Steve Jobs To Keynote Macworld San Francisco 2007

[peharri]

You do realize that would only vindicate the rumor, and people would say he's only saying that because he doesn't want anyone leaking the info on the product Apple's developing...

The first few times, yes. But when three years rolls by, and Steve has announced each time "I've been looking at the rumours sites. There's some great ideas being suggested that I can honestly say we're not working on. But I'd like to single out the iPhone, the tablet, and the Powerbook G5, as we've looked at these and I can honestly tell you that, right now, we see no point in making them. Maybe things will change next year, but as of now, I'd like you to know that our engineers are working on much more interesting, exciting, original hardware." then people are going to start to take it seriously.

Especially if he also comes up with things like "Oh, and while obviously we're going to do what we can to keep our hardware up to date, I can assure you we're not planning the rumoured 64 bit upgrades for the MacBook Pro in the next quarter."

As time goes by, people will recognize that he's not lying. And that'll make it much harder to make stuff up in order to sell page hits.

Of course, I'm fairly convinced the "iPhone" nonsense is probably partly being exploited by Apple at the moment. They didn't invent it, but I suspect it's being used to try to find leakers at the moment. Does anyone seriously think Steve Jobs is running around talking openly about a super-secret product?

 

[Multimedia]

Apple's Pokey Release Pace Is Still Not A Certainty

I'm afraid the new Intel Apple is going to be the same as the old PPC Apple.

Apple, (in the past), always blamed slow implementation of new processors and long shipping wait times on low Motorola or IBM processor yields.

Now Apple doesn't have the same excuse with Intel but I bet we don't see a Merom MBP or an Octo-MacPro until MacWorld SF or later.

Anyone taking bets!

I'm not betting. But I think the C2D MB & MBPs will come out before Thanksgiving November 23. I can see them holding out on the Dual Clovertown Mac Pro for dramatic purposes in the January 9 SteveNote. But they will be a full two months behind the shipping date if they do, which would confirm your fear which I can fully understand.

Seems like they have not figured out how to turn on a dime or have make a conscious decision to not try and keep up with the latest ASAP and just poke along to the beat of their own weird drum. I feel a little bit hostage to their slow release pace. But perhaps we can't really understand what goes on behind the curtain and should cut them more slack.

After all, they were spot on with the rapid release of the C2D iMacs a month ago. Maybe we're all being irrationally and prematurely impatient.

 

[nagromme]

FunFact:

1 in 5 MacRumors voters think someone else should keynote MacWorld SF

But who? A possible clue:

I received an email form letter directly from Phil Schiller today, asking me to vote negative on this story. From what I hear in the forums, Phil has sent a LOT of these out today.

Very interesting.

 

[donlphi]

I heard this is all a rumor!!!

Coming as little surprise to veteran Apple watchers, IDG World Expo announced on Tuesday that Apple CEO Steve Jobs would deliver the opening keynote address at Macworld Expo San Francisco. The expo will be held at San Francisco's Moscone Convention Center from January 8-12, 2007, with the keynote on Tuesday January 9th at 9 am Pacific at Moscone West.

Last year's keynote brought software updates including iLife and iWork 06 and Mac OS X 10.4.4. Also, the first Intel Macs were announced 6 months early in the form of the iMac and MacBook Pro.

While still early, this year's expectations have already begun to gain steam, with obvious expectations of iLife and iWork updates as well as the formal launch of the "iTV". Also possible is Apple's long-awaited phone and similarly long-awaited "true" video iPod, although both products have seen several setbacks. Lastly, with OS 10.5 Leopard's release around the corner, Jobs will undoubtedly take the opportunity to highlight some already announced (and perhaps some remaining "top-secret") features of the new operating system.

Digg This

 

[50548]

Windows and Linux are running on the same platform, and both have proven SMP capabilities far beyond what Apple is selling.

Most of the quad and octo systems at IDF were running XP, W2K3, or Vista. None were running OSX.

Squarely wrong. Even "The Inquirer" has talked about the vastly superior multitasking AND SMP features of OS X Leopard, as compared to what Vista seems to offer. Damn, even today any version of Windows crawls far behind OS X in that (XP Home didn't even have SMP support in the first place).

Second: the fact that IDF didn't have any "octo" machines derives from the simple and obvious assessment that Apple does NOT have any "octo" machines. Anything else would be just illegal.

And the lack of any OS X-running "quad" machines is not surprising either, given the usual (and) historical focus of the IDF; besides, it's an easy fallacy to assert that the non-existence of machines "running OS X" in quad configurations at a certain event means a lack of capacity by OS X to do so. This statement has no basis whatsoever.

 

[JackSYi]

Thank god. My first MWSF (been saving up for it), with the primary reason being: Steve Jobs.

 

[50548]

Thank god. My first MWSF (been saving up for it), with the primary reason being: Steve Jobs.

To listen a keynote about his retirement?

 

[AidenShaw]

Squarely wrong. Even "The Inquirer" has talked about the vastly superior multitasking AND SMP features of OS X Leopard, as compared to what Vista seems to offer. Damn, even today any version of Windows crawls far behind OS X in that.

If you say so. I guess the people running databases on 64-processor Windows systems haven't read The Inquirer.

Second: the fact that IDF didn't have any "octo" machines derives from the simple and obvious assessment that Apple does NOT have any "octo" machines. Anything else would be just illegal.

HP, Dell, IBM and the rest were running octos - their dual-socket workstations and servers were fitted with Clovertown samples provided by Intel. I didn't know that there was a law against that.

...it's an easy fallacy to assert that the non-existence of machines "running OS X" in quad configurations at a certain event means a lack of capacity by OS X to do so.

Sorry for the confusion - my point was that Intel was demonstrating the power of the octos by demoing with Windows as the OS.

One demo even had a Windows quad (dual-dual) system which was upgraded onstage to an octo (dual-quad) system - the benchmark was re-run with the 8 processors on the octo to show the improvement.

If Windows SMP and multi-tasking is as bad as you and The Inquirer say, I would have expected Intel to use Linux....

 

[digitalbiker]

Squarely wrong. Even "The Inquirer" has talked about the vastly superior multitasking AND SMP features of OS X Leopard, as compared to what Vista seems to offer. Damn, even today any version of Windows crawls far behind OS X in that (XP Home didn't even have SMP support in the first place).

Second: the fact that IDF didn't have any "octo" machines derives from the simple and obvious assessment that Apple does NOT have any "octo" machines. Anything else would be just illegal.

And the lack of any OS X-running "quad" machines is not surprising either, given the usual (and) historical focus of the IDF; besides, it's an easy fallacy to assert that the non-existence of machines "running OS X" in quad configurations at a certain event means a lack of capacity by OS X to do so. This statement has no basis whatsoever.

The inquirer is definitely wrong about this! OS X is a great OS with many features but it needs a lot of work with SMP compared to 64 bit windows and Linux.

In fact, OS X is behind on being a full 64 bit OS as well.

Besides, I wouldn't contradict Aiden if I were you. The man knows of that which he speaks.

 

[peharri]

Second: the fact that IDF didn't have any "octo" machines derives from the simple and obvious assessment that Apple does NOT have any "octo" machines. Anything else would be just illegal.

It'd be pretty easy to check actually, and really quite legal. The part of Mac OS X that actually implements SMP is the kernel, which is part of Darwin. You can install Darwin without fear of repurcusions, on your toaster, if you want.

 

[Multimedia]

Aiden Is Similar To GOD Here

The inquirer is definitely wrong about this! OS X is a great OS with many features but it needs a lot of work with SMP compared to 64 bit windows and Linux.

In fact, OS X is behind on being a full 64 bit OS as well.

Besides, I wouldn't contradict Aiden if I were you. The man knows of that which he speaks.

No kidding. The only time I contradict Aiden is always inadvertant use of my ignorant brain connected to my loose fingers. And Aiden is always happy to correct the error of my ways while I am glad he does.

 

[w_parietti22]

I might be going for my 16th Bday

 

[brepublican]

This is HOT sh*t!! I'm keeping my fingers crossed for the 'true video iPod'. And a stunning live performance! By Dido or Alicia Keys - with SJ going 'Wooo' at the end of the live performance

And is it wierd that I keep watching last month's keynote (just the end of it though) for that sizzling John Legend performance?? I've seen it like more than thrice already...

 

[nagromme]

In fact, OS X is behind on being a full 64 bit OS as well.

Meanwhile Vista will be behind Leopard in 64-bit support An optional install no less!

 

[AidenShaw]

Let's re-examine that claim when both 10.5 and Vista are released

Meanwhile Vista will be behind Leopard in 64-bit support An optional install no less!

This claim, of course, is based on two Powerpoints from a Stevenote at WWDC.

The current 10.5 builds are behind XP 64-bit in support.

And those Apple 64-bit Intel systems - not a lick of 64-bit support in the OSX that runs on them....

 

[drsmithy]

lets hope for a great keynote:

1- new Mac without display, performance would be better than imac, and not as much $$ as mac pro. basically a mid sized tower good enough for mid level use on graphics, games and much more. something upgradable by the end user.

Much as I'd love this, it ain't going to happen. Users have been begging for such a machine since Apple slimmed down their product line in the late '90s and left that gaping hole in it, but to no avail.

Apple won't release such a machine because they know it would absolutely slaughter high margin PowerMac^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HMac Pro sales unless ridiculously (and obviously) artificially crippled. A secondary effect would be the loss of sales on their high-margin LCDs.

So, while the market for such a machine is massive, Apple won't sell directly to them because they make more money by "up-selling" them to a Mac Pro or high-end iMac.

2- media center to complement the Itv

They've already got one - the Mac Mini (I've got one running Windows MCE and it's great). Maybe an update to Front Row so that it's an equivalent to Windows MCE...

I must admit I don't see the point of the iTV at all when you can get a console like the Xbox 360 for the same price that will do everything the iTV is supposed to do and more.

 

[drsmithy]

The Mini is pretty powerful. Sorry to discount your argument, but I think that it's more than enough for people out there that aren't power users/computer nerds. Heck, my dad runs engineering software all day long on his Pentium 3 733mhz, 256MB RAM computer and doesn't feel the need to upgrade.

It being in a small case is even better for the common user. Maybe to us, a small case seems like a bad computer, but the specs are similar to MacBook specs, which seems like enough for almost all users out there.

Minis suck for gaming (and iMacs aren't much better). Much as people like to play this issue down, I think it's relatively significant problem for machines that are being primarily marketed at home users.

Certainly, the single biggest reason I haven't replaced my Desktop PC with a Mac - despite *really* wanting to (even though it would run Windows as much as OS X) - is because a Mac that can play current games well is frighteningly expensive.

 

[drsmithy]

Squarely wrong. Even "The Inquirer" has talked about the vastly superior multitasking AND SMP features of OS X Leopard, as compared to what Vista seems to offer. Damn, even today any version of Windows crawls far behind OS X in that (XP Home didn't even have SMP support in the first place).

The Inquirer is wrong (and it certainly wouldn't be the first time). Not only is Windows's SMP capability ahead of OS X's right now, it's improved even more in Vista. All those improvements in 10.4 regarding SMP ? NT was getting them 7 - 8 years ago.

Oh, and XP Home most certainly *does* support SMP (and seeing as it uses the same kernel as other versions of Windows, it makes better use of multiple CPUs than OS X does).

Windows NT was designed from day one for multiprocessor machines and has been running on them since 1993. It's at least as good as its contemporaries.

 

[drsmithy]

It'd be pretty easy to check actually, and really quite legal. The part of Mac OS X that actually implements SMP is the kernel, which is part of Darwin. You can install Darwin without fear of repurcusions, on your toaster, if you want.

Isn't the version of Darwin underpinning OS X/Intel no longer Open Source ?

 

[peharri]

Isn't the version of Darwin underpinning OS X/Intel no longer Open Source ?

Define "Open Source". If by Open Source, you mean provided under a liberal license that provides for the ability of users to excercise Free Software rights, then it's open source. If you mean characterized by an open development model in which any party can contribute with contributions being judged by merit, then, no, not really.

Darwin remains licensed under APSL2, and the source code for a usable subset (missing some device drivers, notably nVidia and ATI drivers) is downloadable and sharable.