The 2 TB is a 3.5" hard drive. They always make room for that size. Plus, there is no 2 TB 2.5" HDD. Biggest one on the market is 640 GB.
However, according to the context, it's saying that there is no second hard drive. I'm assuming meaning another 3.5" hard drive, which people might think because there is a bigger chassis. However, according to iFixIt, an SSD is possible to fit.
That would be nice, have a bootable Intel X-25M SSD 160 GB and keep your 1 TB or 2 TB as just a scratch disk.
Ahem... WD 750gb 12.5mm 2.5" HD... It's in my Mini's...
I may be mistaken, but doesn't that look like a 2.5" hard drive in there? If so, what company out there is currently making a 1TB drive, let alone a 2TB drive? Just curious, as I haven't seen any out in the wild yet.
No, you can see it's a 3.5" Western Digital 2TB, but which one it look like a Black 2TB that has 7200RPM with 64MB Cache if it's the one.
I may be mistaken, but doesn't that look like a 2.5" hard drive in there? If so, what company out there is currently making a 1TB drive, let alone a 2TB drive? Just curious, as I haven't seen any out in the wild yet.
No it is a 3.5" drive. It just looks small inside that 27" enclosure.
3.5" and 2.5" SATA drives use the exact same connector so you could easily replace a 3.5" SATA drive with a 2.5" SSD SATA drive.
No! Liquid systems leak! Haven't you seen the issues on XLR8yourmac.com regarding all the leaking LCed G5 power macs? Just be happy with the quad core!
I was "cool" with it because Apple replaced my damaged G5 with a Mac Pro.
Damn look at those "gigantic" heat sinks. Next iMac I want liquid cooling
if it fits within Apple's profit margin and environmental program, you might just get it
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland
It's absolutely ridiculous they never offered an SSD option
price would keep the option at such a low size that it would never sell. in another 6-12 months when you can get an SSD at a profitable size, it will happen
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob55
Yet they decided to include the capability to write to BR in FC7 and C3.5. Apparently not too complex that I can't solve it with a $349 external BR burner from OWC.
much of that support is merely having FCP work in higher resolutions. also, as you note there are externals and probably even internals for the Mac Pro (which is the machine they are pushing at the folks doing such things)
Price would keep the option at such a low size that it would never sell. in another 6-12 months when you can get an SSD at a profitable size, it will happen.
You're right that it will happen, but I don't think 250GB is too low personally. It's plenty big for most people. It's totally ridiculous.
Even if a blu-ray drive had been offered as an option. How would it have played if it's not built into the OS? Snow Leopard would have to be updated -correct? Wouldn't that be a major update- size wise? Do you think that was the reason. Also does the Display Port adaptor carry the audio signal from the HDMI or is Video only? Thanks.
Ps: One of the best changes IMHO is the change of the Dell black plastic back to the new metal. The iMac is looking good again.
What's the reason was it a last minute change for Apple not to put the Panasonic Blu-Ray Drive in? I think Apple didn't do it because like I said in earlier post if Apple is going to pay fees to Sony and Microsoft for licensing their codecs to have that Panasonic Drive in. This would have added cost to the Mac pricing well as if the studios wasn't going to put ALL their movies to 720p HD Movies in iTunes. That's not a wide choice for consumers that just Apple helping Blu-Ray! Apple probably say to Hell with Blu-Ray. I think their might be some going on with the studios to put the 1080p Movies on SD Cards because technologically it can do that with Dolby TrueHD and DTS HD Master Audio plus it wouldn't be Blu-Ray so there wouldn't be no licensing fees to utilize HD Movies and yes I'm sure the codec will be MPEG-4 DRM like the iTunes 480p and 720p! Blu-Ray is truly dead. the fact that copy protection is non-existent and the proof in the pudding is go to torrent sites there are over 5,248 movies ripped from Blu-Ray in 720p and 1080p both with either Dolby Digital @ 640Kbps or DTS @ 1.5Mbps utilizing the Matroska Video File Format (MKV). George Lucas and others probably aware of this since day one if not I will let him know later today! Studios want something more reliable to maximize profits. You can't do that with optical medium so digital copy its best shot!
According to iFixit, the LCD panel itself is glossy yet the photo shows no reflections (more like a matte finish) unlike like the photo where the highly reflective glass is removed.
But then again, there are no reflections on the picture before the glass was removed neither.
So taking their word for it, that the LCD panel is glossy, is confirming what I suspected. It's the LCD panel makers that are opting for glossy finishes, as it saves them a step of applying a matte finish to their panels. So basically glossy LCD's are "cheaper" in the respect of cheaper quality. (in case you hear "cheap" in reference to glossy screens)
The LCD panel makers started with HP, who was new to the computer game having bought Compaq and most likely suckered them in (why take a extra step and apply glass when it wasn't needed?), and the rest of the industry fell like dominoes, including Apple.
It's a shame a another generation of computer users are going to learn the drawbacks of glossy screens on their eyes and health.
It's also a shame it's been delegated to end users to apply a solution to a problem that wasn't a problem before in the name of suckering people into buying flashy objects.
Apple also now has to apply a glass across the entire surface of the viewing area, where before they could just frame the matte LCD panel. So I wonder what is up with that? Are glossy LCD panels themselves more vulnerable to damage?
No! Liquid systems leak! Haven't you seen the issues on XLR8yourmac.com regarding all the leaking LCed G5 power macs? Just be happy with the quad core!
Those heat sinks actually do have liquid in them. As do 90% of all laptop heatsinks.
Comments
The 2 TB is a 3.5" hard drive. They always make room for that size. Plus, there is no 2 TB 2.5" HDD. Biggest one on the market is 640 GB.
However, according to the context, it's saying that there is no second hard drive. I'm assuming meaning another 3.5" hard drive, which people might think because there is a bigger chassis. However, according to iFixIt, an SSD is possible to fit.
That would be nice, have a bootable Intel X-25M SSD 160 GB and keep your 1 TB or 2 TB as just a scratch disk.
Ahem... WD 750gb 12.5mm 2.5" HD... It's in my Mini's...
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16822136414
I may be mistaken, but doesn't that look like a 2.5" hard drive in there? If so, what company out there is currently making a 1TB drive, let alone a 2TB drive? Just curious, as I haven't seen any out in the wild yet.
No, you can see it's a 3.5" Western Digital 2TB, but which one it look like a Black 2TB that has 7200RPM with 64MB Cache if it's the one.
The 2 TB is a 3.5" hard drive. They always make room for that size. Plus, there is no 2 TB 2.5" HDD. Biggest one on the market is 640 GB.
They make a 1TB 2.5" drive but it is 12.5mm thick, not 9mm, the size most thin notebooks use.
I may be mistaken, but doesn't that look like a 2.5" hard drive in there? If so, what company out there is currently making a 1TB drive, let alone a 2TB drive? Just curious, as I haven't seen any out in the wild yet.
No it is a 3.5" drive. It just looks small inside that 27" enclosure.
3.5" and 2.5" SATA drives use the exact same connector so you could easily replace a 3.5" SATA drive with a 2.5" SSD SATA drive.
No! Liquid systems leak! Haven't you seen the issues on XLR8yourmac.com regarding all the leaking LCed G5 power macs? Just be happy with the quad core!
I was "cool" with it because Apple replaced my damaged G5 with a Mac Pro.
Damn look at those "gigantic" heat sinks. Next iMac I want liquid cooling
if it fits within Apple's profit margin and environmental program, you might just get it
It's absolutely ridiculous they never offered an SSD option
price would keep the option at such a low size that it would never sell. in another 6-12 months when you can get an SSD at a profitable size, it will happen
Yet they decided to include the capability to write to BR in FC7 and C3.5. Apparently not too complex that I can't solve it with a $349 external BR burner from OWC.
much of that support is merely having FCP work in higher resolutions. also, as you note there are externals and probably even internals for the Mac Pro (which is the machine they are pushing at the folks doing such things)
I still haven't seen a definitive answer.
Is the source switching done in software or hardware?
Do I have to reboot and hold down "V" or something?
Inquiring minds want to know!
Difference in storage capacity is night and day too.
Stop downloading all that porn and you'll be fine. Anyway, it's called "optional".
Price would keep the option at such a low size that it would never sell. in another 6-12 months when you can get an SSD at a profitable size, it will happen.
You're right that it will happen, but I don't think 250GB is too low personally. It's plenty big for most people. It's totally ridiculous.
much of that support is merely having FCP work in higher resolutions.
What? FCP has been handling Blu-ray resolutions since long before Blu-ray.
Even if a blu-ray drive had been offered as an option. How would it have played if it's not built into the OS? Snow Leopard would have to be updated -correct? Wouldn't that be a major update- size wise? Do you think that was the reason. Also does the Display Port adaptor carry the audio signal from the HDMI or is Video only? Thanks.
Ps: One of the best changes IMHO is the change of the Dell black plastic back to the new metal. The iMac is looking good again.
What's the reason was it a last minute change for Apple not to put the Panasonic Blu-Ray Drive in? I think Apple didn't do it because like I said in earlier post if Apple is going to pay fees to Sony and Microsoft for licensing their codecs to have that Panasonic Drive in. This would have added cost to the Mac pricing well as if the studios wasn't going to put ALL their movies to 720p HD Movies in iTunes. That's not a wide choice for consumers that just Apple helping Blu-Ray! Apple probably say to Hell with Blu-Ray. I think their might be some going on with the studios to put the 1080p Movies on SD Cards because technologically it can do that with Dolby TrueHD and DTS HD Master Audio plus it wouldn't be Blu-Ray so there wouldn't be no licensing fees to utilize HD Movies and yes I'm sure the codec will be MPEG-4 DRM like the iTunes 480p and 720p! Blu-Ray is truly dead. the fact that copy protection is non-existent and the proof in the pudding is go to torrent sites there are over 5,248 movies ripped from Blu-Ray in 720p and 1080p both with either Dolby Digital @ 640Kbps or DTS @ 1.5Mbps utilizing the Matroska Video File Format (MKV). George Lucas and others probably aware of this since day one if not I will let him know later today! Studios want something more reliable to maximize profits. You can't do that with optical medium so digital copy its best shot!
Looks like a 3.5" HDD to me.
According to the teardown photo it is a HDL (Hitachi LG Data Storage) Multi DVD Rewriter Model: GA11N, which is a "HLDS GA11N 12.7mm SATA Slotload 8X DVDRW". http://translate.google.com/translat...ari%26rls%3Den
What parts are behind the chin? Is the chin necessary?
Speakers, memory slots are located in the "chin".
But then again, there are no reflections on the picture before the glass was removed neither.
So taking their word for it, that the LCD panel is glossy, is confirming what I suspected. It's the LCD panel makers that are opting for glossy finishes, as it saves them a step of applying a matte finish to their panels. So basically glossy LCD's are "cheaper" in the respect of cheaper quality. (in case you hear "cheap" in reference to glossy screens)
The LCD panel makers started with HP, who was new to the computer game having bought Compaq and most likely suckered them in (why take a extra step and apply glass when it wasn't needed?), and the rest of the industry fell like dominoes, including Apple.
It's a shame a another generation of computer users are going to learn the drawbacks of glossy screens on their eyes and health.
It's also a shame it's been delegated to end users to apply a solution to a problem that wasn't a problem before in the name of suckering people into buying flashy objects.
Apple also now has to apply a glass across the entire surface of the viewing area, where before they could just frame the matte LCD panel. So I wonder what is up with that? Are glossy LCD panels themselves more vulnerable to damage?
Interesting questions...
Ok I'm done
No! Liquid systems leak! Haven't you seen the issues on XLR8yourmac.com regarding all the leaking LCed G5 power macs? Just be happy with the quad core!
Those heat sinks actually do have liquid in them. As do 90% of all laptop heatsinks.
Just came over CNBC right this exact second!!
You heard it from me! WOOO HOOO!!
NOKIA SUE-ING APPLE OVER GSM/WIRELESS LAN PATENTS!!
Just came over CNBC right this exact second!!
You heard it from me! WOOO HOOO!!
OMG!
http://www.reuters.com/article/press...09+PRN20091022
I wonder if you could force a 27" non-glossy screen into it? Think that would void the warranty?
Just clean the surface with steel wool once, you be fine. Works everytime.