EagerDragon
Sep 14, 06:04 PM
i am a mac-apple newbie~~~
aperture 2!!!waiting for me...i m a photography lover...
i have go through (youtube) a few previous keynote that brought by Steve...
i have addicted with aPPLe
cant wait my new 24' iMac n my new iPod..shuffle
Welcome to the Mac Family, bring your friends. It is always more fun when the family grows. We are vocal, but we have a reason for it. We are proud of Apple and we want them to continue to do better, it is a win win for us that get better and more useful products, and it is better for Apple as we carry the word.
aperture 2!!!waiting for me...i m a photography lover...
i have go through (youtube) a few previous keynote that brought by Steve...
i have addicted with aPPLe
cant wait my new 24' iMac n my new iPod..shuffle
Welcome to the Mac Family, bring your friends. It is always more fun when the family grows. We are vocal, but we have a reason for it. We are proud of Apple and we want them to continue to do better, it is a win win for us that get better and more useful products, and it is better for Apple as we carry the word.
Joe-Diver
Mar 29, 11:08 AM
Don't believe it!
aiqw9182
Apr 16, 10:27 AM
Yes because everyone loves to carry around external breakout boxes with their sleek portable Macbooks.... :rolleyes:
And $10? For Thunderbolt? You are DREAMING. You can't even get a decent USB2 hub for $10.
Yeah because everyone loves to carry around an external hard drive with their sleek portable MacBooks. :rolleyes:
God forbid you carry around an inch long adapter in your laptop bag. Is that too much for you?
Oh and here's some adapter prices for you:
http://www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?c_id=104&cp_id=10428&cs_id=1042802&p_id=5311
http://www.monoprice.com/products/subdepartment.asp?c_id=104&cp_id=10404
Twice the performance of USB3? That would be Thunderbolt's maximum possible data rate. No single consumer hard drive on earth supports that kind of speed (let alone even USB3's top speed) so I haven't a clue what you're getting at. Why would someone pay MORE to get a drive that is no faster than a USB3 drive? LOL, are you kidding me bro? Do you think USB 3 peaks out at it's max 5 Gbps? YOU are the one dreaming if you believe that. Here's some more evidence for your FUD:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCz_c_rDAXw
USB 3 would completely choke in that situation let alone in a simply hard drive speed comparison. Give me a break. Here's another example for you to look at for some REAL WORLD USB 3 speeds:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrtwtSjzjZI
In reality with USB 3 you get about 480 Megabits as opposed to the promised 5 Gpbs meaning Thunderbolt will be even faster than two times.
They would almost certainly have to as demand determines price/availability and there is nearly zero demand for TB devices at this point in time while USB3 are backwards compatible with the vast majority of the computers on the planet. My sales figures are based on the relative cost of drives with Firewire interfaces (the closest example that already exists to Thunderbolt in terms of technology versus low demand) against drives that only support USB2 and/or USB3. There is always a large premium for a drive with a FW interface, even today when a fair amount of computers exist with FW interfaces (i.e. SOME demand). So you are just ASSUMING that they will cost $250 more than USB 3 drives. OK, let's make that clear. You have no evidence to support that your $250 price difference has any validity other than the fact that FireWire drives were more expensive when it's already been explained twice and back why Thunderbolt won't be as 'exclusive' as FireWire. It's going to be on every Ivy Bridge chipset just like USB 3.0 is. Everyone's going to be using it, it's another checkmark for them to list. Why do you think PC manufactures still sell machines with eSata?
Therefore TB compatible drives will likely cost considerably more money than USB3 drives for the SAME underlying drive. You will pay a premium for the interface just like Firewire to offset the higher costs of low production numbers created by little demand compared to USB3/2 interfaces. There will be no speed advantage on a consumer drive because no consumer drive even comes CLOSE to the limits of either interface. So unlike YOUR $10 scenario, I didn't just make a number up out of thin air. Furthermore, the scenario is hardly half-baked given USB drives are already common at places like Best Buy (I personally already own TWO 3TB USB3 drives) so the unlikely 'friend' in the stated scenario would be more likely to already own a USB3 drive than a currently non-existent TB drive that will undoubtedly cost MORE when it does finally arrive.LOL, words can't describe how wrong you are. You think HDD speeds cap out at 480 Mbps? Maybe in your 'practical world' where you enjoy using inferior technology because it's 'what you're used to' that's the case. But for everyone else Thunderbolt will be a massive performance gain. Let alone when external SSD's really start hitting the market. USB 3 will really be proven for the piece of trash that it is and get wasted on all bandwidth comparisons. USB 3 is capped at a theoretical transfer rate of 5 Gbps. Thunderbolt is currently at 10 Gbps and can scale up to 100 Gbps in the future.
TB is more suited to high-end professional use where maximum overall data throughput (probably across multiple banks of drives per interface) and low overhead is desired (e.g. professional video, future high-speed server banks, live audio, etc.) The average consumer doesn't want to pay $50-100 more for FW800 drive interface over USB2 today (nor is their computer even likely to have FW if it's not a Mac) even if does have a benefit over USB2. They certainly aren't going to want to pay a potentially larger premium to get the same relative performance (perhaps with a bit of CPU overhead differences) versus USB3 with today's drives that don't come near USB3 levels, let alone Thunderbolt.Same relative performance? LMAO
Thunderbolt is suited for the future of high data transfer speeds that SSD's are capable of. Who wants the bottleneck to be the port on their computer? Because that's all USB 3 is going to be.
Be my guest and continue to insult and rant and dream big of TB heaven where USB doesn't exist. I live in a more practical and logical world.
Your 'practical world' when you were just talking about how no one will pay a premium for USB 3. Well the reason why no one's going to pay a premium for USB 3 is because it's a garbage update over USB 2.0. Thunderbolt will scale to the future. USB 3 is going to be trapped in limbo no matter what new peripherals come out down the road and given that it took them 8 years to release it a couple of years down the road when Thunderbolt is scaling even faster than USB 3. The only thing USB 3 is going to be used for down the road is nothing that USB 2 couldn't handle.
And $10? For Thunderbolt? You are DREAMING. You can't even get a decent USB2 hub for $10.
Yeah because everyone loves to carry around an external hard drive with their sleek portable MacBooks. :rolleyes:
God forbid you carry around an inch long adapter in your laptop bag. Is that too much for you?
Oh and here's some adapter prices for you:
http://www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?c_id=104&cp_id=10428&cs_id=1042802&p_id=5311
http://www.monoprice.com/products/subdepartment.asp?c_id=104&cp_id=10404
Twice the performance of USB3? That would be Thunderbolt's maximum possible data rate. No single consumer hard drive on earth supports that kind of speed (let alone even USB3's top speed) so I haven't a clue what you're getting at. Why would someone pay MORE to get a drive that is no faster than a USB3 drive? LOL, are you kidding me bro? Do you think USB 3 peaks out at it's max 5 Gbps? YOU are the one dreaming if you believe that. Here's some more evidence for your FUD:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCz_c_rDAXw
USB 3 would completely choke in that situation let alone in a simply hard drive speed comparison. Give me a break. Here's another example for you to look at for some REAL WORLD USB 3 speeds:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrtwtSjzjZI
In reality with USB 3 you get about 480 Megabits as opposed to the promised 5 Gpbs meaning Thunderbolt will be even faster than two times.
They would almost certainly have to as demand determines price/availability and there is nearly zero demand for TB devices at this point in time while USB3 are backwards compatible with the vast majority of the computers on the planet. My sales figures are based on the relative cost of drives with Firewire interfaces (the closest example that already exists to Thunderbolt in terms of technology versus low demand) against drives that only support USB2 and/or USB3. There is always a large premium for a drive with a FW interface, even today when a fair amount of computers exist with FW interfaces (i.e. SOME demand). So you are just ASSUMING that they will cost $250 more than USB 3 drives. OK, let's make that clear. You have no evidence to support that your $250 price difference has any validity other than the fact that FireWire drives were more expensive when it's already been explained twice and back why Thunderbolt won't be as 'exclusive' as FireWire. It's going to be on every Ivy Bridge chipset just like USB 3.0 is. Everyone's going to be using it, it's another checkmark for them to list. Why do you think PC manufactures still sell machines with eSata?
Therefore TB compatible drives will likely cost considerably more money than USB3 drives for the SAME underlying drive. You will pay a premium for the interface just like Firewire to offset the higher costs of low production numbers created by little demand compared to USB3/2 interfaces. There will be no speed advantage on a consumer drive because no consumer drive even comes CLOSE to the limits of either interface. So unlike YOUR $10 scenario, I didn't just make a number up out of thin air. Furthermore, the scenario is hardly half-baked given USB drives are already common at places like Best Buy (I personally already own TWO 3TB USB3 drives) so the unlikely 'friend' in the stated scenario would be more likely to already own a USB3 drive than a currently non-existent TB drive that will undoubtedly cost MORE when it does finally arrive.LOL, words can't describe how wrong you are. You think HDD speeds cap out at 480 Mbps? Maybe in your 'practical world' where you enjoy using inferior technology because it's 'what you're used to' that's the case. But for everyone else Thunderbolt will be a massive performance gain. Let alone when external SSD's really start hitting the market. USB 3 will really be proven for the piece of trash that it is and get wasted on all bandwidth comparisons. USB 3 is capped at a theoretical transfer rate of 5 Gbps. Thunderbolt is currently at 10 Gbps and can scale up to 100 Gbps in the future.
TB is more suited to high-end professional use where maximum overall data throughput (probably across multiple banks of drives per interface) and low overhead is desired (e.g. professional video, future high-speed server banks, live audio, etc.) The average consumer doesn't want to pay $50-100 more for FW800 drive interface over USB2 today (nor is their computer even likely to have FW if it's not a Mac) even if does have a benefit over USB2. They certainly aren't going to want to pay a potentially larger premium to get the same relative performance (perhaps with a bit of CPU overhead differences) versus USB3 with today's drives that don't come near USB3 levels, let alone Thunderbolt.Same relative performance? LMAO
Thunderbolt is suited for the future of high data transfer speeds that SSD's are capable of. Who wants the bottleneck to be the port on their computer? Because that's all USB 3 is going to be.
Be my guest and continue to insult and rant and dream big of TB heaven where USB doesn't exist. I live in a more practical and logical world.
Your 'practical world' when you were just talking about how no one will pay a premium for USB 3. Well the reason why no one's going to pay a premium for USB 3 is because it's a garbage update over USB 2.0. Thunderbolt will scale to the future. USB 3 is going to be trapped in limbo no matter what new peripherals come out down the road and given that it took them 8 years to release it a couple of years down the road when Thunderbolt is scaling even faster than USB 3. The only thing USB 3 is going to be used for down the road is nothing that USB 2 couldn't handle.
bloodycape
Aug 24, 02:56 AM
:) Beyond that my friend. Heard of Sound Blaster?
What about their audio cards?
What about their audio cards?
DHUK
Sep 1, 08:18 AM
I'd say a refresh of the Mac Mini and/or iMac might happen. Why would they call both of the existing models 'early 2006' (esp. the mini) in this page.
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=303315
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=303315
Mitch1984
Sep 14, 10:31 AM
Well let's see, the picture is a camera, so I believe it will somehow relate to pro users and photographers.
Thus I believe it will be:
Nellis Solar Power Plant,
solar power plant diagram.
(CBS Solar Power plant)
(CBS Solar Power plant)
solar PV power plants in
Nellis Solar Power Plant
Solar Thermal Power Plant from
Coal-Solar Power Plant
solar power plants
Solar Power Plant, Dagget,
quot;For the Palen Solar Power
solar thermal power plant
trough solar power plant,
Reacent Post
Thus I believe it will be:
whatever
Sep 11, 10:51 PM
The margins on a mid-mac should be better than the iMac since it's using standard (and therefore cheap) desktop components. So any mid-mac sales in preference to the iMac would probably make Apple more money anyway.
I want Apple to release a stupid "mid-mac" just to shut you and everyone else up.
Professionals buy Mac Pros or laptops. Consumers buy iMacs or laptops. That's a sound and successful strategy for Apple. And if you need a cheap Mac, you can buy a mini.
Just because Intel releases a chip, does not mean Apple is going to use it. If that was the case then Intel should re-release the 486, so that Apple can put them in the "mid-mac"!
I want Apple to release a stupid "mid-mac" just to shut you and everyone else up.
Professionals buy Mac Pros or laptops. Consumers buy iMacs or laptops. That's a sound and successful strategy for Apple. And if you need a cheap Mac, you can buy a mini.
Just because Intel releases a chip, does not mean Apple is going to use it. If that was the case then Intel should re-release the 486, so that Apple can put them in the "mid-mac"!
bad03xtreme
Apr 4, 12:12 PM
Good for the guard darwinism at it's best.
topmounter
Apr 4, 12:15 PM
Maybe you're right, maybe not... I mean, I doubt the guys went in in Kevlar suit saying "we take the loot, not matter what. If someones try to stop us, we kill him". In a bank robbery maybe they would but I doubt they were ready to kill somebody only for a few iPads...
But that's just me.
Feel free to sympathize with the crooks, but this does not sound like a case of "Han shot first".
But that's just me.
Feel free to sympathize with the crooks, but this does not sound like a case of "Han shot first".
DrDomVonDoom
Apr 20, 01:47 PM
I think the main problem is people stating, or at least THINKING they have privacy rights. You do, limited, but you do. The problem is, those rights REALLLLY don't apply when your on someone else's property. AKA T-Mobiles, AT&T or Verizon. You don't OWN their networks, you use them, you rent them. Just like a landlord can give you notice and say, 'I'm going to come check out the house/apt' AT&T can say (albiet in tiny print in a 300 page TOS) I reserve the right to collect your data. You sign the dotted line, get your fancy phone and don't give a ****. Thats untill someone treads on the truth then you become a tight-ass over it.
If a bunch of script kiddies on 4Chan can track down the 'Dog **** Lady' in Japan, you people don't got a chance in HELL. You got Cell Phones, and subscribe to internet forums, your IP is splayed all over the internet like beer at a frat party and your crying because a file tracks what cell tower your connected to? Theres a lot worse things then Death, this ain't one of them.
If a bunch of script kiddies on 4Chan can track down the 'Dog **** Lady' in Japan, you people don't got a chance in HELL. You got Cell Phones, and subscribe to internet forums, your IP is splayed all over the internet like beer at a frat party and your crying because a file tracks what cell tower your connected to? Theres a lot worse things then Death, this ain't one of them.
mduser63
Sep 5, 03:14 PM
I think the notion that Apple is trying to get is like this senerio:
Somebody who is bored on a Friday night with nothing better to do, who does not feel like driving out to the local video rental store. Howabout being able to download it on your computer for $4.99 for a 5 day rental.
I really hope this is what they're thinking, because it describes my reasons for wanting an iTunes Movie Store. I don't buy movies much, because I generally don't watch movies more than once. I like to rent movies, but I find it annoying to have to leave, drive to Blockbuster, look through the shelves, often to find that they are out of the movie I wanted to watch. Being able to fire up iTunes, search or browse for a movie, and immediately download it for viewing would be great. I don't care about buying movies, only rentals. Blockbuster already charges around $4 or something, so I hope Apple can at least match that price if not beat it.
Somebody who is bored on a Friday night with nothing better to do, who does not feel like driving out to the local video rental store. Howabout being able to download it on your computer for $4.99 for a 5 day rental.
I really hope this is what they're thinking, because it describes my reasons for wanting an iTunes Movie Store. I don't buy movies much, because I generally don't watch movies more than once. I like to rent movies, but I find it annoying to have to leave, drive to Blockbuster, look through the shelves, often to find that they are out of the movie I wanted to watch. Being able to fire up iTunes, search or browse for a movie, and immediately download it for viewing would be great. I don't care about buying movies, only rentals. Blockbuster already charges around $4 or something, so I hope Apple can at least match that price if not beat it.
teme
Aug 29, 06:17 AM
After looking around the apple website this morning.. I don't believe that we are getting the new chips until AFTER the iPod rebate offer.. and here is why.
The only legal way Apple could offer the new processor would be to offer it ONLY to out-of-education persons. If you read the fine print of the Apple iPod offer, it ONLY lists the current models (and G4) as acceptable units to use when filing a rebate.... if they were to place the new chip models on the store, it would invalidate the rebate, should someone have the old rebate forms, and a new machine. Just a thought.
But in Europe this same rebate ends at October 7th, 2006...
The only legal way Apple could offer the new processor would be to offer it ONLY to out-of-education persons. If you read the fine print of the Apple iPod offer, it ONLY lists the current models (and G4) as acceptable units to use when filing a rebate.... if they were to place the new chip models on the store, it would invalidate the rebate, should someone have the old rebate forms, and a new machine. Just a thought.
But in Europe this same rebate ends at October 7th, 2006...
stol
Apr 11, 10:59 AM
Both financially and from a space and energy consumption point of view, an Apple TV or an Airport Express is a more efficient solution for this. Apple tends to support only the efficient and simple solutions, not the cumbersome ones.
Agreed. I never said that this is the most elegant solution.
But� why should I get extra hardware (environmentally unfriendly) when I have my Mac on most of the time anyway. You know, I already have a computer (connected to speakers) so computer + Airport Express is more energy/money/space inefficient than a computer alone.
You know all well that the router is not free, you pay for through your monthly payments. The fact that your provider does not offer a cheaper service without such hardware freebies is just unfortunate.
If I renew my service, I pay the same money and of course I don't get new hardware. Hardware freebies are for new customers/connections in many services other than internet connections. Subscribe to a satellite tv service for example, get a free dish. This is beyond me anyway, it's a standard policy for all providers where I live. I just got this modem/router with my subscription and so far it works fine. No need to replace it.
Would you be happy if Apple included a free Airport Express with all Macs (but naturally increased the price for the Mac)? There is nothing free, at least in the physical world (the digital world can be very close to free, see iOS apps).
This makes no sense. Not everyone needs or desires an Airport Express. I never asked Apple for free hardware.
So, how much do think Apple is asking for licensing their Airplay technology, I'd guess at most between $5-10.
Do they license Airplay technology to software developers? I don't think so.
Show me an app on the Mac App Store (or wherever) that acts like an Airport Express and i'll buy it at once.
Is your Mac (the one connected to your sound system) really cheaper than an Airport Express?
And if this is your only Mac, you can just use the Remote app to play the music on it from your iOS device.
How can you possibly compare a Mac to� an Airport Express? I bought a Mac to have a COMPUTER not to stream music wirelessly.
What you should think about is: How hard is for a Mac to act like an Airport Express with the proper software? It shouldn't.
Why it there no software like this? Apple does not want to.
Fair enough; It's their technology. Sometimes though, people want different things. Glad to see quite a few people here want the same as me.
I have no idea what a Banana-TV is but for all that you want to do, an Airport Express it seems would do the trick. Is an Airport Express much more expensive than your Banana-TV?
Banana TV is software. It is $7.99. It makes your Mac act like an Apple TV - does not support audio only though.
It does something like: I can stream a video i just shot from my iPhone to my huge iMac screen - no AppleTV needed, no need to transfer the video to the iMac, no cables.
Now tell me this is not a better solution for casual use than having an AppleTV in terms of money, space, energy, hardware. You see, I don't even have a TV!
Agreed. I never said that this is the most elegant solution.
But� why should I get extra hardware (environmentally unfriendly) when I have my Mac on most of the time anyway. You know, I already have a computer (connected to speakers) so computer + Airport Express is more energy/money/space inefficient than a computer alone.
You know all well that the router is not free, you pay for through your monthly payments. The fact that your provider does not offer a cheaper service without such hardware freebies is just unfortunate.
If I renew my service, I pay the same money and of course I don't get new hardware. Hardware freebies are for new customers/connections in many services other than internet connections. Subscribe to a satellite tv service for example, get a free dish. This is beyond me anyway, it's a standard policy for all providers where I live. I just got this modem/router with my subscription and so far it works fine. No need to replace it.
Would you be happy if Apple included a free Airport Express with all Macs (but naturally increased the price for the Mac)? There is nothing free, at least in the physical world (the digital world can be very close to free, see iOS apps).
This makes no sense. Not everyone needs or desires an Airport Express. I never asked Apple for free hardware.
So, how much do think Apple is asking for licensing their Airplay technology, I'd guess at most between $5-10.
Do they license Airplay technology to software developers? I don't think so.
Show me an app on the Mac App Store (or wherever) that acts like an Airport Express and i'll buy it at once.
Is your Mac (the one connected to your sound system) really cheaper than an Airport Express?
And if this is your only Mac, you can just use the Remote app to play the music on it from your iOS device.
How can you possibly compare a Mac to� an Airport Express? I bought a Mac to have a COMPUTER not to stream music wirelessly.
What you should think about is: How hard is for a Mac to act like an Airport Express with the proper software? It shouldn't.
Why it there no software like this? Apple does not want to.
Fair enough; It's their technology. Sometimes though, people want different things. Glad to see quite a few people here want the same as me.
I have no idea what a Banana-TV is but for all that you want to do, an Airport Express it seems would do the trick. Is an Airport Express much more expensive than your Banana-TV?
Banana TV is software. It is $7.99. It makes your Mac act like an Apple TV - does not support audio only though.
It does something like: I can stream a video i just shot from my iPhone to my huge iMac screen - no AppleTV needed, no need to transfer the video to the iMac, no cables.
Now tell me this is not a better solution for casual use than having an AppleTV in terms of money, space, energy, hardware. You see, I don't even have a TV!
DJMastaWes
Sep 10, 04:31 PM
I hate to say it, but my guess is this is an iPod event, not a MB MBP event. ;)
Gary. You just slowly and painfully killed me inside. I hope you are wrong.
Gary. You just slowly and painfully killed me inside. I hope you are wrong.
slffl
Aug 28, 12:25 PM
I hope we see a MBP upgrade soon. I'm getting restleless since I'm getting a new one as soon as they're updated. My 17" 1ghz PB is starting to show it's age :) .
dondark
Sep 13, 11:56 PM
nokia never fail in making ugly phones
Totally Agree!
Totally Agree!
Small White Car
Apr 25, 01:33 PM
:confused::confused::confused:
Have some new tech that you'd like to share with us?
Yeah, SSDs. I'm so over hard drives.
I'm not buying another Mac anytime soon. I'm gonna wait for SSDs to get cheaper and bigger before I commit to any new hardware.
Have some new tech that you'd like to share with us?
Yeah, SSDs. I'm so over hard drives.
I'm not buying another Mac anytime soon. I'm gonna wait for SSDs to get cheaper and bigger before I commit to any new hardware.
Susurs
Apr 22, 04:55 PM
They'd have better found a place for Nvidia or AMD GPU via PCI-E not that Thunderbolt...
dante@sisna.com
Sep 19, 02:32 PM
couldn't apple develop something into itunes that lets you watch while it is downloading? is this possible?
You can watch while downloading.
I was able to begin about 5 minutes into download -- barely enough time to get the snacks.
You can watch while downloading.
I was able to begin about 5 minutes into download -- barely enough time to get the snacks.
Reach
Sep 14, 02:21 PM
- Image editing hardware (workstation)
- Image processing software
- Digital filing equipment and software
These are the products that Apple is exhibiting at the show, according to the photokina-site. Just to point out to the people that somehow has forgotten that Apple makes hardware very well suited for photography that a Macbook Pro is not out-of-place here! :p
- Image processing software
- Digital filing equipment and software
These are the products that Apple is exhibiting at the show, according to the photokina-site. Just to point out to the people that somehow has forgotten that Apple makes hardware very well suited for photography that a Macbook Pro is not out-of-place here! :p
RollTide
Apr 30, 01:36 PM
Love your Avatar. Sad day though for Michael Scott.
jacollins
Apr 20, 12:59 PM
There is no proof that it is sending that information to anyone.
[conspiracy hat]
Ah, so the REAL reason for the humongous Apple data center with petabytes of storage? dun dun duuuun...
[/conspiracy hat]
:)
[conspiracy hat]
Ah, so the REAL reason for the humongous Apple data center with petabytes of storage? dun dun duuuun...
[/conspiracy hat]
:)
LSS
Apr 20, 10:36 AM
Oh cool! With iPhoneTracker.app I can see where I've been on my travels! :)
rdowns
Apr 25, 08:57 AM
I was going to ask what the D stands for but I guess that's kind of obvious.
0 comments:
Post a Comment