I wouldn't be surprised if Apple released these MBP's before the 19th - it would make their image look slightly better than what people are saying at present.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple's 17" MacBook Pro Delayed Until Feb 19th
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yeah they always do it, and you always end up getting it before you expect it.
Ummm, if the OS your running supports quad core, yeah at the same frequency it will kick the dual cores butt. You cannot make a statement that Quad cores are not faster then dual cores without putting into perspective. The only problem quad cores suffer, as did dual cores is that alot of software was not written to take advantage or the extra cores. For instance when quad cores first came out they were not faster then dual cores when it came to gaming as the games did not support quad cores. Get and OS/Hardware that supports quad cores and they will blow a dual core away. Quad core are especially good at grunt work/processing.
Absolutely true...
Quad Cores are good at anything which requires a lot of continuous processing power like video encoding, image editing, etc..
But as mentioned, the OS and the app must support multi cores. For now as an eg, you might find some unzipping process on a quad core machine utilizing only 25% because it only supports 1 core..
They are also good at running several applications at the same time, even if the apps aren't written for multi-core.
Any of the current operating systems are good at running multiple independent applications, especially for small core counts like 4 or 8.
On a laptop with a single disk, it's likely that disk IO will be the real bottleneck for anything but pure computing tasks.
wtf
the hell is he on about. Please tell me that I can use this machine (when it gets here..) for editing photos at a professional level with the new 24" LCD. If I can't I'm going to pull a Michael Douglas in the film 'Falling Down'....
Gufforr.
the hell is he on about. Please tell me that I can use this machine (when it gets here..) for editing photos at a professional level with the new 24" LCD. If I can't I'm going to pull a Michael Douglas in the film 'Falling Down'....
Gufforr.
instead of criticizing his post why don't you give some input??????????????? He's a newbie and just needs some guidance... as am I!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Is that enough ?'s and !'s for you???????????????
and yeah peterlptl, I'm waiting patiently for the updated iMacs.
HA! Read my sig.
Completely true and agreed but then again... the OS must support multi core. Like in XP.... running a lot of apps or users simultaneously will definitely improve performance on a quad core but only marginally... the full power wont be utilized...
Right, and since Apple has never, ever made anything in China before, this "Chinese New Year" you speak of took them completely by surprise.
They might have knew about Chinese New Year, yet
couldn't know about some last minute QA problems in their laptops.I personally support another conspiracy theory that they knew about delay, yet decided anyway to announce MBP17 for January. Forcing people to wait a bit - instead of going buying competition - is sensible sales strategy.
When buying expensive ware one has to learn to wait. I'm not really worried by the delay. More they test - the better. I was planning to buy the UBMBP17 after first wave of reviews anyway.
Could they be waiting to ship out with SNOW LEOPARD???!!! (hope so)
Wonder if the delay for shipping of the 17" MBP has to do with Apple wanting to ship them out with SNOW LEOPARD? HMMM>...... you guys think it''s a possibility???? I really do hope so........
Wonder if the delay for shipping of the 17" MBP has to do with Apple wanting to ship them out with SNOW LEOPARD? HMMM>...... you guys think it''s a possibility???? I really do hope so........
Please explain this - XP has pretty good SMP scheduling. It's using the same scheduler as Windows server. Vista's scheduler is even better - it's based on Server 2003 with NUMA and other support.
These schedulers are supporting 32 CPU and 64 CPU systems today, so please show some supporting evidence that only marginal improvements will be seen in the embarrassingly parallel case of running multiple apps. Here's what I found in a few seconds about the harder case of single multi-threaded apps:
And to be fair, shouldn't we be talking about the Vista scheduler and not XP? Or we should compare XP to OSX 10.0...
By the way, XP is a single user system, so you won't be adding multiple users to it.
What do you mean by that? It is perfectly possible not only to create several users on XP but even to have them logged on and running programs simultaneously (in fact, using Remote Desktop it is even possible to have them each having and using their own terminal at the same).
Sorry I dont have that many details but I run XP on my quad core Win machine and find it rather paltry at enhancing multi core performance in simply all scenarios!
Single User???? Meaning... I'm pretty sure that we dont understand each other properly on this one!
Single User???? Meaning... I'm pretty sure that we dont understand each other properly on this one!
Can I ask who on earth voted positive for this story. Delays and delays for this product, and ANOTHER delay gets positive voting.
Sometimes I really wonder if Apple could ship cow-pats instead of new Mac Pros, and people will still vote positive.
Sometimes I really wonder if Apple could ship cow-pats instead of new Mac Pros, and people will still vote positive.
Nuff said!
Yes it does, and Apple better give us quad core a hell of a lot sooner than 2 F*&($king years since Intel has HAD quad core laptop CPUs out for MONTHS now. PC makers have been putting them in laptops only 1.1" thick, showing that Apple only cares about thinness and NOT performance on a professional $3000 machine.
And there's a lot of FUD going around about quad core not being that hot, in the typical Apple user fashion of "Apple didn't give it to us, so it must not be that important."
Quad core improves performance of the machine with not only multithreaded apps like Compressor and other encoders, but Virtual machines, and running single threaded apps simultaneously. With Snow Leopard being touted as being very core aware why would the end user NOT want a quad core machine?
Unless of course they are just going to drop $3000 to d!ck around with their machine and look at Facebook all day.
Yeah, beat me to it. I was going to suggest ripping a movie in handbrake using 4 cores, then using 2 and get back to me on that
"faster" is a pretty subjective term, but I know what he meant.
No way; however, would be nice. I am pretty sure, however, that they will come with the new iLIfe09 and potentially less bugs due to more QC resulting in the delayed shipping.
Thats all true, but if your just checking your mail, its not going to make things faster, infact increased heat would mean it clocks slower making things take longer. Its only going to speed up multi core aware apps.
By "single user" I mean that only one user can be logged into the system at a time. There can be multiple users defined in "Users and Groups", but only one active user.
Background tasks might be owned by different users, but not the session.
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/mobility/rdfaq.mspx
Q. The local computer screen locks when a user is connected remotely. How can I get more than one connection to a computer running Windows XP Professional?
A. If you want to have more than one person simultaneously use a computer running Windows XP Professional, you could try Remote Assistance for collaboration and support scenarios. Windows 2000 Server with Terminal Services allows multiple users, as will Windows Server 2003, when it becomes available.
Q. The local computer screen locks when a user is connected remotely. How can I get more than one connection to a computer running Windows XP Professional?
A. If you want to have more than one person simultaneously use a computer running Windows XP Professional, you could try Remote Assistance for collaboration and support scenarios. Windows 2000 Server with Terminal Services allows multiple users, as will Windows Server 2003, when it becomes available.
When you try to create the second remote desktop session, you'll get a popup saying that the computer is busy and asking if you want to log off the other user.
It can also speed things up when running multiple apps, even if they're not multi-core aware.