zac4mac
Sep 11, 07:13 AM
Seems to me the new 24" iMac is the "Media Player" - My two largest "monitors" are my 23" ACD and a 26" old skool TV. I watch DVDs on the ACD, as I get a little bit more picture and a lot more clarity than on my TV.
Seating accommodations in my office aren't as nice as the living room, but oh well...
Seating accommodations in my office aren't as nice as the living room, but oh well...
doctor-don
Apr 26, 02:57 PM
One interesting thing to note. Apple held 25% of recent acquirers with 2 phone models. The iPhone 4 and iPhone 3GS. They are also on only 2 carriers, and have only been with Verizon for part of the time leading up to the march survey. Android however is on dozens of handsets and all four US carriers. I would say apple is doing amazingly well when you consider those specifics.
I am not worried about iOS not having a larger chunk of the market, I am blown away that it has 25%.
Too bad Apple didn't see the light and make its iPhone available across all carriers.
I am not worried about iOS not having a larger chunk of the market, I am blown away that it has 25%.
Too bad Apple didn't see the light and make its iPhone available across all carriers.
OllyW
Apr 20, 04:14 AM
otherwise...why would I buy an ip5?
You don't have to.
It doesn't sound like there's much there to tempt iPhone 4 owners but it should be a great update for those with the 3GS and 3G.
You don't have to.
It doesn't sound like there's much there to tempt iPhone 4 owners but it should be a great update for those with the 3GS and 3G.
LoganT
Mar 26, 10:26 PM
The rumors talking about the iPad 3 are mostly saying it would be a different model than the current iPad. There's multiple Macbook Pros. Don't be surprised if there are multiple iPads, like an iPad pro.
daneoni
Jul 21, 03:50 PM
If there is so much as a hiss with the Merom MBPs then thats it no more Apple portables for me. Its straight to the Towers (iMac is a little too "white" for my taste)
G4scott
Aug 11, 10:02 AM
Hopefully they'll release the MacBook pros before Sept. 16 so I can still get my free iPod nano, but knowing Apple, they always wait until the end if their major promotion to introduce new stuff... Perhaps they'll update the MBP before then and the iPods after the 16th. I don't really need the latest iPod out there.
I'm holding off for the new MBP because from what I've seen, the current ones still have issues. It was Apple's first Mac to go to Intel, and although they've made some changes, it's still "first generation". I'm hoping the next revision will have more than just a processor upgrade.
That said, I don't see the MacBooks going with the Core 2 Duo until sometime next year. The Core Duo is a fine chip, and will handle pretty much anything a MacBook owner would need, and it would make the more expensive MacBook Pro seem more appealing.
I'm holding off for the new MBP because from what I've seen, the current ones still have issues. It was Apple's first Mac to go to Intel, and although they've made some changes, it's still "first generation". I'm hoping the next revision will have more than just a processor upgrade.
That said, I don't see the MacBooks going with the Core 2 Duo until sometime next year. The Core Duo is a fine chip, and will handle pretty much anything a MacBook owner would need, and it would make the more expensive MacBook Pro seem more appealing.
ddeadserious
Apr 26, 02:46 PM
iOS is stale.
They haven't made an significant UI changes since 2007.
While Apple can continue to release a beautifully engineered and sleek phone, they need to focus on making iOS up to par with the features that Android offers.
In terms of OS, the only thing iOS seems to do better is simply being more stable.
I sold my iPhone 4 last month and bought an Android phone. The only thing I miss? The retina display and the Facebook app. I'm willing to deal with a bit of instability for the immense amount of extra functionality that Android offers.
They haven't made an significant UI changes since 2007.
While Apple can continue to release a beautifully engineered and sleek phone, they need to focus on making iOS up to par with the features that Android offers.
In terms of OS, the only thing iOS seems to do better is simply being more stable.
I sold my iPhone 4 last month and bought an Android phone. The only thing I miss? The retina display and the Facebook app. I'm willing to deal with a bit of instability for the immense amount of extra functionality that Android offers.
The Norman
Mar 29, 11:13 AM
Streaming aside, I like how my kindle books sync to ALL of my devices from Amazon's cloud. Obviously DRM is annoying, but this seems to be a cool direction to go in for other media as well. Add streaming for music (maybe video) and it is perfect. You can download or stream anything you own. Have Apple implement the end user GUI app and we're set. You are all right to point out the impending data transfer price hell coming from our wireless carriers.
CalBoy
Apr 20, 11:47 AM
All of these September iPhone rumors leave three possibilities:
1) Apple failed to plug all of its leaks and there are genuine sources providing this information, and as a result, the iPhone 5 will really be out in September.
2) Apple is intentionally testing the waters to not only see where remaining leaks are, but also to encourage iPhone 4 sales to not drop off during the late spring/early summer.
3) The original September rumor began from an untested source and spent enough time on the merry-go-round to be viewed as "legitimate" by larger media outlets.
1) Apple failed to plug all of its leaks and there are genuine sources providing this information, and as a result, the iPhone 5 will really be out in September.
2) Apple is intentionally testing the waters to not only see where remaining leaks are, but also to encourage iPhone 4 sales to not drop off during the late spring/early summer.
3) The original September rumor began from an untested source and spent enough time on the merry-go-round to be viewed as "legitimate" by larger media outlets.
kalsta
May 6, 12:11 PM
If you told the average American male that his 5 inch penis was 13 centimeters, we'd be on the metric system a week from Thursday.
Can't argue with that logic. :D
Can't argue with that logic. :D
brap
Aug 7, 02:09 PM
If that is what you want, Apple won't mind at all if you buy a Macintosh to run Windows.
It's almost at the price point where the OS comes for free, so a Windows OEM install wouldn't make much of a dent on top...
It's a very tasty option if you qualify for education pricing, the dual 2GHz/160GB option tips the scales at a measly ?1350 all-in. Knew there was a reason for marrying a teacher.
The final, killer point though: video cards. Presumably we don't yet know if a standard PC video card would work, right?
It's almost at the price point where the OS comes for free, so a Windows OEM install wouldn't make much of a dent on top...
It's a very tasty option if you qualify for education pricing, the dual 2GHz/160GB option tips the scales at a measly ?1350 all-in. Knew there was a reason for marrying a teacher.
The final, killer point though: video cards. Presumably we don't yet know if a standard PC video card would work, right?
MonkeySee....
Mar 28, 10:08 AM
So your attitude is "if I can't have it, I don't want anyone to have it."?
Whether it comes out or not, you won't be getting one. So why would it matter either way?
Maybe because, like me, it would be nice to actually have a product on its release date? :rolleyes:
Whether it comes out or not, you won't be getting one. So why would it matter either way?
Maybe because, like me, it would be nice to actually have a product on its release date? :rolleyes:
Plutonius
May 5, 11:11 AM
Wilmer will be missed but he was slowing us down with his incessant blather. I'm starting to get hungry so let's try to find a kitchen in this dump so the wizard can make us sandwiches.
Vote - Move to the next room (take Wilmer's body along with us).
Vote - Move to the next room (take Wilmer's body along with us).
AvSRoCkCO1067
Jul 21, 02:51 PM
This may be a dumb question, but why would apple just use the new chips in mbp's and not the mb? Dosn't seem to make sense. As soon as core 2 merom comes out every pc notebook will have it. Price wouldn't be an issue cause merom is same price as yonah, correct?
Every PC Notebook? Eesh most of the notebooks my friends aren't purchasing (that aren't Macbooks - which is by far in the majority) have either AMD chips, P4 chips, or Pentium Mobile chips...
Apple has by far adopted Intel's new chips the fastest out of any other computer manufacturer I know - and hopefully they'll continue to do the same as Core 2 Duo chips are unveiled.
Every PC Notebook? Eesh most of the notebooks my friends aren't purchasing (that aren't Macbooks - which is by far in the majority) have either AMD chips, P4 chips, or Pentium Mobile chips...
Apple has by far adopted Intel's new chips the fastest out of any other computer manufacturer I know - and hopefully they'll continue to do the same as Core 2 Duo chips are unveiled.
Ryth
Apr 21, 10:02 PM
CIA...
That setup screams 'old, slow legacy stuff'.
Why should a new iteration of the MacPro be a hostage to someone wanting a housing for 6 of their old, slow and small drives?
Why support 3 or 4 eSATA and Firewire expansion PCIe cards when that can all be done over a single Thunderbolt cable?
Sounds like your setup needs a bit of a spring clean. A newer, smaller box would force you to consolidate onto a smaller number of bigger and faster drives (those 150GB raptors are slow by today's standards).
Yah CIA, I think you'd be surprised with what little you can get by on these days in smaller boxes and with Thunderbolt.
And I agree with you, I hate tapes...lol. I wish we would go to 1 damn standard but we know that is how people make their money...no standards. I'm so sick of all the formats and all the output formats. I just want 1080p and that's it. Burn the rest. ;)
That setup screams 'old, slow legacy stuff'.
Why should a new iteration of the MacPro be a hostage to someone wanting a housing for 6 of their old, slow and small drives?
Why support 3 or 4 eSATA and Firewire expansion PCIe cards when that can all be done over a single Thunderbolt cable?
Sounds like your setup needs a bit of a spring clean. A newer, smaller box would force you to consolidate onto a smaller number of bigger and faster drives (those 150GB raptors are slow by today's standards).
Yah CIA, I think you'd be surprised with what little you can get by on these days in smaller boxes and with Thunderbolt.
And I agree with you, I hate tapes...lol. I wish we would go to 1 damn standard but we know that is how people make their money...no standards. I'm so sick of all the formats and all the output formats. I just want 1080p and that's it. Burn the rest. ;)
Bibulous
Sep 10, 11:02 PM
I'm hoping for a streaming device with a remote that allows me access to media on my mac from my TV. Of course Apple will overly simplify it and limits it's capabilities, but well love it anyways.
oneighturbo
Sep 16, 11:02 AM
so help me out here..
BTO = anything purchased online? (even if the config doesnt change at all on a MBP) vs. me walking into a store and getting one today?
what im getting at is i would like a Merom MBP but if i want to take advantage of the iPod edu deal i have to buy today, the 16th.
so then if i get the current MBP id have to keep it unopened until the announment on the 24th? then take it back to the store?
if ship dates go into October, when will the stores have em in stock?
does that make any sense :D
BTO = anything purchased online? (even if the config doesnt change at all on a MBP) vs. me walking into a store and getting one today?
what im getting at is i would like a Merom MBP but if i want to take advantage of the iPod edu deal i have to buy today, the 16th.
so then if i get the current MBP id have to keep it unopened until the announment on the 24th? then take it back to the store?
if ship dates go into October, when will the stores have em in stock?
does that make any sense :D
Makosuke
May 6, 05:10 AM
I'm not so much joining in the discussion as publicly recording what I think is going to happen in a few years based not really on this prediction, but the way things are going in general, so that I can point to this post in a few years and either say "I told you so" or "look how clueless I was."
I think this prediction is right, at least in general terms, and while to hardcore geeks it may sound like a terrible idea, I doubt it is, and it makes a great deal of sense to Apple. That said, I expect Apple will continue to sell "pro" systems of some sort based on Intel chips for the foreseeable future, to cover the developer/Photoshop-jockey/video-editor market. They're just not going to sell all that many of them.
This is why the ARM transition will not be like the Intel transition (and remember we're not talking about something happening tomorrow):
For one thing, two years is a lot of time at the rate the ARM architecture has been advancing. Predicting anything about how fast the chips will be in 2013 (or how much Intel will have advanced by then) is difficult.
In the quarter the G5 Power Mac first shipped, back in Apple earned $44M on $1.7B in sales, and shipped 787K Macs. In the quarter the first Intel iMacs shipped, in Apple earned $410M on $4.36B, and sold 1.1M Macs.
In the most recent quarter, Apple's profit was $6B--more than their gross in and almost as much as the entire company's gross for all of 2003--on gross income of close to $25B. They sold 3.76M Macs, and more notably 4.69M iPads and well over 20M small-screen iOS devices. They also have something like $65 billion sitting in the bank, which is ridiculous.
Contrast this with Intel, which in the last quarter was doing extremely well, with gross of $12.8B and net of $3.16B. Or, for that matter, IBM, which had revenue of $24B and earnings of $2.9B.
In Apple was a relatively small-time player that got IBM to design a wicked-fast custom desktop CPU. In 2006 they were a somewhat larger company mostly on account of selling a lot of iPods, and weren't in a strong enough position to get IBM to do what they needed with the PPC architecture to the point it could compete with Intel's upcoming Core architecture. Today their Mac business alone is three times what it was then, it's the only segment of the PC industry actually expanding, and the company is HUGE--twice the size of Intel, in terms of financials. Heck, they could buy a controlling stake in Intel based purely on that company's market cap with cash on hand.
Further, of all those 25M+ iOS devices last quarter, every single one was running an ARM processor. While nearly 4 million Macs is nothing to sneeze at, Apple's bread and butter is iOS and ARM-based systems. They know them, they control the whole package, and they have an in-house CPU team for the architecture. One that, based on performance comparisons with the Xoom, is doing its job quite well. They've also managed to sell these devices at prices so low other companies are having serious trouble matching them, while maintaing very healthy profit margins.
As far as Apple is concerned--and with good reason--iOS on ARM is their future. There's no reason to stop selling Macs, but the market for console-style computers is not likely limited to handhelds and tablets--there's almost certainly a lot of demand in the bigger-laptop-with-a-keyboard space as well as large-screen desktops. With the rate of CPU power increase in ARM chips, within a couple of years they're likely to be powerful enough to comfortably handle desktop tasks, particularly considering that the average user really doesn't have any use for anything more than a basic dual-core system--everything else is for pros and bragging rights.
So, by way of prediction, I'd assume that Apple will continue to beef up its in-house ARM team, and once the desktop-grade chips are in place leverage that to replace what we currently think of as consumer Macs with beefier, larger-screen iOS based devices (or perhaps some iOS/MacOS hybrid thing to better handle indirect input, since pointing at a 27" touchscreen is ridiculous for more than a few minutes).
After all, Apple could--and very will might--dump a few billion dollars of their hoard into advancing the ARM architecture in some way that competitors can't match, and/or building out chip fab capabilities to keep prices low and availability high. Intel's entire R&D budget for 2010 was in the range of $6B, AMD's wasn't much over $1B, and Apple likes to control their own destiny, so it's not out of the question if they can hire good enough people.
I also bet that they will keep some "pro" machines--perhaps even those that'll keep the "Mac" moniker--in the lineup, for people who want more traditional workstation software, since there's still a lucrative market for that. These will presumably use Intel chips, but then who knows--even Microsoft is working on a version of Windows for ARM.
And outside the gamer market or the relatively small number of people who need or want a virtualized Windows environment, I seriously doubt most people will care. After all, it hasn't stopped them from lining up to buy iPads, and I have NEVER heard even the most ardent Windows fanboy rant about Windows with the same fervor as a half-dozen non-technical people I know personally who love their iPad.
Geeks and old-school Macheads like myself will wail and moan, and Apple won't care. If they did, the iPad would have run the MacOS.
In related news, Microsoft is in trouble.
I think this prediction is right, at least in general terms, and while to hardcore geeks it may sound like a terrible idea, I doubt it is, and it makes a great deal of sense to Apple. That said, I expect Apple will continue to sell "pro" systems of some sort based on Intel chips for the foreseeable future, to cover the developer/Photoshop-jockey/video-editor market. They're just not going to sell all that many of them.
This is why the ARM transition will not be like the Intel transition (and remember we're not talking about something happening tomorrow):
For one thing, two years is a lot of time at the rate the ARM architecture has been advancing. Predicting anything about how fast the chips will be in 2013 (or how much Intel will have advanced by then) is difficult.
In the quarter the G5 Power Mac first shipped, back in Apple earned $44M on $1.7B in sales, and shipped 787K Macs. In the quarter the first Intel iMacs shipped, in Apple earned $410M on $4.36B, and sold 1.1M Macs.
In the most recent quarter, Apple's profit was $6B--more than their gross in and almost as much as the entire company's gross for all of 2003--on gross income of close to $25B. They sold 3.76M Macs, and more notably 4.69M iPads and well over 20M small-screen iOS devices. They also have something like $65 billion sitting in the bank, which is ridiculous.
Contrast this with Intel, which in the last quarter was doing extremely well, with gross of $12.8B and net of $3.16B. Or, for that matter, IBM, which had revenue of $24B and earnings of $2.9B.
In Apple was a relatively small-time player that got IBM to design a wicked-fast custom desktop CPU. In 2006 they were a somewhat larger company mostly on account of selling a lot of iPods, and weren't in a strong enough position to get IBM to do what they needed with the PPC architecture to the point it could compete with Intel's upcoming Core architecture. Today their Mac business alone is three times what it was then, it's the only segment of the PC industry actually expanding, and the company is HUGE--twice the size of Intel, in terms of financials. Heck, they could buy a controlling stake in Intel based purely on that company's market cap with cash on hand.
Further, of all those 25M+ iOS devices last quarter, every single one was running an ARM processor. While nearly 4 million Macs is nothing to sneeze at, Apple's bread and butter is iOS and ARM-based systems. They know them, they control the whole package, and they have an in-house CPU team for the architecture. One that, based on performance comparisons with the Xoom, is doing its job quite well. They've also managed to sell these devices at prices so low other companies are having serious trouble matching them, while maintaing very healthy profit margins.
As far as Apple is concerned--and with good reason--iOS on ARM is their future. There's no reason to stop selling Macs, but the market for console-style computers is not likely limited to handhelds and tablets--there's almost certainly a lot of demand in the bigger-laptop-with-a-keyboard space as well as large-screen desktops. With the rate of CPU power increase in ARM chips, within a couple of years they're likely to be powerful enough to comfortably handle desktop tasks, particularly considering that the average user really doesn't have any use for anything more than a basic dual-core system--everything else is for pros and bragging rights.
So, by way of prediction, I'd assume that Apple will continue to beef up its in-house ARM team, and once the desktop-grade chips are in place leverage that to replace what we currently think of as consumer Macs with beefier, larger-screen iOS based devices (or perhaps some iOS/MacOS hybrid thing to better handle indirect input, since pointing at a 27" touchscreen is ridiculous for more than a few minutes).
After all, Apple could--and very will might--dump a few billion dollars of their hoard into advancing the ARM architecture in some way that competitors can't match, and/or building out chip fab capabilities to keep prices low and availability high. Intel's entire R&D budget for 2010 was in the range of $6B, AMD's wasn't much over $1B, and Apple likes to control their own destiny, so it's not out of the question if they can hire good enough people.
I also bet that they will keep some "pro" machines--perhaps even those that'll keep the "Mac" moniker--in the lineup, for people who want more traditional workstation software, since there's still a lucrative market for that. These will presumably use Intel chips, but then who knows--even Microsoft is working on a version of Windows for ARM.
And outside the gamer market or the relatively small number of people who need or want a virtualized Windows environment, I seriously doubt most people will care. After all, it hasn't stopped them from lining up to buy iPads, and I have NEVER heard even the most ardent Windows fanboy rant about Windows with the same fervor as a half-dozen non-technical people I know personally who love their iPad.
Geeks and old-school Macheads like myself will wail and moan, and Apple won't care. If they did, the iPad would have run the MacOS.
In related news, Microsoft is in trouble.
azilnik
Aug 2, 09:56 PM
Hm. Hey guys... I'm a longtime reader of MR. I always read your comments and never recall posting (Creepy, eh?)
Anyway apparently I once made an account although I don't remember.
None the less... I'm surprised at how much doubt there is about Core 2 Duos. Apple and Intel are more or less best buddies. You honestly expect Apple to not update their lineup? You don't think people will go... Hmm... Core Duo Macbook Pro... Or... Core 2 Duo Dell. Even a moron will say "2's better than 1!" Apple is KNOWN for having top of the line systems in their respective class, and now that that class is Intel processors, I have 0 doubt that Apple will introduce Core 2 Duos in it's Macbook Pros as soon as it can. The reason I say Macbook Pros is because I'm sure that Macbooks and Mac Minis will say with the Core Duos. Why? Apple needs to better differentiate their pro line from their consumer line, because right now there is not much difference between the Macbook and Macbook Pro, performance-wise (Yes I know Integrated Video, Glossy Screen, etc.) but Proc. to Proc., Almost no difference.
As for "Meroms in iMacs..." Maybe, but I doubt it. Not SOON at least. Conroes then? You guys are forgetting... Apple doesn't NEED to use it. Just because it's AVAILABLE means almost nothing. Why would they use Conroe when they simply don't need to. I don't think we'll see Conroes at all in Macs quite honestly, and I don't see any problem with that. Maybe in Intel-based Power Macs, but there's ALOT of speculation about that.
Anyway apparently I once made an account although I don't remember.
None the less... I'm surprised at how much doubt there is about Core 2 Duos. Apple and Intel are more or less best buddies. You honestly expect Apple to not update their lineup? You don't think people will go... Hmm... Core Duo Macbook Pro... Or... Core 2 Duo Dell. Even a moron will say "2's better than 1!" Apple is KNOWN for having top of the line systems in their respective class, and now that that class is Intel processors, I have 0 doubt that Apple will introduce Core 2 Duos in it's Macbook Pros as soon as it can. The reason I say Macbook Pros is because I'm sure that Macbooks and Mac Minis will say with the Core Duos. Why? Apple needs to better differentiate their pro line from their consumer line, because right now there is not much difference between the Macbook and Macbook Pro, performance-wise (Yes I know Integrated Video, Glossy Screen, etc.) but Proc. to Proc., Almost no difference.
As for "Meroms in iMacs..." Maybe, but I doubt it. Not SOON at least. Conroes then? You guys are forgetting... Apple doesn't NEED to use it. Just because it's AVAILABLE means almost nothing. Why would they use Conroe when they simply don't need to. I don't think we'll see Conroes at all in Macs quite honestly, and I don't see any problem with that. Maybe in Intel-based Power Macs, but there's ALOT of speculation about that.
Derekasaurus
Aug 4, 12:19 AM
are people not expecting merom to go immediately into the macbook as well? i don't see a reason for apple to purposely gimp their best-selling notebook when a merom chip is supposed to cost the same as its yonah counterpart.
Right now there is a big price difference between the MB and MBP line but not a whole lot of difference in performance. Putting the Core 2 in the MBP would help differentiate it from the MB. That doesn't mean the MB won't get a speed bump (the Core Duo goes up to 2.33GHz), but Apple might delay putting Merom in the MB to differentiate the lines. I'd pounce on a Merom MB, but I don't think it's going to happen in conjunction with the Merom MBP.
Right now there is a big price difference between the MB and MBP line but not a whole lot of difference in performance. Putting the Core 2 in the MBP would help differentiate it from the MB. That doesn't mean the MB won't get a speed bump (the Core Duo goes up to 2.33GHz), but Apple might delay putting Merom in the MB to differentiate the lines. I'd pounce on a Merom MB, but I don't think it's going to happen in conjunction with the Merom MBP.
Daveoc64
May 4, 03:04 PM
Because it has a payment system and delivery system in place.
But it isn't an app. It's an OS upgrade.
So why sell it in the App Store?
Apple isn't a poor company, the Apple Store (the website) has been able to sell digital software for years. They could set up a very sophisticated method for selling Mac OS X to people without using the App Store.
If I was Apple, I'd sell (through their website) a licence for Mac OS X. You'd download a small App, which would give you the option to either install it to the computer you were on right then or to create a DVD or USB key which could also be used to install the OS. This App would then download the appropriate files and continue the install/make the DVD.
But it isn't an app. It's an OS upgrade.
So why sell it in the App Store?
Apple isn't a poor company, the Apple Store (the website) has been able to sell digital software for years. They could set up a very sophisticated method for selling Mac OS X to people without using the App Store.
If I was Apple, I'd sell (through their website) a licence for Mac OS X. You'd download a small App, which would give you the option to either install it to the computer you were on right then or to create a DVD or USB key which could also be used to install the OS. This App would then download the appropriate files and continue the install/make the DVD.
Chupa Chupa
Mar 28, 09:54 AM
Makes sense if Apple wants 10.7 and iOS5 to be the focus. Also gives a little more life to the VZW iPhone 4 (fewer bitter customers, even if caused by their own impatience). Finally, while the fall is usually iPod update time, let's face it, iPod updates are getting kinda boring. A new iPhone 5 in Sept would def be more buzzworthy. Then Apple gets back to the summer iPhone releases w/ the iPhone (6) LTE.
rpenzinger
Apr 21, 02:48 PM
Not gonna happen
totally gonna happen
totally gonna happen
KnightWRX
Apr 23, 06:30 PM
Bogus story because Apple would never fit graphics cards capable of outputting at that res in the iMacs or laptops
3200x2000 requires 6,400,000 pixels. At 32 bit per pixel, we're talking 25,600,000 bytes of data. Considering modern framebuffers are double buffered, this requires 51,200,000 bytes of memory to hold. That fits into 48.82 MB of RAM. GPUs have had that much since ... hum... 2004 ? So we're good on framebuffer RAM.
Now, bandwidth. In order to refresh the screen 60 times, we need to push out those 25,600,000 pixels. That's going to require 11718 Mbps of bandwidth. Let's see... Display port 1.1a has 10.8 Gbps so it's a no go (though it could almost do it). If only there was a DP 1.2 spec that had a 21.6 Gbps cap... Oh wait there is. :D
So we're good on RAM and bandwidth. Now, what ATI family introduces DP 1.2 so that we can use this new standard ? Oh right, the Radeon HD 6000 series, AMD's current shipping tech! Now if only Apple would release some kind of support for these GPUs, like they did back in 10.6.7 ;) :
http://appleheadlines.com/2011/03/24/10-6-7-update-brings-native-graphic-acceleration-for-amd-5000-and-6000-series-video-cards/
So let's see if I got all of this right. We're good on RAM (have been for quite a few years). We're good on bandwidth for 60 hz 3200x2000 resolution. We're good on hardware (AMD 6000 series) and we're good on OS X support (with 10.6.7).
What exactly is missing here ? Oh right, a hardware refresh with said hardware included, which is probably a formality seeing all of these news and facts :cool:
3200x2000 requires 6,400,000 pixels. At 32 bit per pixel, we're talking 25,600,000 bytes of data. Considering modern framebuffers are double buffered, this requires 51,200,000 bytes of memory to hold. That fits into 48.82 MB of RAM. GPUs have had that much since ... hum... 2004 ? So we're good on framebuffer RAM.
Now, bandwidth. In order to refresh the screen 60 times, we need to push out those 25,600,000 pixels. That's going to require 11718 Mbps of bandwidth. Let's see... Display port 1.1a has 10.8 Gbps so it's a no go (though it could almost do it). If only there was a DP 1.2 spec that had a 21.6 Gbps cap... Oh wait there is. :D
So we're good on RAM and bandwidth. Now, what ATI family introduces DP 1.2 so that we can use this new standard ? Oh right, the Radeon HD 6000 series, AMD's current shipping tech! Now if only Apple would release some kind of support for these GPUs, like they did back in 10.6.7 ;) :
http://appleheadlines.com/2011/03/24/10-6-7-update-brings-native-graphic-acceleration-for-amd-5000-and-6000-series-video-cards/
So let's see if I got all of this right. We're good on RAM (have been for quite a few years). We're good on bandwidth for 60 hz 3200x2000 resolution. We're good on hardware (AMD 6000 series) and we're good on OS X support (with 10.6.7).
What exactly is missing here ? Oh right, a hardware refresh with said hardware included, which is probably a formality seeing all of these news and facts :cool:
No comments:
Post a Comment