, and more processor options.
The Mac mini was a great idea, but the execution was terrible. The Blade simply doesn't exist and probably never will so long as His Steveness lives.
Kill the mini, make a new mini tower, refresh the iMacs and add a standard DVD slot to the Apple TV. That would pretty much make the perfect Macworld 2009.
Then September 2009 announce their 42" Plasma TV, and Macworld 2010 announce the 10" Mac touch + SDK. Boy I'm good!
Ireland I just can't understand your love of the idea of apple making tvs. And isn't every manufacturer ditching plasma for lcd now?
The Xserve is not a blade, it is a 1U rackmount server…
Oh. I thought 1U-servers were called blades. I'm not in IT (I'm in TV). We had a bunch of Xserves in a test bed at the office recently and everyone called 'em blades.
Edit:
From AppleInsider:
"A blade server is a high density, self contained server built into a card or module that allows for many independent server "blades" to be packed together in a small space. Apple's 1U Xserve is a slim server, but is not a blade server design. Apple sells its Xserves to broadcasters and video pros, education, and the hospitality industry, such as cruise ships and hotels that rack up Xserves to deliver video on demand services. Building a true blade server would have only a moderate impact on the space consumed by such applications." --Prince McLean
Oh. I thought 1U-servers were called blades. I'm not in IT (I'm in TV). We had a bunch of Xserves in a test bed at the office recently and everyone called 'em blades.
Edit:
From AppleInsider:
"A blade server is a high density, self contained server built into a card or module that allows for many independent server "blades" to be packed together in a small space. Apple's 1U Xserve is a slim server, but is not a blade server design. Apple sells its Xserves to broadcasters and video pros, education, and the hospitality industry, such as cruise ships and hotels that rack up Xserves to deliver video on demand services. Building a true blade server would have only a moderate impact on the space consumed by such applications." --Prince McLean
I think I get the distinction now.
The biggest difference is that a series of blades don't have their own power supply and live on a backplane that provides common services: usb, dvd, power, ethernet, video, etc.
Density is a higher. A 9U high blade server can hold 14 blades. Prince is kinda wrong on that point except that most folks don't really need that kind of density. Others can't support that density in a full rack either from power, weight or cooling aspect.
Ireland I just can't understand your love of the idea of apple making tvs. And isn't every manufacturer ditching plasma for lcd now?
Panasonic, Pioneer, Samsung, and Hitachi all make plasma TVs. Pioneer and Panasonic only make plasma TVs in large sizes. If there's a better TV made by anyone than Pioneer's 1080P plasma, I haven't seen it (and I've looked a lot).
Panasonic, Pioneer, Samsung, and Hitachi all make plasma TVs. Pioneer and Panasonic only make plasma TVs in large sizes. If there's a better TV made by anyone than Pioneer's 1080P plasma, I haven't seen it (and I've looked a lot).
Pioneer are getting out of the plasma manufacturing business and have closed/are closing soon their plasma factory. They've now got a deal with Panasonic for plasma panels and have launched LCD-based TVs, using Sharp LCD panels.
I doubt that the next Mac Pro will get eSATA, except from an after market PCI card.
Yeah, but you can add eSATA to a Mac Pro for $3 using one of these. Just plug it into the spare SATA port the Mac Pro has for a second optical drive (assuming 12" is enough to reach, but there are eSATA brackets with longer internal cables).
Yeah, but you can add eSATA to a Mac Pro for $3 using one of these. Just plug it into the spare SATA port the Mac Pro has for a second optical drive (assuming 12" is enough to reach, but there are eSATA brackets with longer internal cables).
Unless something changed about the hardware or the OS, or there is an OS hack that I don't know about, a separate card is needed if you want to be able to hot plug or remove devices when the computer is on. Otherwise, you need to shut down to safely connect or remove devices if you use those built-in ports.
Pioneer are getting out of the plasma manufacturing business and have closed/are closing soon their plasma factory. They've now got a deal with Panasonic for plasma panels and have launched LCD-based TVs, using Sharp LCD panels.
Pioneer are getting out of the PDP manufacturing business but certainly not the plasma television business and the LCD-based TVs from Pioneer are in the smaller sizes only. I forgot to add LG which is, I think, the #2 producer of plasma display panels.
The news dampens expectations for late 2008, which according to roadmaps would have Apple launch minor iMac updates before the year closed out.
Core i7 is the new Intel quad-core desktop chip. Mainstream quad-core desktop CPUs have been available for more than a year from both AMD and Intel, yet Apple doesn't use the new chips in its aging iMac design. What's wrong with Apple?
On the Core i7 to be launched this November 17, see:
Top dollars go for top of the line computers. If Apple can't and won't sell me a competitive computer with the latest CPU from Intel, I'll have to take my business elsewhere. What's wrong with Apple?
Core i7 is the new Intel quad-core desktop chip. Mainstream quad-core desktop CPUs have been available for more than a year from both AMD and Intel, yet Apple doesn't use the new chips in its aging iMac design. What's wrong with Apple?
On the Core i7 to be launched this November 17, see:
Top dollars go for top of the line computers. If Apple can't and won't sell me a competitive computer with the latest CPU from Intel, I'll have to take my business elsewhere. What's wrong with Apple?
Is that a serious post? Assuming it is you have failed to see that...
1) It's Not yet November 17th so expecting i7 now is impossible.
2) Apple doesn't use AMD CPUs.
3) Apple doesn't use desktop-grade CPUs in their iMacs
4) The iMac was updated in April with specialized Santa Rosa/Penryn chipsets with Montevina properties (ie: what are being used now)
5) Notebook-grade Nehelham chipsets aren't due until Fall of 2009.
6) Due to the very limited number of chip models Apple's uses, their bulk orders far exceed the larger PC vendors whose sell mainly older HW, so Apple has to wait until Intel has ramped up production enough to accommodate Apple's demands. This is an issue that keeps getting worse as Apple's unit sales keep growing by 4x the industry.
Is that a serious post? Assuming it is you have failed to see that...
1) It's Not yet November 17th so expecting i7 now is impossible.
2) Apple doesn't use AMD CPUs.
It's not that hard to form them to start useing them jobs wanted mac os to be on the AMD based (OLPC)
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
3) Apple doesn't use desktop-grade CPUs in their iMacs
For Now
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
4) The iMac was updated in April with specialized Santa Rosa/Penryn chipsets with Montevina properties (ie: what are being used now)
5) Notebook-grade Nehelham chipsets aren't due until Fall of 2009.
6) Due to the very limited number of chip models Apple's uses, their bulk orders far exceed the larger PC vendors whose sell mainly older HW, so Apple has to wait until Intel has ramped up production enough to accommodate Apple's demands. This is an issue that keeps getting worse as Apple's unit sales keep growing by 4x the industry.
It's not that hard to form them to start useing them jobs wanted mac os to be on the AMD based (OLPC)
For Now
Apple can start uses desktop cpu if they want.
1) Apple and MS wanted to be on LOPC and thus offered their OS for free to get a new generation using their OS. It's a smart plan, something any company who looks past the current quarter would do. But there is no reason to believe that Apple will start intermixing AMD and Intel into their Mac line.
2) For now and the past. If you have a hypothesis as to why Apple would do so go ahead and post it, but there is no evidence that they will. I posted mine, stating that cooler running desktop chips would allow Apple to run faster CPUs at a lower price, but that is just a hypothesis. It is not fact.
3) They can put a Xeon in a laptop if they want, They can bring back Serial ports and floppy drives if they want.
Comments
I would like to see 2x eSATA, 2x FW800, 6x USB, but Apple doesn't seem to want me as a customer.
I doubt that the next Mac Pro will get eSATA, except from an after market PCI card.
That can't be true. The Vista security man, marketing, the wheel of fortune, the upgrade one (where PC is in a gown), the yoga one, just of the top of my head.
Here is a complete list, starting with the latest ads and going to the earliest. Apple really did start picking on Vista a lot. Note that they rarely mentioned Windows when they said Vista.
And obliterate the white plasticy Mighty Mouse as it currently exists.
That's an interesting point. With the whole lineup moving to glass and aluminium, a white plastic mouse is going to look quite odd. I guess the keys are still white plastic but it stands out quite badly.
A metal mouse wouldn't feel very good at all. Desktop users are missing out on the whole touch gestures so I reckon they have to be working on something along those lines.
If it was just a trackpad stuck onto the keyboard like the 20th Century Mac, it would simplify their input products. Just wireless keyboard or wired.
I find it surprising how close the current iMac is to this setup.
They also should make it easier to get to the components. They've had plenty of time to work around the complexities of that design. The current latch mechanism on the new Mac notebooks is excellent!
Yes the hard drive, Ram, battery access is a good step forward in terms of design because it makes components that are widely considered user-replaceable easy to access. This should always be the case.
For a moment, I thought Apple were going the opposite way with the MBP but they pulled it back again. The iMac and Mini are the only machines now with drives that are very difficult to replace.
I'm not sure how they'd manage to do this with the display at all any more - the glass plate on the new Cinema screen doesn't look like it can be removed. If they went this way with the design, they'd have to have the old way of opening the back, which I personally preferred.
They may keep the components external though. If they can fit all that performance into a MBP base with a 9800GT graphics card, including keyboard, battery and trackpad, what's to stop them making a powerful miniature base that runs off a magsafe attached to a Cinema-style display?
It's just one extra cable vs an iMac but so much easier to upgrade. It might not be able to accommodate the higher end chips but they are way too expensive anyway and if the MBP is meant for 'Pro' users then surely the same components will satisfy consumer-level hardware. I really think Apple need to put a firm £1000 cap on all hardware targeted at consumers. They almost manage it with the Macbooks where they top out at £1149 but the iMac goes up to £1389. £999 is a good cap and starting the Pro hardware just above this would work. The MBP used to be £1299 but is now £1399.
The Mac Pro entry point is £1429. If they can get this down to £1299 using Core i7, it would be great.
The modular idea for the iMac keeps the lineup balanced too.
consumer = Macbook (£699-999), Pro = Macbook Pro (£1299+)
consumer = Mac module (£499-999), Pro = Mac Pro (£1299+)
BTO options close the gaps.
People will say that Apple will simply lose display sales using a desktop module as no one will pay the price of the display but they could offer a discount for buying one with a Mac and explain to people why they are better quality screens. They should probably bring out a 20" model too. The current 20" Cinema is £399. The cheapest 20" displays are £120, the average is about £170. If Apple even said £299 for the 20" matte Cinema display when bought with a Mac, I would not hesitate to get one. Extra ports, professional quality color, multiple displays possibly with displayport (though the old Cinemas don't have this).
If you bought a £499 Mini and a £299 display, that's still £100 cheaper than the current lowest iMac. So in fact, they could sell the displays at the same price and if you want to stick to the lowest hardware, you can still opt for a 30" display. Save money on the components and put it on the screen.
Leaving the xMac aside, do you think Apple will tackle the business sector shortly? I think they only have three choices as they move to a saturation point in the +$1000 consumer market: Business, sub-$1000, or more foreign markets.
As much as we'd all like to see it, I doubt it. (But then again, what do I know?) Apple likes big margins. They don't seem to be interested in the sub-$1,000 desktop market. Save for their expensive Xserve blades, Apple continues to behave like a boutique consumer electronics marketer. MacMinis, refreshed or not, won't compete with $500 PC offerings from Dell and others. The hole in Apple's product line (the one that an "xMac" would fill), just doesn't seem to be in the cards. As much as we would like it not to be true, I don't think Apple will ever productize a sub-$1,000, mini-tower anything.
…Xserve blades…
The Xserve is not a blade, it is a 1U rackmount server…
I doubt that the next Mac Pro will get eSATA, except from an after market PCI card.
The Mac Pro doesn't need eSATA because it already has 4 internal SATA bays and PCIe slots. It's single drive, slot-less machines like the iMac that so desperately need full speed expansion capabilities.
I've been a loyal Mac owner since 1992 who went so far as to buy two copies of Mac OS 8 just to help Apple through the tough times, but I'm terribly disillusioned. Back in 2001 I spent over $4500 on a G4 tower, iBook and original AirPort base station. Since then I've upgraded to newer, faster Macs three times and bought two additional Macs for my kids, yet Apple has received less than $300 from me, all of it for iPods and accessories.
The reason is really quite simple. Steve Jobs, much as he did in the early days of Macintosh, has placed an absolutely insane price on expandability. In his world computers are appliances that have no user serviceable parts and an artificially short lifespan.
The recent "greening" of Apple is a combination of clever illusion and modest reality funded by price increases. There's no such thing as a "green" LCD. Making those things releases complex gases that are hundreds of times more damaging to the environment than carbon dioxide. Almost every Mac has a built-in LCD that must be replaced every time the computer part is replaced. My daughter's LCD display is onto it's fifth computer (3 mine, 2 hers) and is still going strong. I shudder to think how much more it would have cost me and the planet to have been forced to toss an LCD display every time one of us upgraded.
Are big towers the answer? Only for true pros. All other desktop buyers really only need two choices: a Mac Nano (MacBook minus its display, keyboard and battery) and a Mac Blade that offers a wide variety of ports, an upgradeable video card, one open PCIe slot, and more processor options.
The Mac mini was a great idea, but the execution was terrible. The Blade simply doesn't exist and probably never will so long as His Steveness lives.
No new iMac for me. And, my plans for a mini-based test and development server are iced.
Kill the mini, make a new mini tower, refresh the iMacs and add a standard DVD slot to the Apple TV. That would pretty much make the perfect Macworld 2009.
Then September 2009 announce their 42" Plasma TV, and Macworld 2010 announce the 10" Mac touch + SDK. Boy I'm good!
Ireland I just can't understand your love of the idea of apple making tvs. And isn't every manufacturer ditching plasma for lcd now?
The Xserve is not a blade, it is a 1U rackmount server…
Oh. I thought 1U-servers were called blades. I'm not in IT (I'm in TV). We had a bunch of Xserves in a test bed at the office recently and everyone called 'em blades.
Edit:
From AppleInsider:
"A blade server is a high density, self contained server built into a card or module that allows for many independent server "blades" to be packed together in a small space. Apple's 1U Xserve is a slim server, but is not a blade server design. Apple sells its Xserves to broadcasters and video pros, education, and the hospitality industry, such as cruise ships and hotels that rack up Xserves to deliver video on demand services. Building a true blade server would have only a moderate impact on the space consumed by such applications." --Prince McLean
I think I get the distinction now.
Oh. I thought 1U-servers were called blades. I'm not in IT (I'm in TV). We had a bunch of Xserves in a test bed at the office recently and everyone called 'em blades.
Edit:
From AppleInsider:
"A blade server is a high density, self contained server built into a card or module that allows for many independent server "blades" to be packed together in a small space. Apple's 1U Xserve is a slim server, but is not a blade server design. Apple sells its Xserves to broadcasters and video pros, education, and the hospitality industry, such as cruise ships and hotels that rack up Xserves to deliver video on demand services. Building a true blade server would have only a moderate impact on the space consumed by such applications." --Prince McLean
I think I get the distinction now.
The biggest difference is that a series of blades don't have their own power supply and live on a backplane that provides common services: usb, dvd, power, ethernet, video, etc.
Density is a higher. A 9U high blade server can hold 14 blades. Prince is kinda wrong on that point except that most folks don't really need that kind of density. Others can't support that density in a full rack either from power, weight or cooling aspect.
Ireland I just can't understand your love of the idea of apple making tvs. And isn't every manufacturer ditching plasma for lcd now?
Panasonic, Pioneer, Samsung, and Hitachi all make plasma TVs. Pioneer and Panasonic only make plasma TVs in large sizes. If there's a better TV made by anyone than Pioneer's 1080P plasma, I haven't seen it (and I've looked a lot).
Panasonic, Pioneer, Samsung, and Hitachi all make plasma TVs. Pioneer and Panasonic only make plasma TVs in large sizes. If there's a better TV made by anyone than Pioneer's 1080P plasma, I haven't seen it (and I've looked a lot).
Pioneer are getting out of the plasma manufacturing business and have closed/are closing soon their plasma factory. They've now got a deal with Panasonic for plasma panels and have launched LCD-based TVs, using Sharp LCD panels.
(see here, here and here)
I doubt that the next Mac Pro will get eSATA, except from an after market PCI card.
Yeah, but you can add eSATA to a Mac Pro for $3 using one of these. Just plug it into the spare SATA port the Mac Pro has for a second optical drive (assuming 12" is enough to reach, but there are eSATA brackets with longer internal cables).
Yeah, but you can add eSATA to a Mac Pro for $3 using one of these. Just plug it into the spare SATA port the Mac Pro has for a second optical drive (assuming 12" is enough to reach, but there are eSATA brackets with longer internal cables).
Unless something changed about the hardware or the OS, or there is an OS hack that I don't know about, a separate card is needed if you want to be able to hot plug or remove devices when the computer is on. Otherwise, you need to shut down to safely connect or remove devices if you use those built-in ports.
I doubt that the next Mac Pro will get eSATA, except from an after market PCI card.
you don't need a card just a brake out cables hooked up to the open sata ports on the MB.
Pioneer are getting out of the plasma manufacturing business and have closed/are closing soon their plasma factory. They've now got a deal with Panasonic for plasma panels and have launched LCD-based TVs, using Sharp LCD panels.
(see here, here and here)
Pioneer are getting out of the PDP manufacturing business but certainly not the plasma television business and the LCD-based TVs from Pioneer are in the smaller sizes only. I forgot to add LG which is, I think, the #2 producer of plasma display panels.
The news dampens expectations for late 2008, which according to roadmaps would have Apple launch minor iMac updates before the year closed out.
Core i7 is the new Intel quad-core desktop chip. Mainstream quad-core desktop CPUs have been available for more than a year from both AMD and Intel, yet Apple doesn't use the new chips in its aging iMac design. What's wrong with Apple?
On the Core i7 to be launched this November 17, see:
- Nehalem - Intel's new Core i7 gives them a big new lead @ http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/40012/135/
- Intel to launch Core i7 Nehalem processors on November 17 @ http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/40061/135/
Top dollars go for top of the line computers. If Apple can't and won't sell me a competitive computer with the latest CPU from Intel, I'll have to take my business elsewhere. What's wrong with Apple?
Core i7 is the new Intel quad-core desktop chip. Mainstream quad-core desktop CPUs have been available for more than a year from both AMD and Intel, yet Apple doesn't use the new chips in its aging iMac design. What's wrong with Apple?
On the Core i7 to be launched this November 17, see:
- Nehalem - Intel's new Core i7 gives them a big new lead @ http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/40012/135/
- Intel to launch Core i7 Nehalem processors on November 17 @ http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/40061/135/
Top dollars go for top of the line computers. If Apple can't and won't sell me a competitive computer with the latest CPU from Intel, I'll have to take my business elsewhere. What's wrong with Apple?
Is that a serious post? Assuming it is you have failed to see that...
1) It's Not yet November 17th so expecting i7 now is impossible.
2) Apple doesn't use AMD CPUs.
3) Apple doesn't use desktop-grade CPUs in their iMacs
4) The iMac was updated in April with specialized Santa Rosa/Penryn chipsets with Montevina properties (ie: what are being used now)
5) Notebook-grade Nehelham chipsets aren't due until Fall of 2009.
6) Due to the very limited number of chip models Apple's uses, their bulk orders far exceed the larger PC vendors whose sell mainly older HW, so Apple has to wait until Intel has ramped up production enough to accommodate Apple's demands. This is an issue that keeps getting worse as Apple's unit sales keep growing by 4x the industry.
Is that a serious post? Assuming it is you have failed to see that...
1) It's Not yet November 17th so expecting i7 now is impossible.
2) Apple doesn't use AMD CPUs.
It's not that hard to form them to start useing them jobs wanted mac os to be on the AMD based (OLPC)
3) Apple doesn't use desktop-grade CPUs in their iMacs
For Now
4) The iMac was updated in April with specialized Santa Rosa/Penryn chipsets with Montevina properties (ie: what are being used now)
5) Notebook-grade Nehelham chipsets aren't due until Fall of 2009.
6) Due to the very limited number of chip models Apple's uses, their bulk orders far exceed the larger PC vendors whose sell mainly older HW, so Apple has to wait until Intel has ramped up production enough to accommodate Apple's demands. This is an issue that keeps getting worse as Apple's unit sales keep growing by 4x the industry.
Apple can start uses desktop cpu if they want.
It's not that hard to form them to start useing them jobs wanted mac os to be on the AMD based (OLPC)
For Now
Apple can start uses desktop cpu if they want.
1) Apple and MS wanted to be on LOPC and thus offered their OS for free to get a new generation using their OS. It's a smart plan, something any company who looks past the current quarter would do. But there is no reason to believe that Apple will start intermixing AMD and Intel into their Mac line.
2) For now and the past. If you have a hypothesis as to why Apple would do so go ahead and post it, but there is no evidence that they will. I posted mine, stating that cooler running desktop chips would allow Apple to run faster CPUs at a lower price, but that is just a hypothesis. It is not fact.
3) They can put a Xeon in a laptop if they want, They can bring back Serial ports and floppy drives if they want.