Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Steve Jobs on Apple, iPods, Lifestyle Brand

~Shard~ said:
I should hope that's enough space for you - that's bigger than some people's hard drives! :eek: ;)
Click to expand...
For the record, I've got over 40G of music on my Mac at home. (Almost all of it ripped from my CDs at 128K AAC.) I could see myself exceedng 60G in a few years.

Add in photo slide shows, buffer space for voice-recordings, and camera-transfers, and I could easily see a purpose for a model 80G or larger.

I also know people who only rip their music in lossless formats. Now you've got 5M/min instead of 1M/min. If I did that, my collection would balloon up to 200G, easily filling any iPod Apple is likely to sell for several years.

(FWIW, I'm using a 4G mini. I use some smart playlists to constantly rotate random songs from my collection through it.) This is good enough most of the time.
 
~Shard~ said:
I don't know if they'll have them out that quickly, what with the nano just being released, but that would definitely make for some amazing Xmas sales! Mind you, then the video iPod sales would cannabalize other iPod sales too, including the nano.

For this and (many) other reasons, I don't think we will be seeing a video iPod from Apple until 2006.
Click to expand...

I think its a good idea because Apple would get more prophet on the video ipod. I hope it look something like a PSP, but a bigger screen, skinnier and has swappable HDDs
 
Uhhh...

I'm pretty sure I read that the developer box running a generic Pentium at 3.6 GHz "seemed" as fast as about a Dual 2.0 GHz Mac. In fact, I think I saw it on Macrumors.
 
pubwvj said:
Steve is talking about the new µMac (microMacintosh) which is a PDA/tablet/cellphone/2.4GHzphone/WiFi-VOIPphone/GPS/MP3player/mobileHome/backup/etc. It runs the new MacOS Xµ, a slightly limited version of OSX Tiger which runs all basic applications just like the current Macs but of course not power apps like X-Plane/Halo/Photoshop/etc. Just in time for Xmas! :)
Click to expand...

The sizeof the ipod nano w/ an 40 gb flash drive and a projector that projects the image on your glasses via bluetooth 3 so the computer stays in you pocket and you wear touch sensitive finger things to type and control the curser. Next tuesday
 
lilstewart92 said:
I think we need something new. Something to like take our breath away. We haven't had that in a while! :(
Click to expand...


I'm one of those people who at the moment doesn't care about new and exciting things in the pipeline. I already have a perfectly functioning iPod mini, all i need is for the PB to finally get a modest upgrade- screen, HDD, graphics and better sound- whatever!

Steve Jobs can continue to pump out smaller iPods and fancy phones, but in the end there is only one thing that will get me excited:)

As a wise man once said (may of been Gene Simmons), "Give the people what they want"
 
c2104338 said:
I'm one of those people who at the moment doesn't care about new and exciting things in the pipeline. I already have a perfectly functioning iPod mini, all i need is for the PB to finally get a modest upgrade- screen, HDD, graphics and better sound- whatever!

Steve Jobs can continue to pump out smaller iPods and fancy phones, but in the end there is only one thing that will get me excited:)

As a wise man once said (may of been Gene Simmons), "Give the people what they want"
Click to expand...

Ah yes, from the wise tongue of Gene Simmons. :p <---needs longer tongue
 
waiting?

i read a lot the last weeks about "maybe" new macs.
in several forums etc.
i´ve got the feeling apple already lost their main purpose, computer.
i like the ipod and i´m very pleased with it.
but, now i´m looking for a new laptop.
i worked now for seven years with apple computers.
at the moment i´m really thinking to switch to "the dark side".
to be honest, i´m hardly p.... about apple.
is osx really working on other computers?
it could be an alternative.
 
pb updates plz

The ONLY thing holding me back from buying a new PB is a update...that and I am pretty skeptical about the future of Mac with the Intel switch...and Windows is starting to get a little more stable ever since SP2. Look at the Windows Lappies....the PWN the PowerBook....it's sad.
 
I literally laughed at this!!!!!!!


shamino said:
Prophet? No wonder they're so successful. These suckers can predict the future!
Click to expand...


Here are a few things...

I like Mac because...

1.OSX

2.PPC-it really set it apart from Windows

3.The apps

Want to know what would suck? They switch to Intel and IBM starts making better processors....way better. And then maybe we switch back, and for a short period a LOT of people bought Intel and now the Intel people are screwed and Apple is a mess!
 
Surreal said:
new ipod = recording? :eek: :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Integrated recording would be a nice feature. Or Apple could simply make their own microphone device and make a little more.
A feature I would like to see is an iSight-like camera integrated into an iPod. That would be cooler than simply making the iPod play video. Recording your own.
 
iQuit said:
Want to know what would suck? They switch to Intel and IBM starts making better processors....way better. And then maybe we switch back, and for a short period a LOT of people bought Intel and now the Intel people are screwed and Apple is a mess!
Click to expand...
Or....

Apple sells both kinds of systems beyond 2007. Maybe Intel-based systems for the low-end and PPC-based systems for the high end.

If universal binaries are all Apple claims they will be, users shouldn't be affected that much.

Of course, you'd still have to deal with with bone-headed companies like Adobe that would choose one platform and flat-out refuse to ship code on the other, even in the face of tremendous customer demands. So maybe that wouldn't be such a great idea.

But the way things are going, I doubt Apple will move back to PPC ever again, once the Intel transition is completed. Apple doesn't forgive suppliers that burn them. Notice how Apple has not even considered the advanced PPC chips from Freescale, even though many of them have the potential to trounce the IBM 970 chip.

Also notice how they never shipped anything based on the 68060.
 
shamino said:
Also notice how they never shipped anything based on the 68060.
Click to expand...

Apple dropping the 68k line had little to do with supply, in my opinion, but had more to do with the fact Apple was moving to RISC and the 68060 was CISC, plus it had more architectural features in common with the original Pentium. Also the 060's FPU performance was crap since it wasn't pipelined.
 
ZorPrime said:
Apple dropping the 68k line had little to do with supply, in my opinion, but had more to do with the fact Apple was moving to RISC and the 68060 was CISC, plus it had more architectural features in common with the original Pentium. Also the 060's FPU performance was crap since it wasn't pipelined.
Click to expand...
Just like Apple's decision to move away from PPC and towards Intel has little to do with supply. It was IBM's lack of desire to ship competitive processors, not their lack of production capability.

And just like Apple refused to consider another 68K box after switching to PPC, they will almost certainly refuse to consider another PPC box after they finish the transition to Intel.
 
shamino said:
Just like Apple's decision to move away from PPC and towards Intel has little to do with supply. It was IBM's lack of desire to ship competitive processors, not their lack of production capability.
Click to expand...

I respectfully disagree in part on that point. I think Apple's shifting to Intel has more to due with profit than IBM's "lack of desire". IBM is very comitted to the PPC architecture. I think Apple simply doesn't want to spend the R&D $$$ on processor development anymore. They'd rather shop around for third party vendors for their CPUs. I think the "iPod Profit Model" adopted by Apple is to blame for this shift. One day, we might even see Apple using AMD processors instead of Intel.

shamino said:
And just like Apple refused to consider another 68K box after switching to PPC, they will almost certainly refuse to consider another PPC box after they finish the transition to Intel.
Click to expand...

Very true. It does seem to be the case for now.
 
...one day

ZorPrime said:
One day, we might even see Apple using AMD processors instead of Intel.
Click to expand...
Perhaps sometime in the future....

I would expect that Apple has agreed to exclusively use Intel CPUs (for x86/x64) for a significant period of time, however.

One wouldn't expect Intel to invest in Apple (porting Intel's compilers and tools, for example) if Apple could immediately use those tools for AMD chips.

Right now, however, AMD's only clear advantage is in the single-chip dual-core area, where the tight memory coupling is an advantage over Intel's dual-cores. (In multi-chip configurations, however, AMD's NUMA architecture can lead to erratic performance.)

The new 2 MiB L2 cache Xeons seem to have caught up with Opteron on most performance fronts.

AMD's mobile lineup is weak compared to Pentium M. AMD has a better dual-core lineup, but by year's end Intel will have dual-chip capable dual-core. So, before you see any MacIntels that advantage will be gone.

wikipedia said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xeon#Xeon_.26_Xeon_MP_.2864-bit.29

Xeon & Xeon MP (64-bit)

A slightly updated core called Irwindale was released in early 2005, differing from Nocona in having twice the L2 cache and the ability to reduce its clockspeeds in situations that didn't need much processing power.

Current performance numbers are somewhat limited, though the independant tests which have been conducted show the Irwindale outperforming the Opteron.

64-bit Xeon MPs were introduced in April 2005. The cheaper version was Cranford, an MP version of Nocona. The more expensive version was Potomac; a Nocona with an 8 MB L3 cache.
Click to expand...
("Xeon MP" chips are multi-chip (quad and higher) capable, "Xeon" chips are dual-capable)
 
AidenShaw said:
Perhaps sometime in the future....

I would expect that Apple has agreed to exclusively use Intel CPUs (for x86/x64) for a significant period of time, however.

One wouldn't expect Intel to invest in Apple (porting Intel's compilers and tools, for example) if Apple could immediately use those tools for AMD chips.
Click to expand...

I totally agree with you. Excellent points. I don’t see Apple moving over to AMD anytime in the foreseeable future either.

I think your explanation reinforces the reasoning behind Apple’s long-term CPU goal for their computer lineup (particularly their mobile units). Apple will no longer have such a long turnaround time between CPU R&D, implementation, and production. It’ll be painful in the short term but I think The Switch will be well worth it. :cool:
 
ZorPrime said:
I think your explanation reinforces the reasoning behind Apple’s long-term CPU goal for their computer lineup (particularly their mobile units). Apple will no longer have such a long turnaround time between CPU R&D, implementation, and production. It’ll be painful in the short term but I think The Switch will be well worth it. :cool:
Click to expand...

I agree. I for one welcome our new Intel overlords. ;)

I'll be due for a new Mac in 2007 anyway, so picking up a nice Intel Mac with Leopard pre-installed and a kick-ass Blu Ray drive is my plan. :cool:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back