brianus
Sep 1, 01:05 PM
Most of the posts in this thread are about the 23" screen. Yes, I think it will happen to allow the imac to play 1080i/1080p HD.
But, how about the processors? Apple needs to have a Core 2 (Conroe not Merom) inside the imac. The imac is not a conventionally size desktop (not as much room inside as a tower) but Apple can not continue to use a laptop processor in the imac. If they do, then how will the Conroe be used in Apple's line up? In a Mac tower? I don't think so. Surely, a 23" iMac could house the Conroe suitably?
So I would say that the 23" iMac would kill 2 birds - Conroe and HD for the home user. :)
I completely agree with you that using Conroe would make more sense (the casing for the 17" and 20" models was originally designer for a G5, for pete's sake), but I disagree with the assumption that Conroe will *have* to be used in some way in Apple's lineup. Nobody's putting a gun to their head; they may well skip that processor entirely, as AppleInsider has suggested.
They may be responding to positive reviews and customer satisfaction with the relative silence of the Yonah iMacs compared to their G5 predecessors. I don't know how much hotter and louder an iMac would run with Conroe, but if it was noisy it would be a disappointment, as all the other desktop models they've released this year have been noticeably quieter.
Of course they won't offer it in aluminum, sheesh. Aluminum is the "pro" color, white and black are the "consumer" colors. Sheesh! Thought you people followed Apple.. anybody think they'll offer a "premium" black 23", same as they did for the higher-end MacBook? They are after all "siblings" in the product lineup.
Lastly I don't see them getting rid of the "chin" unless they come out with the rumored touch-screen, widescreen video iPods on the 12th too. I think the visual similarity between the iPod and iMac is quite intentional and not something they're likely to change unless the iPod itself changes.
But, how about the processors? Apple needs to have a Core 2 (Conroe not Merom) inside the imac. The imac is not a conventionally size desktop (not as much room inside as a tower) but Apple can not continue to use a laptop processor in the imac. If they do, then how will the Conroe be used in Apple's line up? In a Mac tower? I don't think so. Surely, a 23" iMac could house the Conroe suitably?
So I would say that the 23" iMac would kill 2 birds - Conroe and HD for the home user. :)
I completely agree with you that using Conroe would make more sense (the casing for the 17" and 20" models was originally designer for a G5, for pete's sake), but I disagree with the assumption that Conroe will *have* to be used in some way in Apple's lineup. Nobody's putting a gun to their head; they may well skip that processor entirely, as AppleInsider has suggested.
They may be responding to positive reviews and customer satisfaction with the relative silence of the Yonah iMacs compared to their G5 predecessors. I don't know how much hotter and louder an iMac would run with Conroe, but if it was noisy it would be a disappointment, as all the other desktop models they've released this year have been noticeably quieter.
Of course they won't offer it in aluminum, sheesh. Aluminum is the "pro" color, white and black are the "consumer" colors. Sheesh! Thought you people followed Apple.. anybody think they'll offer a "premium" black 23", same as they did for the higher-end MacBook? They are after all "siblings" in the product lineup.
Lastly I don't see them getting rid of the "chin" unless they come out with the rumored touch-screen, widescreen video iPods on the 12th too. I think the visual similarity between the iPod and iMac is quite intentional and not something they're likely to change unless the iPod itself changes.
Bubba Satori
Apr 2, 09:24 PM
your kidding right?
You're.
You're.
Small White Car
Apr 12, 09:40 PM
Ground up rewrite = a whole load of bugs.
It'll be interesting to see how many shops use this for production work when it's finally released.
I bet this'll be like when they changed iMovie...it won't over-write the old version and you can keep both Final Cuts on a single machine.
At least, I sure hope so. I mean, they have to do it that way, right?
Based on the name, this is obviously going to require heavy support from Quicktime X, which is not getting an update until Lion. Don't expect this before June.
Yeah, I will not be shocked if this ends up being a Lion-only application. They couldn't be that strict with many apps, but FCP is one that they could be with.
It'll be interesting to see how many shops use this for production work when it's finally released.
I bet this'll be like when they changed iMovie...it won't over-write the old version and you can keep both Final Cuts on a single machine.
At least, I sure hope so. I mean, they have to do it that way, right?
Based on the name, this is obviously going to require heavy support from Quicktime X, which is not getting an update until Lion. Don't expect this before June.
Yeah, I will not be shocked if this ends up being a Lion-only application. They couldn't be that strict with many apps, but FCP is one that they could be with.
DeSnousa
Aug 6, 08:47 PM
I'm sorry I'm really slow, I don't get the slogan :(
"Mac OS X Leopard, Introducing Vista 2.0"
Do they mean that Leopard is years ahead of Vista, like if it were to be like Windows next version OS :confused:
:o
"Mac OS X Leopard, Introducing Vista 2.0"
Do they mean that Leopard is years ahead of Vista, like if it were to be like Windows next version OS :confused:
:o
iMikeT
Jul 14, 10:16 AM
You mean like when they standardised on CD's?
From what I recall, Philips began working on the compact disk project and Sony later on joined them in that venture.
Also, CDs were not easily accepted as a standard. It did take some time before everyone else adapted.
I must also point out that if you want to take the compact disk standard as an example of standardization, that CDs were the only format in its class. That is, there was no other competition for a standard format. Which brings us to today. Like the Betamax and VHS, we are seeing two formats of next generation's storage medium competing to become a standard.
Just keep in mind Sony's hit/miss ratio for standardization.;)
From what I recall, Philips began working on the compact disk project and Sony later on joined them in that venture.
Also, CDs were not easily accepted as a standard. It did take some time before everyone else adapted.
I must also point out that if you want to take the compact disk standard as an example of standardization, that CDs were the only format in its class. That is, there was no other competition for a standard format. Which brings us to today. Like the Betamax and VHS, we are seeing two formats of next generation's storage medium competing to become a standard.
Just keep in mind Sony's hit/miss ratio for standardization.;)
DavidLeblond
Apr 21, 01:59 PM
To those laughing at this and pointing out that Android phones don't have a file recording your movements:
https://github.com/packetlss/android-locdump
(NOTE: I did not write this)
https://github.com/packetlss/android-locdump
(NOTE: I did not write this)
![selena gomez kca dress. Christian Cota Spring 2010 RTW Yellow Chiffon Goddess Dress and 2010 Kids Choice Awards Photograph. Click on the photo to add a spot [Done]](http://www3.images.coolspotters.com/photos/242566/selena-gomez-and-2010-kids-choice-awards-gallery.jpg "Christian Cota Spring 2010 RTW Yellow Chiffon Goddess Dress and 2010 Kids Choice Awards Photograph. Click on the photo to add a spot [Done]")
HecubusPro
Sep 6, 06:37 PM
What's stopping you from doing that now?
I know I have all of my iTMS video backed up to data DVDs...
I know I won't be spending $10-$15 for anything less than DVD quality though, so I hope there's either a rental model or at least 480p.
B
I do backup all of my ipod videos on DVD. I was talking in terms of rentals that so many people are interested in here. Apple would have to implement some sort of copy protection for people who simply want to rent for a few days, so the movies can't be backed up to DVD. Sort of like Divx DVD back in the day. You bought the movie for $5, then after 48 hours it was unusable.
This brings up another point. There are a lot of "hackers" out there who, I would think, wouldn't have a lot of difficulty breaking encryption or copy protection on the possible movie rentals from iTunes. I think that would be another reason Apple would avoid rentals.
I know I have all of my iTMS video backed up to data DVDs...
I know I won't be spending $10-$15 for anything less than DVD quality though, so I hope there's either a rental model or at least 480p.
B
I do backup all of my ipod videos on DVD. I was talking in terms of rentals that so many people are interested in here. Apple would have to implement some sort of copy protection for people who simply want to rent for a few days, so the movies can't be backed up to DVD. Sort of like Divx DVD back in the day. You bought the movie for $5, then after 48 hours it was unusable.
This brings up another point. There are a lot of "hackers" out there who, I would think, wouldn't have a lot of difficulty breaking encryption or copy protection on the possible movie rentals from iTunes. I think that would be another reason Apple would avoid rentals.
Lunja
Jan 7, 06:47 PM
above
YAY! I'll download that tomorrow!
As for media buttons, when I had my PC (shudder) I loved them. If I wanted to rewind a song or video while I was typing, I could just hit the rewind button and back it's go, withou me having to leave Word or touch the mouse. And since Apple is all about media I've always thought they'd be a nice addition.
Plus, the keyboard is WAYYYY overdue for an update. I've got an eMac from 2003 (I think...) and the keyboard is virtually the same as the one my gf just got with her Mac Pro.
YAY! I'll download that tomorrow!
As for media buttons, when I had my PC (shudder) I loved them. If I wanted to rewind a song or video while I was typing, I could just hit the rewind button and back it's go, withou me having to leave Word or touch the mouse. And since Apple is all about media I've always thought they'd be a nice addition.
Plus, the keyboard is WAYYYY overdue for an update. I've got an eMac from 2003 (I think...) and the keyboard is virtually the same as the one my gf just got with her Mac Pro.
archer75
Apr 19, 11:45 AM
It was rumored just prior to the macbook pro refresh that they might come with a small 16gb SSD drive just for the OS. Wouldn't surprise me to see that make it's way into an imac. Large SSD's are just too expensive and often times not big enough. And you only get a finite number of writes on them before they're garbage.
apb3
Aug 31, 10:12 AM
Blue sky on wireless? Think a device which works out presence of others, and can connect safely.
Imagine being able to *share* (not stream, but share) your tunes with others on a "I'm interested in your... can I share/get that from you).
This goes beyond fair use and would not be legal. Just because I buy a song or CD, movie whatever does not mean I can give it to all my friends. I'm sure you didn't mean that
If you want to use up all your authorized machines (what is it? 5 now?) for a few friends to listen to a few songs every once in a while - I guess that would be arguably OK, but I think it would still go beyond fair use rules.
Being on the tube/commuting for ~ 1 1/2 hours a day or so and seeing >6 ipods through glancing for white buds alone, the possiblities are huge.
What are net connections used mostly for (in terms of Mb up/down) It's P2P. There wouldn't be any roaming charges, any peak rates. You could do it in a lecture room, whilst you were studying, or having coffee with friends (sharing tunes, rather than listening )
Think one big interacting social darknet :D Think virality without PC's needed.
Someone has a cool tune, and it could replicate exponentially!
For more benefits: Linking up to USB wireless receiver chips - you can wireless move files to/from PC.
Hands free driving - using changeable function paddles/butons on the steeering wheel. Hell - You could have a HUD of iTunes on a car soon (or at the very least, hook it up to those screens in the back of those orrible 4x4s )
In terms of illegal possibilities, think discogs. The amount of music you'll bump into increases a lot, so the rarer stuff might be out there. You could strike up a friendship with someone who had say, the entire back catalogue of (insert your fave band/movie/TV series). People could be walking lossless discographies of current artists. A discog of an artist is at most probably under 10Gig, so for a >60Gig player...
Who needs radio when you can stream? You could get it to actively hunt for a MP3 id tag genre - rock/pop, or highly rated artists. You could have the function to hunt for certain artists/songs...
That's another reason why I want wireless.
All this still does not tip the scales in terms of cost/benefit. Wireless will eat up your battery. It will be clumsy and frustrating (I would really hate for the new Streets single to break off midway through because iPod girl gets off at her stop or walks out of range). Also, I would not be thrilled adding drain to my battery by engaging sharing/wireless just so a bunch of strangers can mooch off of me. If my friend wants to listen to a song I have there are many ways he can do so without adding cost to the iPod and my time by having to charge the iPod all the time to make it possible in the first place
As for wireless sync... why? My god man, if we've come to the point where putting the iPod in its base is too difficult, we're screwed. Maybe there'd be the odd time when you forgot your cable or dock on a trip but that should be a rare enough occurence. If you find you always forget your cables, get an extra. You're also not addressing that you'd need that cable or dock for charging anyway (especially since you're going to be using that wireless feature to kill your battery much more quickly).
The chance that someone with an iPod (who also happens to be willing to kill their battery for my enjoyment) will be in range long enough for me to enjoy a few x-ray specks or spacemen 3 tracks are, in my opinion, close to nil.
The car options using wireless make some degree of sense (you'd be able to charge the unit by the cig lighter at least), but this seems better addressed by car/stereo makers. They're already doing it. Theree are also adapters for sale that do this.
I don't have all I need yet in this area but hooking my iPod up to the charger/FM transmitter I have let's me use the steering wheel controls for everything except the menu/scrolling bits (I know that's a big thing but I've got it set up so the iPod in it's charger/transmitter is right next to my knee and easier to manipulate than a cell phone and no harder than using the controls on the radio that are not available on the steering column). The HUD would be cool, though, and would make me a safer driver... I always wanted a HUD for my car. I think Cadillac actually had a model with an optional HUD for the main instrument panel items a while back. I wonder why more auto makers don't do this... or do they and I am just ignorant?
All in all, I just don't see enough good in adding wireless (of whatever kind) to the iPod to justify it. Now, a non-iPod (new) product that had wireless with a limited music/photo/video feature set (iPhone?, iBerry?) might be on the horizon. That wouldn't be bad as it would give those you feel the same as you the option to get their much needed "wireless," while letting others enjoy the most elegant, easy to use media player on the market without the bloat.
Imagine being able to *share* (not stream, but share) your tunes with others on a "I'm interested in your... can I share/get that from you).
This goes beyond fair use and would not be legal. Just because I buy a song or CD, movie whatever does not mean I can give it to all my friends. I'm sure you didn't mean that
If you want to use up all your authorized machines (what is it? 5 now?) for a few friends to listen to a few songs every once in a while - I guess that would be arguably OK, but I think it would still go beyond fair use rules.
Being on the tube/commuting for ~ 1 1/2 hours a day or so and seeing >6 ipods through glancing for white buds alone, the possiblities are huge.
What are net connections used mostly for (in terms of Mb up/down) It's P2P. There wouldn't be any roaming charges, any peak rates. You could do it in a lecture room, whilst you were studying, or having coffee with friends (sharing tunes, rather than listening )
Think one big interacting social darknet :D Think virality without PC's needed.
Someone has a cool tune, and it could replicate exponentially!
For more benefits: Linking up to USB wireless receiver chips - you can wireless move files to/from PC.
Hands free driving - using changeable function paddles/butons on the steeering wheel. Hell - You could have a HUD of iTunes on a car soon (or at the very least, hook it up to those screens in the back of those orrible 4x4s )
In terms of illegal possibilities, think discogs. The amount of music you'll bump into increases a lot, so the rarer stuff might be out there. You could strike up a friendship with someone who had say, the entire back catalogue of (insert your fave band/movie/TV series). People could be walking lossless discographies of current artists. A discog of an artist is at most probably under 10Gig, so for a >60Gig player...
Who needs radio when you can stream? You could get it to actively hunt for a MP3 id tag genre - rock/pop, or highly rated artists. You could have the function to hunt for certain artists/songs...
That's another reason why I want wireless.
All this still does not tip the scales in terms of cost/benefit. Wireless will eat up your battery. It will be clumsy and frustrating (I would really hate for the new Streets single to break off midway through because iPod girl gets off at her stop or walks out of range). Also, I would not be thrilled adding drain to my battery by engaging sharing/wireless just so a bunch of strangers can mooch off of me. If my friend wants to listen to a song I have there are many ways he can do so without adding cost to the iPod and my time by having to charge the iPod all the time to make it possible in the first place
As for wireless sync... why? My god man, if we've come to the point where putting the iPod in its base is too difficult, we're screwed. Maybe there'd be the odd time when you forgot your cable or dock on a trip but that should be a rare enough occurence. If you find you always forget your cables, get an extra. You're also not addressing that you'd need that cable or dock for charging anyway (especially since you're going to be using that wireless feature to kill your battery much more quickly).
The chance that someone with an iPod (who also happens to be willing to kill their battery for my enjoyment) will be in range long enough for me to enjoy a few x-ray specks or spacemen 3 tracks are, in my opinion, close to nil.
The car options using wireless make some degree of sense (you'd be able to charge the unit by the cig lighter at least), but this seems better addressed by car/stereo makers. They're already doing it. Theree are also adapters for sale that do this.
I don't have all I need yet in this area but hooking my iPod up to the charger/FM transmitter I have let's me use the steering wheel controls for everything except the menu/scrolling bits (I know that's a big thing but I've got it set up so the iPod in it's charger/transmitter is right next to my knee and easier to manipulate than a cell phone and no harder than using the controls on the radio that are not available on the steering column). The HUD would be cool, though, and would make me a safer driver... I always wanted a HUD for my car. I think Cadillac actually had a model with an optional HUD for the main instrument panel items a while back. I wonder why more auto makers don't do this... or do they and I am just ignorant?
All in all, I just don't see enough good in adding wireless (of whatever kind) to the iPod to justify it. Now, a non-iPod (new) product that had wireless with a limited music/photo/video feature set (iPhone?, iBerry?) might be on the horizon. That wouldn't be bad as it would give those you feel the same as you the option to get their much needed "wireless," while letting others enjoy the most elegant, easy to use media player on the market without the bloat.
Manic Mouse
Aug 26, 05:57 AM
Oh I can be sure that a Conroe placed in an iMac will run into the volume constraints and effective heat dissipation of the heat sink when compared to a full blown BTX tower.
The original G5 and the Rev. B (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9d/IMacG5guts.png) stuck with the wonderful heat channel. The 17" models ran a lot hotter then the 20" due to the internal design and volume.
The Rev. C (http://www.xlr8yourmac.com/systems/imac_isight_internals/imac_g5_isight_inside.html) and Intel use similar internal layouts with the CPU and power supply toward the top of the machine.
Here (http://www.flickr.com/photos/inju/88928219/) is a good comparison.
Watch the WWDC keynote and note that the xserves now use Woodcrest which has a higher TDP than Conroe (95W compared to 65W). Also note what they say about Woodcrest having a better thermal environment that the G5's they were using before which were the same G5's (non-dual core) that the iMac used I believe. Conroe has better thermal characteristics than G5's, the Mac Pro and xserve prove that.
iMac will get Conroe. 2.4Ghz and 2.66Ghz. Conroe is the best value for performance processor that Intel are offering, so they need to use it SOMEWHERE in their lineup.
The original G5 and the Rev. B (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9d/IMacG5guts.png) stuck with the wonderful heat channel. The 17" models ran a lot hotter then the 20" due to the internal design and volume.
The Rev. C (http://www.xlr8yourmac.com/systems/imac_isight_internals/imac_g5_isight_inside.html) and Intel use similar internal layouts with the CPU and power supply toward the top of the machine.
Here (http://www.flickr.com/photos/inju/88928219/) is a good comparison.
Watch the WWDC keynote and note that the xserves now use Woodcrest which has a higher TDP than Conroe (95W compared to 65W). Also note what they say about Woodcrest having a better thermal environment that the G5's they were using before which were the same G5's (non-dual core) that the iMac used I believe. Conroe has better thermal characteristics than G5's, the Mac Pro and xserve prove that.
iMac will get Conroe. 2.4Ghz and 2.66Ghz. Conroe is the best value for performance processor that Intel are offering, so they need to use it SOMEWHERE in their lineup.
BLUELION
Apr 3, 01:46 PM
Apple is Apple and the king of the hill with respect to the tablet sector. Android is attempting to catch up, and therefore not on top.
The reason this ad works so well is because it is not in your face, trying to give you a spec list of what it can do. People already know what is under the hood and what its hardware can do, the point of the ad is to entice, to get those who are on other platforms to come on over.
This ad is about subtle confidence and that is why it is a home-run. Android, well they can keep trying with their used car salesman approach.
:apple:
This ad will never work. People want ads that make them feel like teenage boys. I know this from Android ads. Steel and lasers, Apple. Steel and lasers!
The reason this ad works so well is because it is not in your face, trying to give you a spec list of what it can do. People already know what is under the hood and what its hardware can do, the point of the ad is to entice, to get those who are on other platforms to come on over.
This ad is about subtle confidence and that is why it is a home-run. Android, well they can keep trying with their used car salesman approach.
:apple:
This ad will never work. People want ads that make them feel like teenage boys. I know this from Android ads. Steel and lasers, Apple. Steel and lasers!
GregA
Nov 29, 05:51 PM
B) Add a built in iPod dock. This would enable friends to bring their iPod to your iTv and play their videos.
Well, it has a USB port. Wouldn't it be better to use an existing dock through the USB port than have it on the iTV itself? Easier to put the iTV in your stereo cabinet that way.
ps. Perhaps an external hard disk, external HD-DVD drive, eyeSight, digital TV tuner, and iPod will compete for 1 USB port...
Well, it has a USB port. Wouldn't it be better to use an existing dock through the USB port than have it on the iTV itself? Easier to put the iTV in your stereo cabinet that way.
ps. Perhaps an external hard disk, external HD-DVD drive, eyeSight, digital TV tuner, and iPod will compete for 1 USB port...
DeSnousa
Apr 13, 11:59 PM
What computers do you have operating to get those points? You must be an IT admin or something surely they are not your computers?
Tubby The Bull
Oct 23, 09:00 AM
Nov'06? wow.. the future :)
doh! sorry... Nov'05
doh! sorry... Nov'05
hulugu
Nov 29, 08:58 PM
Why are we still talking about the Zune. Does anyone really care? It's just another mp3 player among so many others behind iPod. :rolleyes:
It will never match the iPod's popularity, ever.
I think the feeling was, this is the last full measure for anyone expecting to knock the iPod off its pedestal without a serious sea-change in technology, to mix my metaphors a little.
Sony tried, Dell tried, Creative is trying, and really only Samsung and SanDisk are having any success. The real threat it appeared was from Microsoft who could use their money and leverage the support of WMA, the XBox, and other technologies to support the Zune.
Instead, Microsoft made a clunky box, reinvented the software wheel, and severed the Zune from all the PlaysForSure companies. The only real leverage the Zune has is it's connection with the XBox, which the iPod can do as well. The Zune is a massive duplication of effort, and will surely do more to eliminate the smaller players in the market, such as SanDisk, than affect the iPod's sales.
Furthermore, I would ask anyone to avoid buying the Zune, no one should reward Microsoft for releasing a product that is effectively unfinished. Really for $250.00 you get to do their beta testing, and that's not a privilege anyone should have to endure.
It will never match the iPod's popularity, ever.
I think the feeling was, this is the last full measure for anyone expecting to knock the iPod off its pedestal without a serious sea-change in technology, to mix my metaphors a little.
Sony tried, Dell tried, Creative is trying, and really only Samsung and SanDisk are having any success. The real threat it appeared was from Microsoft who could use their money and leverage the support of WMA, the XBox, and other technologies to support the Zune.
Instead, Microsoft made a clunky box, reinvented the software wheel, and severed the Zune from all the PlaysForSure companies. The only real leverage the Zune has is it's connection with the XBox, which the iPod can do as well. The Zune is a massive duplication of effort, and will surely do more to eliminate the smaller players in the market, such as SanDisk, than affect the iPod's sales.
Furthermore, I would ask anyone to avoid buying the Zune, no one should reward Microsoft for releasing a product that is effectively unfinished. Really for $250.00 you get to do their beta testing, and that's not a privilege anyone should have to endure.
mozmac
Jul 14, 02:43 AM
Apple is frequently the first to incorporate new technologies. USB, ditching the floppy drive, airport wireless networking, firewire. I remember when I had my iBook on campus back in 2002. I was one of the ONLY people that had wireless. A few buildings offered it, and I didn't see many other people sitting around on their laptops, unless they had an illuminated Apple shining on their lap.:)
I wouldn't be surprised if Apple was one of the first to use Blu-Ray, especially seeing they are a contributing company. They have a tendency to take new technologies and make them mainstream. They did it with the Apple II, the original Mac, and they continue to do it today.
I wouldn't be surprised if Apple was one of the first to use Blu-Ray, especially seeing they are a contributing company. They have a tendency to take new technologies and make them mainstream. They did it with the Apple II, the original Mac, and they continue to do it today.
lordonuthin
Mar 18, 01:32 PM
so i hit 5 million points on jan 27, and i hit 6 million points today. so that last million took me 49 days. not my best so far, but hopefully once i get back to my apartment next month i'll be back in business
Grats on 6 mil!!
Grats on 6 mil!!
evilgEEk
Sep 9, 09:04 PM
Can you put them side by side and run some comparisons?
Since I'm home for the evening and didn't see your post until now, I can't give you any specific side-by-side tests, but I can give you a rough estimate of the speeds.
Overall, the Dual G5 is faster, not by a landslide by any means, but it is faster. Of course the G5 has 1.5 gigs of RAM vs. the mini's 512K, and the G5 has a 1Ghz BUS speed vs. the 667Mhz of the mini. If I were to slap in 2 gigs of RAM in to the mini then I'm sure I would see a little more performance, but I think the G5 would still be faster.
But the mini is still very zippy, no beachballs or waiting on Apps, very fast and clean for average use. Now if I were to do some Photoshop or, say, FCP comparisons, I'm sure the G5 would clean up in those areas.
I'm really happy with the purchase though, it's perfect for what I need it to do.
Oh, I installed Windows XP via BootCamp and after having to burn an illegal copy of my legal disc (the retail disc was bad) I got it running with no problems. I must say, this mini is the fastest Windows machine I've ever had.
Since I'm home for the evening and didn't see your post until now, I can't give you any specific side-by-side tests, but I can give you a rough estimate of the speeds.
Overall, the Dual G5 is faster, not by a landslide by any means, but it is faster. Of course the G5 has 1.5 gigs of RAM vs. the mini's 512K, and the G5 has a 1Ghz BUS speed vs. the 667Mhz of the mini. If I were to slap in 2 gigs of RAM in to the mini then I'm sure I would see a little more performance, but I think the G5 would still be faster.
But the mini is still very zippy, no beachballs or waiting on Apps, very fast and clean for average use. Now if I were to do some Photoshop or, say, FCP comparisons, I'm sure the G5 would clean up in those areas.
I'm really happy with the purchase though, it's perfect for what I need it to do.
Oh, I installed Windows XP via BootCamp and after having to burn an illegal copy of my legal disc (the retail disc was bad) I got it running with no problems. I must say, this mini is the fastest Windows machine I've ever had.
Northgrove
May 3, 05:40 AM
In Lion a user simply needs to invoke the Launchpad, click and hold on the icon of the application they wish to delete, and when the icons begin to wiggle a cross appears on icons of apps installed via the Mac App Store. Clicking this cross brings up the message "Are you sure you want to delete the application...?", and clicking 'Delete' confirms and removes the app.
I hope I can right-click and delete them too. Pointless to click and wait while holding if you have an input device with more than one button... :rolleyes:
I hope I can right-click and delete them too. Pointless to click and wait while holding if you have an input device with more than one button... :rolleyes:
chameleon81
May 2, 04:33 PM
you people like to discuss about everything.
marksman
Mar 27, 11:36 PM
It is amazing how limited in vision some people are...
Seriously people stuck with this idea that the future of gaming is going to be non-portable systems with game controllers forever are going to be very disappointed in the future.
Ultimately gesture based movements and other mechanisms will be used for gaming, not a freaking glorified joystick. It is silly to believe otherwise.
Again people saying you couldn't play with a touchscreen device without looking at it have no imagination or understanding. Definately within two years you will be shown to be horribly wrong on this point.
You keep believing the future of gaming is going to remain in the hands of traditional 8 year console development cycles... It is not going to happen.
It would be like saying you can't play any real game on a console, you need a pc for it. I certainly can do much more in terms of controlling and playing a game on a computer than I can do with any console controller.
Seriously people stuck with this idea that the future of gaming is going to be non-portable systems with game controllers forever are going to be very disappointed in the future.
Ultimately gesture based movements and other mechanisms will be used for gaming, not a freaking glorified joystick. It is silly to believe otherwise.
Again people saying you couldn't play with a touchscreen device without looking at it have no imagination or understanding. Definately within two years you will be shown to be horribly wrong on this point.
You keep believing the future of gaming is going to remain in the hands of traditional 8 year console development cycles... It is not going to happen.
It would be like saying you can't play any real game on a console, you need a pc for it. I certainly can do much more in terms of controlling and playing a game on a computer than I can do with any console controller.
ObsidianIce
Jul 19, 06:55 PM
Ahhh, as a loyal user, and stockholder this is what i like to hear. And i agree it is nice to personally be able to say that you've helped!
jgould
Feb 20, 04:25 PM
Ok, So I moved the Mini back to the corner where it sat before, and added my wireless trackpad and keyboard to the desk. I'm still not sure on the keyboard. it feels different than the one built into the MBP. I think it might feel mushy... I need to put something on top of my desk so that things don't slid around... The trackpad will slide as I move it as will the MBP if it's sitting on the desk surface...
Very Nice blog! have a look at selena gomez net worth in indian rupees.
ReplyDelete