thedarkhalf
Apr 27, 08:27 AM
The fact is that the iPhone is logging the location of the near by hot spot and cell tower. So if the cell tower is 50 miles away is some instances it is tracking that information not that the GPS location of your phone 50 miles from your phone. If you did the tracking thing on your computer and saw the map with your info, you would notice that some of the dots are places that you probably have never been. When I did and I went up to Northern Michigan it was tracking information approx 60 miles from the road I was on. This is why I never worried about this cause I knew it wasn't actually tracking my iPhones GPS location rather the nearest cell or Wifi location.
This is correct. In checking my trip to NC last year, it's showing locations i wasn't even close to. literally 81 miles away from the closest destination I was at (including the trip up and down).
Check a map of all ATT cell towers, i confirmed one cell tower in a location very close to whats pinned on the map (it's about 4 blocks off)
This is correct. In checking my trip to NC last year, it's showing locations i wasn't even close to. literally 81 miles away from the closest destination I was at (including the trip up and down).
Check a map of all ATT cell towers, i confirmed one cell tower in a location very close to whats pinned on the map (it's about 4 blocks off)
rdowns
Jun 8, 06:56 PM
Apple really geared up for this rollout. Look how many countries and how fast they're ramping up. I bet all their big retail partners have it on launch day. Those retailers want in on the iPhone rush too.:D
manu chao
Apr 27, 08:24 AM
Keeping a database of our general location is logging our location.
Yes, but
a) there is a difference between logging where you have been and storing the timestamp of when you have been there, I don't think Apple needs to or should have stored the timestamp
b) restricting the database to all locations you been to in the last seven days greatly diminishes the harm potential
Apple admitted (b), and said they would fix it. They might also fix (a).
Anybody who connects to a WiFi network automatically stores its SSID (unless you tell your iOS device to forget the network every time after your done). This alone is a record of your location (though again, the list of WiFi networks could be stripped of its access date, ie, issue (a)).
Yes, but
a) there is a difference between logging where you have been and storing the timestamp of when you have been there, I don't think Apple needs to or should have stored the timestamp
b) restricting the database to all locations you been to in the last seven days greatly diminishes the harm potential
Apple admitted (b), and said they would fix it. They might also fix (a).
Anybody who connects to a WiFi network automatically stores its SSID (unless you tell your iOS device to forget the network every time after your done). This alone is a record of your location (though again, the list of WiFi networks could be stripped of its access date, ie, issue (a)).
Eidorian
Aug 27, 07:57 AM
Conroe power consumption (http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core2duo-shootout_11.html)
I also remember another link where it shows the CPU temperature at 100% load being 50� C. (More then likely with a stock heat sink, fan, and in a BTX case.)
I remember my iMac G5 Rev. B hitting 75� C at 100% load. So there's some room for more heat. I don't know if it'll be as quiet though compared to Yonah.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=219310&highlight=970fx+tdp+conroe
I also remember another link where it shows the CPU temperature at 100% load being 50� C. (More then likely with a stock heat sink, fan, and in a BTX case.)
I remember my iMac G5 Rev. B hitting 75� C at 100% load. So there's some room for more heat. I don't know if it'll be as quiet though compared to Yonah.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=219310&highlight=970fx+tdp+conroe
4God
Jul 14, 02:35 PM
... and the other one HD-DVD! :eek: ;) :D
Doh! Well, again IMHO, it is my preference to have only one optical drive built in. I could always add an external later.
Doh! Well, again IMHO, it is my preference to have only one optical drive built in. I could always add an external later.
iMeowbot
Sep 19, 08:43 AM
All you people who keep whining about "But I want 64 bit!!!" need to step back and think about what possible benefit a 64-bit system will give you. Those of you who need to address more than 4 gigs of RAM are excused. The rest of you, tell me WHY you need 64-bit computing.
There is a general unease about the AMD64 instruction set. We are already seeing a few programs that only run on Intel Macs. What's to stop developers from ignoring the x86 target in new software, especially on the high end, given the short sales cycle of x86-only Macs? The Mac Pro didn't even have a 32-bit version.
There is a general unease about the AMD64 instruction set. We are already seeing a few programs that only run on Intel Macs. What's to stop developers from ignoring the x86 target in new software, especially on the high end, given the short sales cycle of x86-only Macs? The Mac Pro didn't even have a 32-bit version.
HecubusPro
Aug 27, 06:25 PM
I hate to say it, but I think the chances of Apple dropping the merom chips into laptops before September 5th are pretty slim. It's probably more likely that the waiting times are due to back to school rush shortages; Apple has doubled its laptop market share with the Macbook. http://arstechnica.com/journals/apple.ars/2006/7/25/4753
I agree 100%.
In addition, thinksecret reported earlier this month that we might be seeing an updated case for the MBP. http://www.thinksecret.com/news/0606macpro.html While this would be a good thing, because it alludes to Apple maybe addressing the heat issue, it is pretty unlikely that Apple would start shipping a machine to buyers without diclosing that the case looks different.
I've always loved the current look of the aluminum enclosure for the MBP's, so I'm not necessarily looking for a different enclosure, though I wouldn't mind if they did. It's what's inside that counts, right? :p
IMO, I believe the new enclosure will basically add easier access to swappable HDD's like the MB. It doesn't seem appropriate for a lower end model computer to have a feature the professional level model should have. That's why you pay the big $. I think the enclosure will remain the same, but we'll see an update that will allow users to change out their hard drives if they choose.
Apparently, the September 5th date stems from reports that Apple is scheduled to recieved a massive product shipment from Asia. http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1965 This coincides with other reports of the new Macs being ready "after Labor Day."
Agreed again. I know it's exciting to think that we'll see new macs with merom tomorrow, but I think that's 99% unlikely to happen considering the report stated that Apple will receive "a massive product shipment from Asia" on the 5th of September (remember, remember the 5th of September:cool: ) that still doesn't take into account the time it takes to ship from their warehouses where they received those shipments, to their retail outlets--Apple stores, etc. My guess would be that we'll begin seeing merom MPB's between the 7th to the 22nd in stores and online. Perhaps that's not a bold prediction, but I think it's a safe one. :D
It's pretty safe to say that we will be able to get our Merom Macs at the very latest by the second week of September; thus, we will all be able to capitolize on the ipod deal that runs through the 16th. Personally, I think that the likelyhood of time running out on the nano deal is pretty slim because that sale is likely in response to an imminent refresh in the nano's own product line. http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/
Though I certainly do hope they'll be available in time to take advantage of the free Nano before that deal runs out on the 16th.
I agree 100%.
In addition, thinksecret reported earlier this month that we might be seeing an updated case for the MBP. http://www.thinksecret.com/news/0606macpro.html While this would be a good thing, because it alludes to Apple maybe addressing the heat issue, it is pretty unlikely that Apple would start shipping a machine to buyers without diclosing that the case looks different.
I've always loved the current look of the aluminum enclosure for the MBP's, so I'm not necessarily looking for a different enclosure, though I wouldn't mind if they did. It's what's inside that counts, right? :p
IMO, I believe the new enclosure will basically add easier access to swappable HDD's like the MB. It doesn't seem appropriate for a lower end model computer to have a feature the professional level model should have. That's why you pay the big $. I think the enclosure will remain the same, but we'll see an update that will allow users to change out their hard drives if they choose.
Apparently, the September 5th date stems from reports that Apple is scheduled to recieved a massive product shipment from Asia. http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1965 This coincides with other reports of the new Macs being ready "after Labor Day."
Agreed again. I know it's exciting to think that we'll see new macs with merom tomorrow, but I think that's 99% unlikely to happen considering the report stated that Apple will receive "a massive product shipment from Asia" on the 5th of September (remember, remember the 5th of September:cool: ) that still doesn't take into account the time it takes to ship from their warehouses where they received those shipments, to their retail outlets--Apple stores, etc. My guess would be that we'll begin seeing merom MPB's between the 7th to the 22nd in stores and online. Perhaps that's not a bold prediction, but I think it's a safe one. :D
It's pretty safe to say that we will be able to get our Merom Macs at the very latest by the second week of September; thus, we will all be able to capitolize on the ipod deal that runs through the 16th. Personally, I think that the likelyhood of time running out on the nano deal is pretty slim because that sale is likely in response to an imminent refresh in the nano's own product line. http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/
Though I certainly do hope they'll be available in time to take advantage of the free Nano before that deal runs out on the 16th.
Full of Win
Apr 11, 11:40 AM
If true, this means that Apple has raised the white flag and accepted the defeat that Android has given to them. Not caring about the power of the hardware relative to others in the marketplace is a hallmark of a niche ecosystem.
Welcome to obscurity Apple - Population You
Welcome to obscurity Apple - Population You
leekohler
Apr 27, 01:18 PM
obamacare in its smallest form is extreme
No it's not. It's basically what Mitt Romney put in place in Massachusetts. And he's a (gasp!) Republican!
stimulus bill is extreme (and extrememly $$)
No, it's not. This is not the first time it's happened either.
The extreme people he hires, etc.
Such as?
No it's not. It's basically what Mitt Romney put in place in Massachusetts. And he's a (gasp!) Republican!
stimulus bill is extreme (and extrememly $$)
No, it's not. This is not the first time it's happened either.
The extreme people he hires, etc.
Such as?
rdowns
Mar 24, 12:52 PM
Where does race come into this? I don't ask rhetorically. I may have missed it.
I believe a lot of the anti-Obama crap spewed by the Tea Party and Republicans is based more on his race than his party.
I believe a lot of the anti-Obama crap spewed by the Tea Party and Republicans is based more on his race than his party.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 11, 01:09 PM
Iphone 5 on Sprint?
RebootD
Mar 25, 11:47 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_0 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7A341 Safari/528.16)
If this is a standard $129 upgrade I don't see anything here worth that price sadly. That is unless somehow my 2009 mac pro will run 2x as fast but I am not keeping my fingers crossed.
If this is a standard $129 upgrade I don't see anything here worth that price sadly. That is unless somehow my 2009 mac pro will run 2x as fast but I am not keeping my fingers crossed.
Half Glass
Sep 14, 12:49 PM
Well, if you can't find evidence of Windows running on well on machine with >2 processors, or of the significant low-level changes Microsoft have made to ensure it does, you aren't looking very hard.
Agreed.
Don't forget the new MacPros where XP runs very well (minus the MB chipset/SATA issue where there is a workaround.) It recognizes all four cores and seems very stable.
--HG
Agreed.
Don't forget the new MacPros where XP runs very well (minus the MB chipset/SATA issue where there is a workaround.) It recognizes all four cores and seems very stable.
--HG
kny3twalker
Apr 6, 10:36 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_6 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E200 Safari/6533.18.5)
ULV CPUs (17W) will go to 11.6". The TDP of 320M is not known but 9400M has TDP of 12W so it is quite safe to assume that the TDP is similar to that. That means current 11.6" MBA has TDP of 22W (includes CPU, GPU, chipset) while SB 11.6" MBA would have a TDP of 21W (17W for the CPU and ~4W for the PCH).
13" will go with LV CPUs (25W). Again, currently it has 17W for the CPU and 12W for 320M. That's 29W. 25W CPU and ~4W for PCH gives you the same 29W.
11.6" - Core i5-2537M (option for Core i7-2657M)
13.3" - Core i7-2629M (option for Core i7-2649M)
You should submit this. As the current article had me confused as to the potential configurations, and I am sure I am not alone there as your reply represents.
ULV CPUs (17W) will go to 11.6". The TDP of 320M is not known but 9400M has TDP of 12W so it is quite safe to assume that the TDP is similar to that. That means current 11.6" MBA has TDP of 22W (includes CPU, GPU, chipset) while SB 11.6" MBA would have a TDP of 21W (17W for the CPU and ~4W for the PCH).
13" will go with LV CPUs (25W). Again, currently it has 17W for the CPU and 12W for 320M. That's 29W. 25W CPU and ~4W for PCH gives you the same 29W.
11.6" - Core i5-2537M (option for Core i7-2657M)
13.3" - Core i7-2629M (option for Core i7-2649M)
You should submit this. As the current article had me confused as to the potential configurations, and I am sure I am not alone there as your reply represents.
boncellis
Jul 29, 05:59 PM
Ok, here goes. (Quick pass)
Eeek. Not so sure I like that.
Hmmm... maybe with just one slot?
A little better. I personally prefer the taller narrower one, though.
It looks pretty good! The extra room would allow for the 3.5" HDD and a dedicated GPU--making it a "true" media center.
Not to nitpick, but maybe it would only have to be 1.5x wider rather than 2x wide. Either way, I think it's pretty cool. Thanks! ;)
Eeek. Not so sure I like that.
Hmmm... maybe with just one slot?
A little better. I personally prefer the taller narrower one, though.
It looks pretty good! The extra room would allow for the 3.5" HDD and a dedicated GPU--making it a "true" media center.
Not to nitpick, but maybe it would only have to be 1.5x wider rather than 2x wide. Either way, I think it's pretty cool. Thanks! ;)
ergle2
Sep 14, 10:49 PM
Really, completely new? As in, to Core 2 what the G5 was to G4? In just two years?? I guess they're really ramping things up... Core 3 Hexa Mac Pros, anyone?
Intel's stated plans as I understand them are thus:
A new micro-arch every 2 years. I don't think they mean brand new so much as "significant changes/improvements". Whether this is akin to Yonah->Conroe or Netburst->Conroe remains to be seen, but more like the former (or perhaps Pentium-M -> Merom -- Core Duo was very much a stop-gap). Little has been released about Nehalem, but at one time it was slated as "based on Banias/Dothan", due in 2005 and expected to ramp to 9/10GHz.
"Off" years will recieve derivative versions (e.g. Merom->Penryn), which appears to be mostly stuff like L2 cache increases, faster FSB speeds (at least while we have FSBs - 2008 looks like the year for DCI, finally), die shrinks, increasing the number of cores (expect at least one to be more cores on a single die instead of two dice/package), etc.
Die shrinks are currently scheduled for "off" years, in order to stablize the process ready for the new micro-arch in the following year so Intel doesn't need to deal with both new process and new arch at the same time, and presumably in part to keep speed increases coming in "off" years
Of course, roadmaps can change quite rapidly -- it's not that long ago that Whitfield was expected to debut late 2006 with DCI (FSB replacement). Whitfield was replaced by Tigerton which is now due sometime in 2007...
One thing's for sure, Intel appears to have learnt a great deal from the Netburst fiasco -- how not to do things, if nothing else. Unfortunately, they still estimate ~50% of processors shipping in 1Q2007 will be netburst-based (mostly Pentium-D).
Intel's stated plans as I understand them are thus:
A new micro-arch every 2 years. I don't think they mean brand new so much as "significant changes/improvements". Whether this is akin to Yonah->Conroe or Netburst->Conroe remains to be seen, but more like the former (or perhaps Pentium-M -> Merom -- Core Duo was very much a stop-gap). Little has been released about Nehalem, but at one time it was slated as "based on Banias/Dothan", due in 2005 and expected to ramp to 9/10GHz.
"Off" years will recieve derivative versions (e.g. Merom->Penryn), which appears to be mostly stuff like L2 cache increases, faster FSB speeds (at least while we have FSBs - 2008 looks like the year for DCI, finally), die shrinks, increasing the number of cores (expect at least one to be more cores on a single die instead of two dice/package), etc.
Die shrinks are currently scheduled for "off" years, in order to stablize the process ready for the new micro-arch in the following year so Intel doesn't need to deal with both new process and new arch at the same time, and presumably in part to keep speed increases coming in "off" years
Of course, roadmaps can change quite rapidly -- it's not that long ago that Whitfield was expected to debut late 2006 with DCI (FSB replacement). Whitfield was replaced by Tigerton which is now due sometime in 2007...
One thing's for sure, Intel appears to have learnt a great deal from the Netburst fiasco -- how not to do things, if nothing else. Unfortunately, they still estimate ~50% of processors shipping in 1Q2007 will be netburst-based (mostly Pentium-D).
NoSmokingBandit
Sep 1, 11:15 AM
Idk, that just doesnt sound right...
They have higher-res models from the GT4/GTPSP artists (everything 3d is made with super high poly counts then downgraded as the game's engine requires) so i dont understand why they would use the low poly models from GT4 when it would take just as much time to export a higher res model from Maya.
Time will tell i suppose, but it just doesnt make sense for them to gimp standard cars for no reason.
They have higher-res models from the GT4/GTPSP artists (everything 3d is made with super high poly counts then downgraded as the game's engine requires) so i dont understand why they would use the low poly models from GT4 when it would take just as much time to export a higher res model from Maya.
Time will tell i suppose, but it just doesnt make sense for them to gimp standard cars for no reason.
CaoCao
Feb 28, 06:54 PM
In what case is inclusionism not a good policy? Being consistent in our thinking and morality is a sign of a logical and sound mind.
I can not think of a single case where making arbitrary exceptions is a good practice.
I have no problem being exclusionist to bad ideas like rape and paedophilia
I can not think of a single case where making arbitrary exceptions is a good practice.
I have no problem being exclusionist to bad ideas like rape and paedophilia
amccune
Apr 12, 09:13 AM
I think the User's Group meeting isn't until 4:30, so we are in for a wait...
Yebubbleman
Apr 6, 01:57 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/06/intel-launching-next-generation-macbook-air-processors/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/02/11/094654-mba.jpg
As reported by Fudzilla (http://www.fudzilla.com/processors/item/22323-new-17w-core-i7-king-brand-is-2657m) and HardMac (http://www.hardmac.com/news/2011/04/06/intel-to-launch-sandy-bridge-chips-that-could-be-found-in-the-new-macbook-air), Intel is about to launch its next generation Sandy Bridge ultra low voltage CPUs suitable for the MacBook Air.
Due to the MacBook Air's thin form factor, it has required the use of particularly low power CPUs from Intel. Apple has stuck with Core 2 Duo processors with a maximum Thermal Design Power (TDP) of 10-17W. Apple is believed to have continued to use this older processor design in order to keep NVIDIA's graphics chips powering their ultracompact notebook. Due to licensing disputes (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/01/10/nvidia-and-intel-settle-nvidia-still-prohibited-from-building-chipsets-for-newest-intel-processors/), NVIDIA was prohibited from building newer chipsets that supported Intel's newest processors.
With the release of Sandy Bridge, Intel upgraded the performance of their integrated graphics chipset. This was good enough (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/02/24/apple-launches-macbook-pros-with-thunderbolt-quad-core-cpus-amd-gpus/) for Apple to offer in their latest 13" MacBook Pros, so we expect it will be good enough for the upcoming MacBook Airs as well. Apple had been previously rumored (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/02/11/macbook-air-sandy-bridge-update-in-june/) to be introducing the "Sandy Bridge" MacBook Airs this June.
HardMac pinpoints the Core i5 2537M (17W) as the possible chip to be used, at least in the 13" model:Meanwhile, the current 11" MacBook air uses an even lower power (10W) processor, but it's not clear how much power savings is offered by removing the need for the NVIDIA graphics chipset, as the Intel solution is integrated within the processor itself.
Article Link: Intel Launching Next Generation MacBook Air Processors (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/06/intel-launching-next-generation-macbook-air-processors/)
Woo! Something not MacBook Pro or iOS related!
For a programmer dealing with Terminal, Xcode, Netbeans, Eclipse, etc (not graphic intensive softwares), would this macbook air be a better deal than the 13/15" Macbook pro?
Anyone?
Both machines would be fine, though the 13"/15" MacBook Pro is more fully-featured of a machine than the Air, and frankly at that cost, why pay for an incomplete system?
awesome!!! this is really tempting. Should I throw an SSD in my 2010 4GB 2.66 GHz 13" MBP or sell it and wait for the MBA refresh?
If you have to do either, I'd do the former. But I'm in the "screw the Intel HD 3000 bandwaggon" and I also don't think that an Air should replace a Pro unless you have a problem lifting five pounds.
I would love to see a 15" laptop with no optical drive, with the specs and price somewhere between the MBA and MBP.
KEEP DREAMING!
Since you have no clue how the sandy bridge airs will perform, I'll take your statement as FUD.
First off, it's a fair assumption that they won't be more powerful than the current 13" MacBook Pros. Second, it's a fair assumption that the Intel HD 3000 will be in tow, and if the SV HD 3000 is inferior to the SV NVIDIA GeForce 320M, then it's a fair assumption that the ULV versions will probably have a similar result when benchmarked. Then again, who in their right mind is relying on a MacBook Air to play games over say, a MacBook Pro or a P-freakin-C?!
Alas, there are some things that the curated app store will never be able to supply. Case in point: a pokerstars or fulltilt client. And if the ipad's Safari can't do java or flash or allow me to run the applications of my choosing, then it's not sufficiently open for my needs.
Most Flash and Java based sites have App-equivalents. Ideal, no. A true web experience, no. But there's an app for that.
At least I now have a short finite timeline to work with to buy my 13"/2.13GHz C2D/256GB MBA before they "upgrade" it to a vastly inferior Intel GPU.
It's a MacBook Air, for crying out loud! What were you going to use the GeForce 320M for anyway that you won't be able to do with the Intel HD 3000? (Note: Final Cut Studio type things and gaming, which are the only two things that you'd feel the difference between the two IGPs on anyway, are laughable answers.)
I LOL'd. I owned iPad 1 for a year, and while it's nice, it's a FAR, FAR cry from the productivity capabilities of the current gen MBA.
Like it or not, iPad is SEVERELY CRIPPLED for content creation (i.e. real work), but excels at content CONSUMPTION. That's factual and completely undebatable. Everyone knows this.
So, no, it's not "something better". It's a more viable choice for entertainment and consumption. That's it.
The MacBook Air is crippled for content creation purposes. It is no MacBook Pro. The iPad is not crippled for content consumption. Sure, the iPad isn't yet the most stellar option for content creation purposes, but it's not crippled for what it's intended to do. With a 13" or 15" MacBook Pro, there's little practical use for a MacBook Air unless you have a problem lifting the two extra pounds, and really, if you do, either exercise or invest in physical therapy.
What is the obsession with back-lit keys?
Do you actually look at the keyboard when you're typing?
It's more that a feature was taken away and the natural psychological response when that happens is "Why did you do that? Give it back!"
The current nvidia chip is also integrated so it's not that much of a step down. As a 13" Pro user I can happily tell anyone that for what the product is made for, it's perfectly usable. At first I was pissed at the idea but it turned out the Intel HD 3000 were more powerful than the graphics in my old laptop.
It's a step down from the GeForce 320M, but a step up from the GeForce 9400M and the Intel GMA IGPs used before it.
By game I mean a modern title at full settings. Otherwise it's just 'making do'.
+1
sorry but if you're trying to do "pro" work on a MBA, ur doin it wrong.
i'm glad Apple has their MBA line for ultra-portability, plus the MBP line for intensive portable work.
This.
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/02/11/094654-mba.jpg
As reported by Fudzilla (http://www.fudzilla.com/processors/item/22323-new-17w-core-i7-king-brand-is-2657m) and HardMac (http://www.hardmac.com/news/2011/04/06/intel-to-launch-sandy-bridge-chips-that-could-be-found-in-the-new-macbook-air), Intel is about to launch its next generation Sandy Bridge ultra low voltage CPUs suitable for the MacBook Air.
Due to the MacBook Air's thin form factor, it has required the use of particularly low power CPUs from Intel. Apple has stuck with Core 2 Duo processors with a maximum Thermal Design Power (TDP) of 10-17W. Apple is believed to have continued to use this older processor design in order to keep NVIDIA's graphics chips powering their ultracompact notebook. Due to licensing disputes (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/01/10/nvidia-and-intel-settle-nvidia-still-prohibited-from-building-chipsets-for-newest-intel-processors/), NVIDIA was prohibited from building newer chipsets that supported Intel's newest processors.
With the release of Sandy Bridge, Intel upgraded the performance of their integrated graphics chipset. This was good enough (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/02/24/apple-launches-macbook-pros-with-thunderbolt-quad-core-cpus-amd-gpus/) for Apple to offer in their latest 13" MacBook Pros, so we expect it will be good enough for the upcoming MacBook Airs as well. Apple had been previously rumored (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/02/11/macbook-air-sandy-bridge-update-in-june/) to be introducing the "Sandy Bridge" MacBook Airs this June.
HardMac pinpoints the Core i5 2537M (17W) as the possible chip to be used, at least in the 13" model:Meanwhile, the current 11" MacBook air uses an even lower power (10W) processor, but it's not clear how much power savings is offered by removing the need for the NVIDIA graphics chipset, as the Intel solution is integrated within the processor itself.
Article Link: Intel Launching Next Generation MacBook Air Processors (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/06/intel-launching-next-generation-macbook-air-processors/)
Woo! Something not MacBook Pro or iOS related!
For a programmer dealing with Terminal, Xcode, Netbeans, Eclipse, etc (not graphic intensive softwares), would this macbook air be a better deal than the 13/15" Macbook pro?
Anyone?
Both machines would be fine, though the 13"/15" MacBook Pro is more fully-featured of a machine than the Air, and frankly at that cost, why pay for an incomplete system?
awesome!!! this is really tempting. Should I throw an SSD in my 2010 4GB 2.66 GHz 13" MBP or sell it and wait for the MBA refresh?
If you have to do either, I'd do the former. But I'm in the "screw the Intel HD 3000 bandwaggon" and I also don't think that an Air should replace a Pro unless you have a problem lifting five pounds.
I would love to see a 15" laptop with no optical drive, with the specs and price somewhere between the MBA and MBP.
KEEP DREAMING!
Since you have no clue how the sandy bridge airs will perform, I'll take your statement as FUD.
First off, it's a fair assumption that they won't be more powerful than the current 13" MacBook Pros. Second, it's a fair assumption that the Intel HD 3000 will be in tow, and if the SV HD 3000 is inferior to the SV NVIDIA GeForce 320M, then it's a fair assumption that the ULV versions will probably have a similar result when benchmarked. Then again, who in their right mind is relying on a MacBook Air to play games over say, a MacBook Pro or a P-freakin-C?!
Alas, there are some things that the curated app store will never be able to supply. Case in point: a pokerstars or fulltilt client. And if the ipad's Safari can't do java or flash or allow me to run the applications of my choosing, then it's not sufficiently open for my needs.
Most Flash and Java based sites have App-equivalents. Ideal, no. A true web experience, no. But there's an app for that.
At least I now have a short finite timeline to work with to buy my 13"/2.13GHz C2D/256GB MBA before they "upgrade" it to a vastly inferior Intel GPU.
It's a MacBook Air, for crying out loud! What were you going to use the GeForce 320M for anyway that you won't be able to do with the Intel HD 3000? (Note: Final Cut Studio type things and gaming, which are the only two things that you'd feel the difference between the two IGPs on anyway, are laughable answers.)
I LOL'd. I owned iPad 1 for a year, and while it's nice, it's a FAR, FAR cry from the productivity capabilities of the current gen MBA.
Like it or not, iPad is SEVERELY CRIPPLED for content creation (i.e. real work), but excels at content CONSUMPTION. That's factual and completely undebatable. Everyone knows this.
So, no, it's not "something better". It's a more viable choice for entertainment and consumption. That's it.
The MacBook Air is crippled for content creation purposes. It is no MacBook Pro. The iPad is not crippled for content consumption. Sure, the iPad isn't yet the most stellar option for content creation purposes, but it's not crippled for what it's intended to do. With a 13" or 15" MacBook Pro, there's little practical use for a MacBook Air unless you have a problem lifting the two extra pounds, and really, if you do, either exercise or invest in physical therapy.
What is the obsession with back-lit keys?
Do you actually look at the keyboard when you're typing?
It's more that a feature was taken away and the natural psychological response when that happens is "Why did you do that? Give it back!"
The current nvidia chip is also integrated so it's not that much of a step down. As a 13" Pro user I can happily tell anyone that for what the product is made for, it's perfectly usable. At first I was pissed at the idea but it turned out the Intel HD 3000 were more powerful than the graphics in my old laptop.
It's a step down from the GeForce 320M, but a step up from the GeForce 9400M and the Intel GMA IGPs used before it.
By game I mean a modern title at full settings. Otherwise it's just 'making do'.
+1
sorry but if you're trying to do "pro" work on a MBA, ur doin it wrong.
i'm glad Apple has their MBA line for ultra-portability, plus the MBP line for intensive portable work.
This.
MacRumors
Aug 16, 10:33 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Barefeats provides (http://www.barefeats.com/quad06.html) benchmarks comparing the Quad 3GHz Mac Pro (Xeon) vs the Quad G5 2.5GHz Power Mac (G5). This represents the new top of the line vs the old top of the line Mac.
They provide benchmarks for both non-Universal and Universal applications between the Mac Pro 3GHz, Mac Pro 2.66GHz and PowerMac G5 Quad 2.5GHz.
The top-end Mac Pro performed well compared to the Quad G5 with both Photoshop CS2 and After Effects 7.0 despite running under Rosetta emulation on the Mac Pro. Universal upgrades to these applications should provide additional performance boosts.
Meanwhile, Universal applications iMovie HD 6, Final Cut Pro 5, FileMaker Pro 8.5 and Cinebench 9.5 generally showed substantial improvements even in the 2.66GHz Mac Pro vs the 2.5GHz PowerMac.
There's no doubt that both versions of the Mac Pro are faster than the G5 Quad-Core running Universal Binary apps like iMovie, Final Cut Pro, etc. As you can see from the four UB tests we ran in this session, the Mac Pro 2.66GHz was as much as 62% faster than the Quad-Core G5/2.5GHz. The Mac Pro 3.0GHz was as much as 85% faster.
Barefeats provides (http://www.barefeats.com/quad06.html) benchmarks comparing the Quad 3GHz Mac Pro (Xeon) vs the Quad G5 2.5GHz Power Mac (G5). This represents the new top of the line vs the old top of the line Mac.
They provide benchmarks for both non-Universal and Universal applications between the Mac Pro 3GHz, Mac Pro 2.66GHz and PowerMac G5 Quad 2.5GHz.
The top-end Mac Pro performed well compared to the Quad G5 with both Photoshop CS2 and After Effects 7.0 despite running under Rosetta emulation on the Mac Pro. Universal upgrades to these applications should provide additional performance boosts.
Meanwhile, Universal applications iMovie HD 6, Final Cut Pro 5, FileMaker Pro 8.5 and Cinebench 9.5 generally showed substantial improvements even in the 2.66GHz Mac Pro vs the 2.5GHz PowerMac.
There's no doubt that both versions of the Mac Pro are faster than the G5 Quad-Core running Universal Binary apps like iMovie, Final Cut Pro, etc. As you can see from the four UB tests we ran in this session, the Mac Pro 2.66GHz was as much as 62% faster than the Quad-Core G5/2.5GHz. The Mac Pro 3.0GHz was as much as 85% faster.
Bosunsfate
Aug 5, 04:56 PM
6PM London time..
Use the dashboard clock widget if you're in the UK and open a clock then set it to Cupertino..
Correct, the time difference is plus 8 hours. Good call on the widget usage. :p
Use the dashboard clock widget if you're in the UK and open a clock then set it to Cupertino..
Correct, the time difference is plus 8 hours. Good call on the widget usage. :p
mylios101
Apr 6, 11:11 AM
http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=54619&processor=i5-2537M&spec-codes=SR03W
Hope this is useful.
Hope this is useful.
Chaszmyr
Aug 15, 01:00 PM
I would have thought that the Final Cut Pro benchmark would have really blown away the G5 - not so much, right?
I couldn't say for sure, but I would guess that the current version of FCP was carefully optimized for the G5, and has not yet undergone the same treatment for Intel chips.
I couldn't say for sure, but I would guess that the current version of FCP was carefully optimized for the G5, and has not yet undergone the same treatment for Intel chips.
No comments:
Post a Comment