that's all well and good if the price reflected it..which it doesn't...
besides..who doesn't want more power..if anything it futureproofs the computer
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.
Online Ad Evidence of Imminent iMac, Mac Mini and MacBook Updates?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
that's all well and good if the price reflected it..which it doesn't...
besides..who doesn't want more power..if anything it futureproofs the computer
Speaking of Apple's technologies in Snow Leopard it seems you are forgetting about another huge one. OpenCL. Once OpenCL comes into it's own you will be better off putting multiple graphics cards in your computer than cores. GCD is minor as far as i'm concerned when comparing to the potential of OpenCL. So instead of complaining about the lack of cores in a machine people will start to realize that processors should've and could've plateaued at core 2 duo while increasing the number of graphics cards instead.
The Macbook Air is far more expensive to manufacture than a Macbook. That's why most competitors with the same specs and thinness are priced more than the Air.
No it means you get a mac pro and shut up about how a consumer end machine doesn't suit your hardcore editing, programming and designing needs.
Hasn't anyone considered that these adsense ads are just for the current models ? I mean come on..They can still be seen if you use google.Do people really think Apple would allow this ?
Yes. I respect that. Wanting more. We always want more. What is pissing me off is the people are saying that if there is no quad core I am going to windows. Which is complete bull because no one has the balls to switch to such a bad system like windows after using a mac.
Seriously. I can't even stand that POS for the couple of minutes i'm forced to before I start up a quick game fix in Steam.
There are numerous errors in this post!!!!
Hey I'm happy with my MBP as a portable. It is a little long in the tooth but was a good bargain in it's day. What many of us are saying is that the iMac is a terrible bargain if it is only available in Core 2 technology. That is simply do to it being outdated and grossly out classed by the latest Intel tech.
In any event it is a sign of an amature to compare one series processor with another based on clock rate. The latest i5 and i7's have a vastly improved core over the older Core 2 series. You can only see this difference running the same code on each. I think in manybcases you will be pleasantly surprised and in others shocked at the performance of these processors. Besides that they can automatically crank up the clock and run legacy code even faster. To dismiss Intels latest is to admit not knowing a thing about them.
Dave
This is your first mistake and it is a major one. Consummers don't make use of those cores the operating system does. More importantly Snow Leopard makes us of those cores in a very unique way that benefits the user and his experience with the machine.
You may want to reconsider that as you don't know what you are talking about.
This isn't always true. It depends upon the processor and the application. The new quad i5 for example can be anywhere from slightly faster to very fast relative to a Core 2 series even when running at a lower clock rate.
Hey I'm happy with my MBP as a portable. It is a little long in the tooth but was a good bargain in it's day. What many of us are saying is that the iMac is a terrible bargain if it is only available in Core 2 technology. That is simply do to it being outdated and grossly out classed by the latest Intel tech.
In any event it is a sign of an amature to compare one series processor with another based on clock rate. The latest i5 and i7's have a vastly improved core over the older Core 2 series. You can only see this difference running the same code on each. I think in manybcases you will be pleasantly surprised and in others shocked at the performance of these processors. Besides that they can automatically crank up the clock and run legacy code even faster. To dismiss Intels latest is to admit not knowing a thing about them.
Dave
Some people are so far up there own backsides its unreal...
Think this topic is well and truly over...
Apple has been selling the iMac for a decade. With every form-factor refresh, the model has become slimmer. A bulky G3 CRT made way for the G4 "LCD lamp" which made way for the G5/Intel "LCD PC on a stand".
I know people point out that the PC has followed the same form-factor advancement as long or longer then the iMac and it's bombed in the marketplace every time.
So maybe it's just better marketing that has made the iMac successful. During the G3 and G4 days you could get a "cheap" tower therefore the iMac was not the only "affordable" option for Mac consumers and therefore enjoyed sales success by default.
So making it even thinner seems to make good sense based on past performance.
I know people point out that the PC has followed the same form-factor advancement as long or longer then the iMac and it's bombed in the marketplace every time.
So maybe it's just better marketing that has made the iMac successful. During the G3 and G4 days you could get a "cheap" tower therefore the iMac was not the only "affordable" option for Mac consumers and therefore enjoyed sales success by default.
So making it even thinner seems to make good sense based on past performance.
agreed. People wont switch just because apple have not included a quad core.. You dont buy a mac for the hell of it because we all know you can get a windows PC/Laptop which is better spec for less
Or he pays half the price for the same pro hardware on an HP desktop. Just sayin'..
You sound pretty angry for a Buddhist.
I see. So we should pay 2500 dollars for a mac pro that can be whooped by a 1000 dollar PC? Yeah, I'd feel great about that!
I never said it didn't. I am looking at my CPU usage CONSTANTLY. VERY rarely do I ever see it being used to the max by the OS under normal circumstances, and by normal circumstances I mean Adobe's terrible flash player.
You might want to reconsider considering that I don't know what i'm talking about.
Well obviously it isn't ALWAYS true. But for the majority of things, it is.
Read my post about OpenCL
I wasn't basing them on clock rate. Far from it. I know plenty about them and i'm not too excited. All I care about is the power i'm getting from OpenCL and if you don't like it, then too bad.
Have you ever used Windows 7? it is better than Snow Leopard in many ways. Software choice, speed (go figure), file management, software choice, video editing capabilities in general, games selection for those who care, much much better hardware choices, and hmm...oh yeah software choice.
So true. Macs and PC's are entirely different beasts. You can build a windows machine with the exact same hardware specs as a iMac for erm.. lets say 700 bucks. But, it wont perform NEARLY AS WELL. The iMac would smoke it in probably all categories. It is how OSX uses the hardware that makes macs so good.
Then go and get a PC. Enjoy trying to accomplish anything on Windows. But if you were a PC you wouldn't be on Mac Forums... now would ya.
You have absolutely zero clue what you are talking about man. Install Windows 7 on your mac and see which OS runs faster and oh-so-famously "feels snappier."
Windows 7 may very well light things up for the PC. It's a very good and very efficient OS, and makes Snow Leopard feel slow. I do not like this of course, but it is true.
Way WAY too many people bash windows out of some religious like fervor for Macs, without actually having much experience or knowledge on what they are talking about. People need to basically stop lying about this kinda stuff.
Yes I have. I have it dual booted on my HP laptop with vista right now. Never use 7. I have all my data on 7 and I could just as easy use it, but I don't. You know why.... ITS GARBAGE.
Another attack based on emotion and not fact.
You can still work very efficiently in windows. What do YOU accompish on OSX that you couldn't on W7? Name one single thing that isn't platform specific.
I'll name one the other way. Efficient AVCHD editing. It's awesome on windows. It absolutely blows on OSX.
The only reason I am so outspoken and annoyed on this topic is because Apple is completely dropping the ball when they could be running circles around the competition. They are getting straight up beat though, in just about every way.
If only you understood. Windows takes way more hardware to run efficiently than a mac. Which is what I am saying. And as my previous 18 posts I stated. I have windows 7 on my laptop, and I hate it.