puckhead193
Aug 6, 10:29 AM
all i care about is an updated iMac...... i guess tomarrow i will find out.
littleman23408
Dec 1, 05:27 PM
Sorry, Bandit, I don't have tips for the licenses. I am not that far into them yet.
Took out the Lotus challenge in a snap. The first few times I came close to finishing it, I would have had 1st and beat it, but I either ran into the grass, or the person in first I was about to pass slowed down to much and I nailed him. But, the first time I actually completed the two laps, I was 1st. If someone needs tips I will post it.
Took out the Lotus challenge in a snap. The first few times I came close to finishing it, I would have had 1st and beat it, but I either ran into the grass, or the person in first I was about to pass slowed down to much and I nailed him. But, the first time I actually completed the two laps, I was 1st. If someone needs tips I will post it.
Scottsdale
Apr 6, 11:38 AM
clock speed is not everything... a 1.4ghz sb processor will kill anything you are doing with a 2.4ghz c2d. There are many other factors in a processor than just clock speed so i wouldn't be worried. There is no doubt that the sb will be a much faster processor than the ancient c2d.
Also, I would say 50% less graphics is a bit of a stretch. Haven't personally ran any benchmarks but was reading a thread the other day and in the benchmarks and graphics they were showing that the 320m averages about 5-10 extra fps over the 3000.
here is a thread you can look at and compare for yourself.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1103257
Sure the integrated graphics are going to be slightly worse, but at least you will have a nice new processor. Can't always have your cake and eat it too, especially in an ultraportable.
When the mba was refreshed everyone was complaining about the outdated processor, now rumors of a processor upgrade and people bitch about the integrated graphics. Guess you can't please everyone but jesus, sometimes it just seems like people find anything they can to complain about.
Here's a simple solution for all of you, if you want the "slightly" better graphics go buy a macbook air right now, it's not like apple has stopped selling them. If you'd rather have a sandy bridge processor, wait it out. Seems simple but i guess that's just me?!?!?!:eek:
Sure clock speed isn't everything. But you better go read up some more on Tue Intel HD3000 IGP. You're using facts from the STD voltage SB IGP and applying them to the ULV SB IGP. Go read about the graphics on the Samsung Series 9 laptops. The 13" model uses this very chip cited. It shows greater than a 50% drop in graphics performance from the 320m to ULV IGP used in SB.
This has been the problem all along with everyone. They're attributing facts that are actually fallacies to this Intel IGP.
Also, I would say 50% less graphics is a bit of a stretch. Haven't personally ran any benchmarks but was reading a thread the other day and in the benchmarks and graphics they were showing that the 320m averages about 5-10 extra fps over the 3000.
here is a thread you can look at and compare for yourself.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1103257
Sure the integrated graphics are going to be slightly worse, but at least you will have a nice new processor. Can't always have your cake and eat it too, especially in an ultraportable.
When the mba was refreshed everyone was complaining about the outdated processor, now rumors of a processor upgrade and people bitch about the integrated graphics. Guess you can't please everyone but jesus, sometimes it just seems like people find anything they can to complain about.
Here's a simple solution for all of you, if you want the "slightly" better graphics go buy a macbook air right now, it's not like apple has stopped selling them. If you'd rather have a sandy bridge processor, wait it out. Seems simple but i guess that's just me?!?!?!:eek:
Sure clock speed isn't everything. But you better go read up some more on Tue Intel HD3000 IGP. You're using facts from the STD voltage SB IGP and applying them to the ULV SB IGP. Go read about the graphics on the Samsung Series 9 laptops. The 13" model uses this very chip cited. It shows greater than a 50% drop in graphics performance from the 320m to ULV IGP used in SB.
This has been the problem all along with everyone. They're attributing facts that are actually fallacies to this Intel IGP.
11thIndian
Apr 6, 07:38 AM
The functions inside FCP do not need the OS support. Apple can install private frameworks, and they do it already, for their own applications. So i think they will support SL.
AV Foundation brings back QT7-features to QTX. Apple uses AV Foundation in the new QTX-player of Lion.
And AV Foundation is what allows iOS devices like the iPhone and iPad, with their significantly slower processors and reduced RAM, to view and edit h264 media.
AV Foundation sidesteps ALL the problems of QTKit. It's a fresh start.
Here's a great article from Philip Hodgett's site:
http://www.philiphodgetts.com/2011/02/a-new-64-bit-final-cut-pro/
AV Foundation brings back QT7-features to QTX. Apple uses AV Foundation in the new QTX-player of Lion.
And AV Foundation is what allows iOS devices like the iPhone and iPad, with their significantly slower processors and reduced RAM, to view and edit h264 media.
AV Foundation sidesteps ALL the problems of QTKit. It's a fresh start.
Here's a great article from Philip Hodgett's site:
http://www.philiphodgetts.com/2011/02/a-new-64-bit-final-cut-pro/
70355
Aug 7, 03:53 PM
What I like to say to PC fans that rip on Macs is this: Buy a Mac, use it for a year, and come back to me. Then if you still don't like Macs then at least you have supporting evidence, however I doubt that will be the case!
That's quite an offer. I'm sure you get a lot of takers.:rolleyes:
That's quite an offer. I'm sure you get a lot of takers.:rolleyes:
gnasher729
Apr 8, 07:43 AM
Isn't this hypocritical since Apple has been known to do this in their retail stores too?
Sources? Evidence? Easy to make cheap accusations, much harder to prove them.
Sources? Evidence? Easy to make cheap accusations, much harder to prove them.
portishead
Apr 12, 02:50 AM
Are you a professional editor? Having never had any of the above issues suggests to me that you have been very lucky if you are.
Because somebody talks about 2 issues I don't deal with in my workflow? Jeez, calm down.
Because somebody talks about 2 issues I don't deal with in my workflow? Jeez, calm down.
Bleubird2
Apr 27, 08:51 AM
Sleep walking a lot lately?
Do you have a kid or someone using your phone while you're asleep?
Do you have a kid or someone using your phone while you're asleep?
Macnoviz
Jul 22, 03:03 AM
So I read in this thread that Kentsfield and Clovertown ARE compatible with Conroe and Woodcrest sockets (respectively) (Cloverton or Clovertown?)
Hope for upgrading an iMac to Quad Core is kindled! At least if Apple releases Conroe iMacs.
BTW, In my opinion, one thing a person should never, ever say is some computer has too much power, and that it will never be needed. So when 128 core CPUs come out in ~10 years time, will we still be considering dual core CPUs as fast enough for our use?
I seem to remember that when the original DOS operating system was created, its RAM was limited. I can't remember exactly to how much, but it was decided that people would never use more than a few kilobytes of memory. Now we are arguing that Mac should provide no less than a gigabyte! Now we are moving to 64 bit processing, with its capability to address a few exobytes, or millions of Terabytes of storage, it seems impossible that we will ever need 128bit computing. But, no doubt, one day we will.
When we will be able to download our entire lives, and even conciousness into a computer, as is said to happen in about 40 years (very much looking forward to), I dare say it will take a lot of memory to do, and even more processing power to manage effectively, especially if we wanted to "live" inside computers, as we will no doubt want to do someday.
So as a conclusion to my most recent rant, Please, never tell me a computer is too powerfu, has too many cores, or has too much storage capacity. If it is there to be used, it will be used. It always is.
I agree with your point on never saying a computer is too powerful, although living in computers is probably not going to happen. Sounds a bit too Matrix-like for me.
Hope for upgrading an iMac to Quad Core is kindled! At least if Apple releases Conroe iMacs.
BTW, In my opinion, one thing a person should never, ever say is some computer has too much power, and that it will never be needed. So when 128 core CPUs come out in ~10 years time, will we still be considering dual core CPUs as fast enough for our use?
I seem to remember that when the original DOS operating system was created, its RAM was limited. I can't remember exactly to how much, but it was decided that people would never use more than a few kilobytes of memory. Now we are arguing that Mac should provide no less than a gigabyte! Now we are moving to 64 bit processing, with its capability to address a few exobytes, or millions of Terabytes of storage, it seems impossible that we will ever need 128bit computing. But, no doubt, one day we will.
When we will be able to download our entire lives, and even conciousness into a computer, as is said to happen in about 40 years (very much looking forward to), I dare say it will take a lot of memory to do, and even more processing power to manage effectively, especially if we wanted to "live" inside computers, as we will no doubt want to do someday.
So as a conclusion to my most recent rant, Please, never tell me a computer is too powerfu, has too many cores, or has too much storage capacity. If it is there to be used, it will be used. It always is.
I agree with your point on never saying a computer is too powerful, although living in computers is probably not going to happen. Sounds a bit too Matrix-like for me.
brownpaw
Jun 11, 03:50 PM
I used to work at radioshack too and the resources there suck. Activation will take longer than usual and they can mess up your account/credit. I hated activating phones cause it was a hassle since we were not connected directly with carriers.
Now for Radioshack. Brother-in-Law goes and his credit gets run twice by child who works at Radioshack and signs him up to expensive plan. So they have to call their 3rd party service provider and the manager there and employee make a big mess of his ATT account and turns out the phone they had was from a customer return, not even brand new. He ends up just getting bad credit after 4 hrs in the stuffy dusty shack. We go to apple next week, now he has to put deposit cause his credit was messed up but guess what? thats right apple waived it as they saw the mistake and he gets a brand new phone. :) Radioshack = worse place to get any phone Apple = smart well trained employees
I just talked about these cases closest to me but I'll tell you those Radioshack employees are the worst to buy any cellphone from. you take a risk with your credit, used phone possibly, long activations, and bad locale.
Just wanted to say that generally when people have these types of experiences, they are at RadioShack franchises and not company-run (corporate) stores. I have worked at both in the past, and though it's been about 6 years, I can say that things were definitely very different.
Franchise stores, at the time, did indeed work through 3rd party processors for cell phones so it was easier to mess things up. However, it was all through a web interface so more often than not the problems stemmed from the interface crashing or it not being up to date with the latest promotions, etc, than actual user error.
Corporate stores also ran through a web interface but it was directly through the carrier so it was much more reliable.
The bigger problem with cell phones at RadioShack was consistency. The sales flyers would always talk about this deal or that deal, and oftentimes that deal wasn't even offered to franchise stores.
I think a bit of this has been resolved, and I wouldn't mind getting a phone through RadioShack nowadays if there was a good promotion.
However, as someone else said, RadioShack prices on most other things are ridiculously high. I felt terrible when I saw a guy at our store sell this old man a 30-ft HDMI cable for $300. Not kidding at all. I don't know how they stay in business, their prices on most things are not competitive at all.
sw
Now for Radioshack. Brother-in-Law goes and his credit gets run twice by child who works at Radioshack and signs him up to expensive plan. So they have to call their 3rd party service provider and the manager there and employee make a big mess of his ATT account and turns out the phone they had was from a customer return, not even brand new. He ends up just getting bad credit after 4 hrs in the stuffy dusty shack. We go to apple next week, now he has to put deposit cause his credit was messed up but guess what? thats right apple waived it as they saw the mistake and he gets a brand new phone. :) Radioshack = worse place to get any phone Apple = smart well trained employees
I just talked about these cases closest to me but I'll tell you those Radioshack employees are the worst to buy any cellphone from. you take a risk with your credit, used phone possibly, long activations, and bad locale.
Just wanted to say that generally when people have these types of experiences, they are at RadioShack franchises and not company-run (corporate) stores. I have worked at both in the past, and though it's been about 6 years, I can say that things were definitely very different.
Franchise stores, at the time, did indeed work through 3rd party processors for cell phones so it was easier to mess things up. However, it was all through a web interface so more often than not the problems stemmed from the interface crashing or it not being up to date with the latest promotions, etc, than actual user error.
Corporate stores also ran through a web interface but it was directly through the carrier so it was much more reliable.
The bigger problem with cell phones at RadioShack was consistency. The sales flyers would always talk about this deal or that deal, and oftentimes that deal wasn't even offered to franchise stores.
I think a bit of this has been resolved, and I wouldn't mind getting a phone through RadioShack nowadays if there was a good promotion.
However, as someone else said, RadioShack prices on most other things are ridiculously high. I felt terrible when I saw a guy at our store sell this old man a 30-ft HDMI cable for $300. Not kidding at all. I don't know how they stay in business, their prices on most things are not competitive at all.
sw
bankshot
Aug 7, 07:12 PM
As others have said, Time Machine is likely either a direct port of Sun's ZFS, or an equivalent implementation in HFS+. Actually, that's an interesting point -- if it's ZFS, it'll require a reformat in order to use it. If they did it themselves in HFS+, that's a lot more useful for anything besides brand new machines. Though ZFS is a much more modern design, despite all the things Apple's done to extend HFS+ in recent years (journaling, case-sensitive option, etc). Might be good to make a clean break and move forward.
Anyway, no real surprise there, unless you count the fancy glitz that Apple put on top of it. And of course, who's surprised when they do that? ;)
What I'd like to know more about is Spotlight. It was one of the most disappointing features in Tiger for me. It was supposed to revolutionize how you use the computer, but it turned out to be extremely slow and almost useless to me. I suggested from day one -- in fact from the day Steve demoed Tiger at WWDC in 2004 -- that Spotlight should not only index your online drives, but also network drives and offline media (backup CDs and DVDs). The latter two are far more useful to me personally, as I have data scattered across several different computers and on dozens of backups.
According to today's keynote, Apple has finally added support for network drives. But I wonder -- does this mean only other Leopard Macs, or any shared drive that the Mac can connect to? Can I index a Windows shared drive from my Mac, or even a Unix NFS mount? Or is it only other Macs? Once again, if it's limited to other Leopard Macs, then this would be useless for a lot of people (mostly ME! :D).
Also, will they add indexing of offline media? There's no mention of it on the Leopard Spotlight page. Do I still have time to suggest it (again)? Hmmm....
Finally, gotta wonder what those "top secret" features are, and why so secret? Maybe they might not get done in time for release, and therefore Apple doesn't want to look bad like MS pulling Vista features left and right? Surely there's not enough time for a competitor to steal the idea and get it out before Apple does? Even if "next spring" means early June... That's no time at all in large scale software projects.
Anyway, no real surprise there, unless you count the fancy glitz that Apple put on top of it. And of course, who's surprised when they do that? ;)
What I'd like to know more about is Spotlight. It was one of the most disappointing features in Tiger for me. It was supposed to revolutionize how you use the computer, but it turned out to be extremely slow and almost useless to me. I suggested from day one -- in fact from the day Steve demoed Tiger at WWDC in 2004 -- that Spotlight should not only index your online drives, but also network drives and offline media (backup CDs and DVDs). The latter two are far more useful to me personally, as I have data scattered across several different computers and on dozens of backups.
According to today's keynote, Apple has finally added support for network drives. But I wonder -- does this mean only other Leopard Macs, or any shared drive that the Mac can connect to? Can I index a Windows shared drive from my Mac, or even a Unix NFS mount? Or is it only other Macs? Once again, if it's limited to other Leopard Macs, then this would be useless for a lot of people (mostly ME! :D).
Also, will they add indexing of offline media? There's no mention of it on the Leopard Spotlight page. Do I still have time to suggest it (again)? Hmmm....
Finally, gotta wonder what those "top secret" features are, and why so secret? Maybe they might not get done in time for release, and therefore Apple doesn't want to look bad like MS pulling Vista features left and right? Surely there's not enough time for a competitor to steal the idea and get it out before Apple does? Even if "next spring" means early June... That's no time at all in large scale software projects.
OSXconvert
Aug 17, 03:32 PM
It will be exactly 25% faster in UB photoshop. How do I know? I tested in photoshop 7.01 in OS X and in XP on the mac pro. XP test was 25% faster. There you go.
Macenforcer, that's a good estimate based on PS7, but we have no idea how much Adobe will optimize the code in CS3.
The thing that makes the Mac vs PC battle so interesting now is that the hardware is essentially the same. So the differences will come down to the hardware drivers and the software and OS optimizations. Though I'd love to see Adobe preferentially optimize the UB code for CS3, I doubt they will financially risk it being much better than Windows. As much as I love the OSX interface better than Windows, I suspect that the deeper pockets of Microsoft will be able to ensure that Vista and CS3 remain neck and neck competitive if not superior in pure performance to Leopard and CS3. Before, when Apple had Motorola's and IBM's chips, things like vector processing speed shone on the Mac, but now the playing field is totally level.
Though it was a smart move to increase marketshare when Apple switched to Intel, it may actually hurt the high-end pro market because all pro machines will be running on the best Intel processors. Choosing, say AMD, over Intel might have been a wiser choice: Apple would have gotten PC compatibility with the possibility of increased performance or Mac customization which would have made the pro machines really scream compared to Windows.
From now on, whatever processor Apple has, Windows has, and the differences will come down mostly on the OS. I do have to tip my hat to Apple for developing BootCamp, because now we as Apple users get the best of both worlds.
Macenforcer, that's a good estimate based on PS7, but we have no idea how much Adobe will optimize the code in CS3.
The thing that makes the Mac vs PC battle so interesting now is that the hardware is essentially the same. So the differences will come down to the hardware drivers and the software and OS optimizations. Though I'd love to see Adobe preferentially optimize the UB code for CS3, I doubt they will financially risk it being much better than Windows. As much as I love the OSX interface better than Windows, I suspect that the deeper pockets of Microsoft will be able to ensure that Vista and CS3 remain neck and neck competitive if not superior in pure performance to Leopard and CS3. Before, when Apple had Motorola's and IBM's chips, things like vector processing speed shone on the Mac, but now the playing field is totally level.
Though it was a smart move to increase marketshare when Apple switched to Intel, it may actually hurt the high-end pro market because all pro machines will be running on the best Intel processors. Choosing, say AMD, over Intel might have been a wiser choice: Apple would have gotten PC compatibility with the possibility of increased performance or Mac customization which would have made the pro machines really scream compared to Windows.
From now on, whatever processor Apple has, Windows has, and the differences will come down mostly on the OS. I do have to tip my hat to Apple for developing BootCamp, because now we as Apple users get the best of both worlds.
mrwombat
Sep 19, 08:43 AM
As a fomer Mac user, who had Macs from 1987 through about 1997, and did most of my graduate school work on a Quadra in that period, I am looking forward to returning to the fold. For a variety of personal and professional reasons I need and will continue to need a high-end gaming rig, meaning a Windows box, but for my academic work I really want to switch to a Mac Book Pro to replace my aging Compaq laptop that I use as my primary office machine. I want a machine I can carry about, that is easy to use, and that will be more useful for me in doing classroom presentations, working with some video and audio stuff (again for presentations). So a MBP seems ideal.
But I'm also a computer fan, reasonably knowledgeable, and reasonably savvy. I've built machines before, routinely do hardware and software tweaking and upgrading, and have had multiple computers of various sorts since my first back in early 1983. That's the main reason the delay in getting the new MBPs out is frustrating. I don't need a 64bit processor right now. I don't need the extra 20% or whatever it is performance boost. But I also don't want to drop $2500 on a notebook that is neither leading-edge nor a price-performance leader within it's own market segment.
In buying PCs, I usually buy a step below the best, because the price performance ratio is very good. Until Apple upgrades the MBPs, I can't do that, as there is only, um, one choice really. I also can't get the latest and greatest, C2D, either. So while the current Yonah MBP is 100% fine for my needs, I'm reluctant to drop a wad of cash on it when I know that is will either be 1) superceded by a newer model I'd buy for the same price, or 2) reduced in price to help clear out the old stock. Either of those options would work for me at this time, but neither is available.
Part of buying something like a Mac is the satisfaction one gets from buying a well-engineered piece of gear that works and looks and feels like a sophisticated work of technology. The current MBPs lose a lot of that when you know you're buying something that is in the last days of its product life cycle, even if you also know it doesn't make any difference in day to day usability.
Luckily, my old machine is working fine, so I can wait, but still, bah....
But I'm also a computer fan, reasonably knowledgeable, and reasonably savvy. I've built machines before, routinely do hardware and software tweaking and upgrading, and have had multiple computers of various sorts since my first back in early 1983. That's the main reason the delay in getting the new MBPs out is frustrating. I don't need a 64bit processor right now. I don't need the extra 20% or whatever it is performance boost. But I also don't want to drop $2500 on a notebook that is neither leading-edge nor a price-performance leader within it's own market segment.
In buying PCs, I usually buy a step below the best, because the price performance ratio is very good. Until Apple upgrades the MBPs, I can't do that, as there is only, um, one choice really. I also can't get the latest and greatest, C2D, either. So while the current Yonah MBP is 100% fine for my needs, I'm reluctant to drop a wad of cash on it when I know that is will either be 1) superceded by a newer model I'd buy for the same price, or 2) reduced in price to help clear out the old stock. Either of those options would work for me at this time, but neither is available.
Part of buying something like a Mac is the satisfaction one gets from buying a well-engineered piece of gear that works and looks and feels like a sophisticated work of technology. The current MBPs lose a lot of that when you know you're buying something that is in the last days of its product life cycle, even if you also know it doesn't make any difference in day to day usability.
Luckily, my old machine is working fine, so I can wait, but still, bah....
stapler
Sep 13, 07:57 PM
I doubt anybody runs more than eight really hardcore apps at once.
dscuber9000
Apr 27, 02:57 PM
The birthers have moved on to say that because Obama "doesn't have allegiance to America" or some BS like that, he is now no longer a natural born citizen (http://www.birthers.org/). :rolleyes:
mrkramer
Apr 27, 02:27 PM
First off, before the ignorant attacks begin, no I'm not a birther. I'm personally of the opinion that he was born in America and generally share the president's feelings that this is a giant waste of time.
Sorry, but your claim that you aren't a birther is like someone who says that they have a lot of friends who are black as an excuse to then say something racist. In this post and previous posts in the PRSI, you have shown that you clearly question where Obama was born.
That said, I don't think Obama should have released it, he has other more important things to do, and he's already proven his citizenship several times.
Sorry, but your claim that you aren't a birther is like someone who says that they have a lot of friends who are black as an excuse to then say something racist. In this post and previous posts in the PRSI, you have shown that you clearly question where Obama was born.
That said, I don't think Obama should have released it, he has other more important things to do, and he's already proven his citizenship several times.
iphones4evry1
Jun 8, 10:26 PM
GREAT! The more places that carry the iPhone4 during the launch, THE SHORTER THE LINES WILL BE ! :)
(added to the fact that people can now pre-order from the website and have the phone shipped to them)
(added to the fact that people can now pre-order from the website and have the phone shipped to them)
iPhil
Apr 27, 12:53 PM
Who is NOBama? I looked up that name on Wikipedia but haven't found anything.
in the Situation Room of
cmaier
Apr 20, 03:27 PM
They're similar enough that an average person should be able to make a connection. Apple is filing a lawsuit against Samsung that doesn't have much chance of sticking, but that's not even the point, they want to scare Samsung into a settlement in all likelihood.
Think deeper. They're more similar than you think they are.
What makes you say it has no chance of sticking? Have you read the complaint? I have. I also read the ITC filings. They're not alike at all. The claims cover different IP, and even different TYPES of IP.
Think deeper. They're more similar than you think they are.
What makes you say it has no chance of sticking? Have you read the complaint? I have. I also read the ITC filings. They're not alike at all. The claims cover different IP, and even different TYPES of IP.
dernhelm
Nov 29, 07:24 AM
Perhaps that lost money isn't due to pirating like the execs want you to think.
Sure it is. Its just that the everyday Joe isn't the pirate, the music distribution executives are. And there's only room for one pirate ship in this industry.
Sure it is. Its just that the everyday Joe isn't the pirate, the music distribution executives are. And there's only room for one pirate ship in this industry.
UmaThurman
Sep 18, 11:09 PM
Y'all just wait a bit longer. it'll come soon.
jholzner
Jul 20, 11:23 AM
If you want wild speculation, here goes....
Apple might use the Conroe and ConroeXE in the first Mac Pros and then add in support for Kentsfield (quad) when it becomes available. This could well be the reason why Intel has brought forward the release of Kentsfield.
Somehow I doubt that Intel would change thier roadmap for/because of Apple. They are probably one of their smallest customers :P
Apple might use the Conroe and ConroeXE in the first Mac Pros and then add in support for Kentsfield (quad) when it becomes available. This could well be the reason why Intel has brought forward the release of Kentsfield.
Somehow I doubt that Intel would change thier roadmap for/because of Apple. They are probably one of their smallest customers :P
~Shard~
Jul 15, 12:49 AM
Still, it's ridiculous that Apple's Top-Of-The-Line machines don't come STANDARD with 1 gig of ram. I can guarantee they will when they come out next month.
Oh, I agree - I should hope this is the case. In this day and age, 1 GB should be table stakes, especially when you're dealing with Pro machines - I would bet that most PowerMac owners upgrade to at least 2 GB of RAM standard as it is. Throw on top of that the fact that Leopard is coming out in (presumably) 6 months, give or take, and I'm sure that 1 GB will be required to run that with any degree of smoothness as well.
Here's hoping you're right. I think including 512 MB of RAM standard would be a bit of a slap in the face if Apple is releasing these supposedly "advanced" machines. What kind of advanced PowerMac has only 512 MB of RAM standard? ;) :cool:
Oh, I agree - I should hope this is the case. In this day and age, 1 GB should be table stakes, especially when you're dealing with Pro machines - I would bet that most PowerMac owners upgrade to at least 2 GB of RAM standard as it is. Throw on top of that the fact that Leopard is coming out in (presumably) 6 months, give or take, and I'm sure that 1 GB will be required to run that with any degree of smoothness as well.
Here's hoping you're right. I think including 512 MB of RAM standard would be a bit of a slap in the face if Apple is releasing these supposedly "advanced" machines. What kind of advanced PowerMac has only 512 MB of RAM standard? ;) :cool:
Mistrblank
Apr 8, 07:19 AM
Wow. I bought mine at Best Buy on opening day and they sold out of them. Why in anybody's right mind would best buy not sell what they have?
It keeps people coming back day after day.
It keeps people coming back day after day.
No comments:
Post a Comment