fivepoint
Mar 22, 06:48 AM
The hypocrisy coming from the left in the media on this issue is palpable... all the talk about Obama's great coalition and how its a justifiable war. Here are a few of my favorite quotes from Brhawk Obama:
�I�m gonna read this and then tell you who said it. �The president does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.� Now that was Barack Obama who said that on December the 20, 2007. We�ve got to be very sure here that we follow the Constitution, and president Obama didn�t do that.�
�Well, look, if that�s the criteria by which we are making decisions on the deployment of U.S. forces, then by that argument you would have 300,000 troops in the Congo right now � where millions have been slaughtered as a consequence of ethnic strife � which we haven�t done,�
Oh yeah... and here's a fun little nugget for those who like to tout Obama's coalition:
[Source: US State Department]
Coalition Countries - Iraq - 2003
Afghanistan,
Albania
Australia
Azerbaijan
Bulgaria
Colombia
Czech Republic
Denmark
El Salvador
Eritrea
Estonia
Ethiopia
Georgia
Hungary
Italy
Japan
South Korea
Latvia
Lithuania
Macedonia
Netherlands
Nicaragua
Philippines
Poland
Romania
Slovakia
Spain
Turkey
United Kingdom
Uzbekistan
Coalition - Libya - 2011
United States
France
United Kingdom
Italy
Canada
Belgium
Denmark
Norway
Qatar
Spain
Greece
Germany
Poland
Jordan
Morocco
United Arab Emirate
Read more: http://nation.foxnews.com/barack-obama/2011/03/21/fact-bush-had-2-times-more-coalition-partners-iraq-obama-has-libya#ixzz1HKPFLjvX
�I�m gonna read this and then tell you who said it. �The president does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.� Now that was Barack Obama who said that on December the 20, 2007. We�ve got to be very sure here that we follow the Constitution, and president Obama didn�t do that.�
�Well, look, if that�s the criteria by which we are making decisions on the deployment of U.S. forces, then by that argument you would have 300,000 troops in the Congo right now � where millions have been slaughtered as a consequence of ethnic strife � which we haven�t done,�
Oh yeah... and here's a fun little nugget for those who like to tout Obama's coalition:
[Source: US State Department]
Coalition Countries - Iraq - 2003
Afghanistan,
Albania
Australia
Azerbaijan
Bulgaria
Colombia
Czech Republic
Denmark
El Salvador
Eritrea
Estonia
Ethiopia
Georgia
Hungary
Italy
Japan
South Korea
Latvia
Lithuania
Macedonia
Netherlands
Nicaragua
Philippines
Poland
Romania
Slovakia
Spain
Turkey
United Kingdom
Uzbekistan
Coalition - Libya - 2011
United States
France
United Kingdom
Italy
Canada
Belgium
Denmark
Norway
Qatar
Spain
Greece
Germany
Poland
Jordan
Morocco
United Arab Emirate
Read more: http://nation.foxnews.com/barack-obama/2011/03/21/fact-bush-had-2-times-more-coalition-partners-iraq-obama-has-libya#ixzz1HKPFLjvX
Mundy
Sep 13, 09:38 AM
Are these processors 32 or 64 bit? I told one of my PC-lovin' IT guys about the 8 core Mac this morning and he said, "32 bit processors are ancient technology no matter how many you stuff into a box, but I guess they are OK for entertainment computers." :rolleyes:
Clovertown is a 64-bit CPU.
Ask your PC-loving IT guy if he uses Windows XP64 and more than 4 gigabytes of RAM. If not, then 32-bit processors are apparently okay for him, too.
Clovertown is a 64-bit CPU.
Ask your PC-loving IT guy if he uses Windows XP64 and more than 4 gigabytes of RAM. If not, then 32-bit processors are apparently okay for him, too.
pale9
Nov 28, 08:10 PM
lets face it. at this point MS can't get anything right, except, maybe the xbox. vista is a joke, the tablet pc a failure, zune a real loser, on and on and on...
but now some of their insane actions will cause harm to others, like simply handing money to universal for every zune sold (which will turn out to be close to nothing anyway), as all labels will now expect to be paid off in this manner. i hope jobs will tell them to shove it if it gets to this point.
but now some of their insane actions will cause harm to others, like simply handing money to universal for every zune sold (which will turn out to be close to nothing anyway), as all labels will now expect to be paid off in this manner. i hope jobs will tell them to shove it if it gets to this point.
amin
Aug 18, 10:28 PM
Obviously, inherently the iMac design is inferior to the Mac Pro/Powermac.
It may be obvious, but based on your earlier statement that a Conroe iMac would be "able to crunch through" apps faster than a Mac Pro, the obvious seemed worth identifying.
But I think there's a bigger reason why Apple chose to go all quad with the Mac Pro: Apple chose all quad because a duo option would have had the same performance in professional apps (again, excluding handbrake and toast which are the only two examples touted about). A single processor Woodcrest or Conroe option will have the same obtainable CPU power for 90-95% of the professional market for another 6-12 months at the very least.
So you think they put an extra processor in across the line just to be able to say they had a quad? Even the AnandTech article you used as a source showed here (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2816&p=18) that PS took advantage of quad cores in Rosetta
Here's some data regarding the Mac Pro's FSB:
*snip*
What can we take from this? Because of the use of FB-DIMMs, the Mac Pro's effective FSB is that of ~640MHz DDR2 system.
And how does it fare in memory latency?
*snip*
Your points about latency and FSB are not separate negatives as you have made them. They are redundant theoretical concerns with implications of unclear practical significance.
As for bandwidth, although the Mac Pro has a load of theoretical bandwidth, the efficiency is an abysmal 20%. In real use a DDR2 system has 72% more usable bandwidth. (source here (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2816&p=11))
I don't know bout you, but if I were a heavy user of memory intensive apps such as Photoshop, I'd be worried. Worried in the sense that a Conroe would be noticeably faster.
I am not worried. Everything anyone has come up with on this issue are taken from that same AnandTech article. Until I see more real-world testing, I will not be convinced. Also, I expect that more pro apps such as PS will be able to utilize quad cores in the near future, if they aren't already doing so. Finally, even if Conroe is faster, Woodcrest is fast enough for me ;).
Memory issues aside, Woodcrests are faster than Conroes, 2.4% on average (source here (http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2795&p=6))
I think you misread that. They were comparing Core 2 Extreme (not Woodcrest) and Conroe to see whether the increased FSB of the former would make much difference.
It may be obvious, but based on your earlier statement that a Conroe iMac would be "able to crunch through" apps faster than a Mac Pro, the obvious seemed worth identifying.
But I think there's a bigger reason why Apple chose to go all quad with the Mac Pro: Apple chose all quad because a duo option would have had the same performance in professional apps (again, excluding handbrake and toast which are the only two examples touted about). A single processor Woodcrest or Conroe option will have the same obtainable CPU power for 90-95% of the professional market for another 6-12 months at the very least.
So you think they put an extra processor in across the line just to be able to say they had a quad? Even the AnandTech article you used as a source showed here (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2816&p=18) that PS took advantage of quad cores in Rosetta
Here's some data regarding the Mac Pro's FSB:
*snip*
What can we take from this? Because of the use of FB-DIMMs, the Mac Pro's effective FSB is that of ~640MHz DDR2 system.
And how does it fare in memory latency?
*snip*
Your points about latency and FSB are not separate negatives as you have made them. They are redundant theoretical concerns with implications of unclear practical significance.
As for bandwidth, although the Mac Pro has a load of theoretical bandwidth, the efficiency is an abysmal 20%. In real use a DDR2 system has 72% more usable bandwidth. (source here (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2816&p=11))
I don't know bout you, but if I were a heavy user of memory intensive apps such as Photoshop, I'd be worried. Worried in the sense that a Conroe would be noticeably faster.
I am not worried. Everything anyone has come up with on this issue are taken from that same AnandTech article. Until I see more real-world testing, I will not be convinced. Also, I expect that more pro apps such as PS will be able to utilize quad cores in the near future, if they aren't already doing so. Finally, even if Conroe is faster, Woodcrest is fast enough for me ;).
Memory issues aside, Woodcrests are faster than Conroes, 2.4% on average (source here (http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2795&p=6))
I think you misread that. They were comparing Core 2 Extreme (not Woodcrest) and Conroe to see whether the increased FSB of the former would make much difference.
Veinticinco
Apr 6, 10:42 AM
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.
twoodcc
Aug 27, 01:06 AM
i just hope they don't forget the mac mini
0815
Apr 27, 08:50 AM
Maybe this will stop the large daily 1am data chunks being sent on 3G??? My most active time on 3G data always happens when I am asleep....:eek:
Sleep walking a lot lately?
Sleep walking a lot lately?
centauratlas
Apr 6, 04:39 PM
You both ignored HOT DOGS! Sheesh, hot dogs rule. The only problem is kids under 6 choking on them unless you cut them right. But that will be fixed in the v3.0 hot dog, they will come pre-sliced.
You busted me.
I am a hamburger fanboi, and will turn into a raving lunatic, foam at the mouth and make up opinions based on nothing all to defend my beloved hamburgers. After all they're lighter, slimmer and tastier than cheesburgers!!!
Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk
You busted me.
I am a hamburger fanboi, and will turn into a raving lunatic, foam at the mouth and make up opinions based on nothing all to defend my beloved hamburgers. After all they're lighter, slimmer and tastier than cheesburgers!!!
Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk
Multimedia
Jul 21, 01:39 PM
Hey Multimedia, just curious, I wonder what's your current (something you want to use for the next 1-2 years) idea of the ultimate machine wrt number of Cores, Memory, Storage, etc. And, how much are you willing to pay for it?Under $4k whatever state of the offerings are. I am not writing about wanting to pay for expensive servers etc. I am only referring to Mac Pro top of the lines. So I am looking foward to the 8 core starter kit this Winter. :D
Mine is not RAM intensive work. I have 6GB of ram now and it is more than enough. I also have several Terabytes of HDs already. 400GB HDs are down to $100 now so Storage is pretty cheap with each Terabyte down to $250 or 25� a GB.
Mine is not RAM intensive work. I have 6GB of ram now and it is more than enough. I also have several Terabytes of HDs already. 400GB HDs are down to $100 now so Storage is pretty cheap with each Terabyte down to $250 or 25� a GB.
damnyooneek
Apr 6, 10:25 AM
"But I JUST bought this..."
"3D, 3D, 3D."
"Wait... 4D?"
"You bought the wrong one dummy..."
"3D, 3D, 3D."
"Wait... 4D?"
"You bought the wrong one dummy..."
S i
Sep 19, 09:26 AM
AMEN!!!! This whole thread has the tone of a spoiled 13 year old's "I want" tirade. All the benchmarks show little difference between Merom and what you can buy today...and the 64 bit argument is really moot for most users because....(ready for it)....it's a laptop! Very few will have more than 2GB RAM on it anyway, and addressing larger RAM partitions is the #1 64 bit advantage.
You can get a real speed boost just by compiling to 64-bit (naturally this depends on the source). The 64-bit benefit will increase over time on the Mac platform. On 64-bit Gentoo I had the chance to compare 32-bit & 64-bit binaries on exactly the same PC, & disagree entirely with your statement. Programs that can take advantage of 64-bit architecture, & are subsequently compiled for it, are definitely something to be desired.
Add grudging 32-bit hanger-ons to the spoiled 13 year olds on here.
You can get a real speed boost just by compiling to 64-bit (naturally this depends on the source). The 64-bit benefit will increase over time on the Mac platform. On 64-bit Gentoo I had the chance to compare 32-bit & 64-bit binaries on exactly the same PC, & disagree entirely with your statement. Programs that can take advantage of 64-bit architecture, & are subsequently compiled for it, are definitely something to be desired.
Add grudging 32-bit hanger-ons to the spoiled 13 year olds on here.
Multimedia
Aug 23, 10:38 AM
My Quad G5 is silent as well, unlike Dual 2.7's which rev frequently.
I was concerned that the fans at the rear ports never spin, even during the Apple Hardware Test, but I've noticed that in other Quads as well. CPU temps are 50 to 60 degrees celcius.
Multimedia, would you confirm both with your Quad G5, please?How do I do that? I never hear any fans from it. Analysis temperature Software links?
I was concerned that the fans at the rear ports never spin, even during the Apple Hardware Test, but I've noticed that in other Quads as well. CPU temps are 50 to 60 degrees celcius.
Multimedia, would you confirm both with your Quad G5, please?How do I do that? I never hear any fans from it. Analysis temperature Software links?
Gamoe
Mar 31, 06:43 PM
Open doesn't necessarily mean "supported". All it means is that the source code is available and you can do whatever you want with it (as long as you keep that same source open as well). If some other group or company wants to take on and support an Android variant, they can do so and support it with updates. As far as I understand open source licences, Google can't prevent this.
On the other hand, Google has no obligation to support every single variant out there, or put the Google stamp on something they don't approve because of quality, compatibility, consistency or any number of other concerns. That said, withholding the Honeycomb source may be stretching it.
If you're going to licence your project as open source, then you do actually have to release the source. I know there's often a delay with commercial products. I suppose the tolerance of the open source community depends on the reason and the amount of time the code is held back.
On the other hand, Google has no obligation to support every single variant out there, or put the Google stamp on something they don't approve because of quality, compatibility, consistency or any number of other concerns. That said, withholding the Honeycomb source may be stretching it.
If you're going to licence your project as open source, then you do actually have to release the source. I know there's often a delay with commercial products. I suppose the tolerance of the open source community depends on the reason and the amount of time the code is held back.
emotion
Jul 20, 02:31 PM
I'm not sure either and I shouldn't have made the assumption. I know Ableton and Cubase do as I've used both and I'm now an avid Ableton user. I'd imagine Logic will take full advantage sometime soon since it's now one of Apple's pro applications. It certainly makes sense considering how bogged down your system gets once you load enough virtual instruments and effects.
I'm a Live user too. I wouldn't assume the forthcoming Live 6 supports more than two cores though.
I agree about Logic and the multi core support. They should have done this for the G5 quads though (I hear the quad owners scream :) ).
Edit: apparently Live 6 supports more than two cores/procs
I'm a Live user too. I wouldn't assume the forthcoming Live 6 supports more than two cores though.
I agree about Logic and the multi core support. They should have done this for the G5 quads though (I hear the quad owners scream :) ).
Edit: apparently Live 6 supports more than two cores/procs
wpotere
Apr 27, 10:17 AM
Trump is a hero. :rolleyes:
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/04/27/trump-takes-credit-for-release-of-obamas-long-form-birth-certificate/
I listened to the report and I can't understand a word he is saying. He babbles about nothing.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/04/27/trump-takes-credit-for-release-of-obamas-long-form-birth-certificate/
I listened to the report and I can't understand a word he is saying. He babbles about nothing.
gugy
Aug 11, 03:51 PM
i just want a cell phone that works.
all these phones today(by all these phones i mean the motorolas i have had, so mayby motorola's jsut suck) have this ridiculous amount of latency when you are navigating the menus. cause they have to have all this fancy crap flyin around. its like phones are using the same technology from 5 years ago but they are just piling these features into them so they dog down. overall phones today seem to suck just a bit. my nokia 8260 was the best phone i ever had and it was monochrome with no camera or video or stupid crap like that...
plus it seems that my phones ability to get reception when inside a building has gotten worse over time too. i used to get good reception inside my work, but now i don't. and its the same building.
so all in all, just give me a phone that works and functions well and i'll be happy.
I agree simplicity is everything!
Knowing Apple, I hope the Iphone will be simple and slick. That's all we really need.
all these phones today(by all these phones i mean the motorolas i have had, so mayby motorola's jsut suck) have this ridiculous amount of latency when you are navigating the menus. cause they have to have all this fancy crap flyin around. its like phones are using the same technology from 5 years ago but they are just piling these features into them so they dog down. overall phones today seem to suck just a bit. my nokia 8260 was the best phone i ever had and it was monochrome with no camera or video or stupid crap like that...
plus it seems that my phones ability to get reception when inside a building has gotten worse over time too. i used to get good reception inside my work, but now i don't. and its the same building.
so all in all, just give me a phone that works and functions well and i'll be happy.
I agree simplicity is everything!
Knowing Apple, I hope the Iphone will be simple and slick. That's all we really need.
BRLawyer
Jul 15, 01:28 PM
That would be a good lineup: two Minis, two iMacs, two Macs, two MacPros. Perhaps then the spread from $1499 for a base model conroe Mac to a $3299 or even $3599 for a premo dual-woodcrest 3GHz MacPro would seem plausible? I really like having a Mac desktop option before stepping up to the MacPro (with a smaller format). Right now the iMac is your only option in a certain range.
I agree with another poster too, having both models silent would be most excellent!
This sounds to me like a redux of the Performa/Quadra/LC disaster of the late 90s...I am glad Apple has learned from its mistakes, so it does NOT stretch its production line to a plethora of unnecessary models anymore...
A cheapo MacPro model is more than enough to fill any gaps between the iMac and the Pro line...nothing else.
I agree with another poster too, having both models silent would be most excellent!
This sounds to me like a redux of the Performa/Quadra/LC disaster of the late 90s...I am glad Apple has learned from its mistakes, so it does NOT stretch its production line to a plethora of unnecessary models anymore...
A cheapo MacPro model is more than enough to fill any gaps between the iMac and the Pro line...nothing else.
wizard
Apr 10, 03:53 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
A bit of selective hearing on the part of MacRumors with the quotes they chose to use. At first the video sounds great, dude is hyping what he saw from Apple. But later he gets called out from another speculating Apple is making a very significant change and distancing Final Cut from the real 'pro' users, dumbing it down, etc, and the guy who has seen it gets real quiet.. He is asked if he will update his editing studio's workflow to the new Final Cut, and he basically danced around the question, pleaded the 5th, and made it pretty clear that he is holding back some reservations about how the industry will adapt to the changes.
Personally I'm very interested to see what they do, I'm sure it will have huge improvements on real time rendering and performance, sounds like the whole thing is being rewritten. But it does worry me that the program could become more for mass audience and no longer the pro application it has been for the past decade.
A hammer is a hammer, the only significant difference between pro use and amature is how you swing it. Sometimes the pros get a little full of themselves and don't realize that tools are just there to express your imagination.
A bit of selective hearing on the part of MacRumors with the quotes they chose to use. At first the video sounds great, dude is hyping what he saw from Apple. But later he gets called out from another speculating Apple is making a very significant change and distancing Final Cut from the real 'pro' users, dumbing it down, etc, and the guy who has seen it gets real quiet.. He is asked if he will update his editing studio's workflow to the new Final Cut, and he basically danced around the question, pleaded the 5th, and made it pretty clear that he is holding back some reservations about how the industry will adapt to the changes.
Personally I'm very interested to see what they do, I'm sure it will have huge improvements on real time rendering and performance, sounds like the whole thing is being rewritten. But it does worry me that the program could become more for mass audience and no longer the pro application it has been for the past decade.
A hammer is a hammer, the only significant difference between pro use and amature is how you swing it. Sometimes the pros get a little full of themselves and don't realize that tools are just there to express your imagination.
Trekkie
Sep 13, 05:42 PM
According to tha Anandtech article its likely that the Clovertown family will be clocked slower then the Woodcrests
clock speed isn't everything. workload dependant of course.
clock speed isn't everything. workload dependant of course.
Dan==
Jul 31, 09:35 AM
I think that the bigger issue with Dan=='s design (full credit and kudos for the idea!) is that the Mac Mini is so small that it only uses laptop components. If you want to have a full-size optical drive or a full-size hard drive, you need to use a larger form factor. This is part of the reason for the size of my design.
Here's a comparison in sizes (I've also changed the floor because my wife thought that the reflection was confusing...)
http://www.ghwphoto.com/3MacsFrontSm.png
http://www.ghwphoto.com/3MacsBackSm.png
Cheers!
Now you've got some skills. I especially like the shadowing, reflections and detail on the back side. Very nice.
I agree with your size assessment.
Actually, our designs are quite close, differing primarily in cosmetics. What I'm refering to is my earlier design, (which I suspect you missed) not boncellis'. boncellis wished to see a wider, flatter version for use in home entertainment, so I conjured that 2nd one up for visualization. While that form factor has grown on me somewhat, I still like the taller version, as I had done earlier, and you've shown here, as well.
Here's my initial design, from earlier in this thread.
http://img92.imageshack.us/img92/9648/macandmacminipx9.jpg
The size of mine is a little smaller (narrower) - I wanted the whole thing less than 8" wide, though it could go back a little deeper, i.e. not necessarily square.
Also, see possible/hoped for product specs earlier in the thread.
Personally, I think I still prefer the smoother Mini-like skin than the perforated look of the Pro, but I'm just quibbling.
Thanks for the imagery.
-Dan
Here's a comparison in sizes (I've also changed the floor because my wife thought that the reflection was confusing...)
http://www.ghwphoto.com/3MacsFrontSm.png
http://www.ghwphoto.com/3MacsBackSm.png
Cheers!
Now you've got some skills. I especially like the shadowing, reflections and detail on the back side. Very nice.
I agree with your size assessment.
Actually, our designs are quite close, differing primarily in cosmetics. What I'm refering to is my earlier design, (which I suspect you missed) not boncellis'. boncellis wished to see a wider, flatter version for use in home entertainment, so I conjured that 2nd one up for visualization. While that form factor has grown on me somewhat, I still like the taller version, as I had done earlier, and you've shown here, as well.
Here's my initial design, from earlier in this thread.
http://img92.imageshack.us/img92/9648/macandmacminipx9.jpg
The size of mine is a little smaller (narrower) - I wanted the whole thing less than 8" wide, though it could go back a little deeper, i.e. not necessarily square.
Also, see possible/hoped for product specs earlier in the thread.
Personally, I think I still prefer the smoother Mini-like skin than the perforated look of the Pro, but I'm just quibbling.
Thanks for the imagery.
-Dan
xxBURT0Nxx
Apr 6, 10:31 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
I have a 13" ultimate of the current generation. The limiting factor for me is the graphics, not the processor. so going to sandy bridge with the intel 3000 would be a less appealing machine for my uses than the current model. It's really too bad the sandy bridge macs are tied to those garbage integrated graphics.
only the 13" mbp has integrated graphics, they are not quite as good as the 320m on older models or in the current mba, but they are much better than integrated graphics of the past. All other mbp models come with the integrated graphics as well as a discrete graphics processor.
I have a 13" ultimate of the current generation. The limiting factor for me is the graphics, not the processor. so going to sandy bridge with the intel 3000 would be a less appealing machine for my uses than the current model. It's really too bad the sandy bridge macs are tied to those garbage integrated graphics.
only the 13" mbp has integrated graphics, they are not quite as good as the 320m on older models or in the current mba, but they are much better than integrated graphics of the past. All other mbp models come with the integrated graphics as well as a discrete graphics processor.
spicyapple
Sep 12, 11:05 AM
I was going to buy the quad-core Mac Pro 3.0 GHz when it hit the mid-price point, but I think I'll wait out for the dual quad-core (8 core) Mac Pro, instead. :) Hopefully by then, FB-DIMM will be cheap enough to buy 8 GB worth of RAM without breaking the bank.
ergle2
Sep 14, 11:29 PM
It is a shame, but sadly those are the real cheap chips right now. The good news is that they'll change those over soon enough with more Allendales, then millville and so on and so on taking on more segments of the market.
I think as they transition to 45nm we'll see more and more Core chips, simply because they'll want as much manufacturing to be on the new process as possible, and they don't need to scale the D's etc. down to it.
Indeed. The Netburst chicken has been decapitated, it just hasn't yet stopped running around the marketplace...
I think Intel wants the transition to go as quickly as possible, given the aggressive pricing of Core 2 - not as cheap as Pentium D, but a much better bang for the buck, so to speak. Of course, that's also connected to trying to beat back the AMD surge of recent years...
I think as they transition to 45nm we'll see more and more Core chips, simply because they'll want as much manufacturing to be on the new process as possible, and they don't need to scale the D's etc. down to it.
Indeed. The Netburst chicken has been decapitated, it just hasn't yet stopped running around the marketplace...
I think Intel wants the transition to go as quickly as possible, given the aggressive pricing of Core 2 - not as cheap as Pentium D, but a much better bang for the buck, so to speak. Of course, that's also connected to trying to beat back the AMD surge of recent years...
mlayer
Mar 22, 05:29 PM
The tablet market is going to be large, with estimates of 50 million units or more this year. Apple may get 35 million of those sales, which puts the iPad at 70%. Add to the high number of hand-downs and secondhand sales and that further reduces the number of available customers for everyone else.
Let's say that the tablet market explodes and total sold is 60 million, with Apple getting 36 million. That's 60%, and it leaves 24 million for the others. One of the key market drivers for Motorola, Samsung, and the various Android manufacturers is the pace of iteration. Every quarter there's a new phone on one or more carriers. These manufacturers can't afford to iterate as quickly with tablets (maybe twice a year), and they don't have the subsidy model or 2-for-1's to help them while they are selling. That puts HP and RIM on much better footing compared to the Android manufacturers, and HP and RIM are leveraging their enterprise reach to get a foothold. Both HP and RIM could sell 2-3 million (5%) each.
Samsung/Motorola/LG/Acer/HTC will have what should be a growing number of Honeycomb tablet apps, but they're all priced the same making it difficult to differentiate. Motorola tried to be a first mover with Honeycomb. Samsung is throwing various sizes against the wall to see what sticks. LG's best claim is the first to 3D. Acer has its previous experience with Windows. HTC hasn't really played in the tablet market before. In the end it looks like they'll end up competing with each other, not Apple, for that 10-20% of the market. Whoever loses will be heavily discounted on Black Friday, and the market will settle by the next CES.
For Apple this isn't the iPod or the iPhone due to external factors. It's too early and the market is still figuring itself out. As long as Apple is setting trends and everyone else is responding, the iPad is in the catbird seat.
Let's say that the tablet market explodes and total sold is 60 million, with Apple getting 36 million. That's 60%, and it leaves 24 million for the others. One of the key market drivers for Motorola, Samsung, and the various Android manufacturers is the pace of iteration. Every quarter there's a new phone on one or more carriers. These manufacturers can't afford to iterate as quickly with tablets (maybe twice a year), and they don't have the subsidy model or 2-for-1's to help them while they are selling. That puts HP and RIM on much better footing compared to the Android manufacturers, and HP and RIM are leveraging their enterprise reach to get a foothold. Both HP and RIM could sell 2-3 million (5%) each.
Samsung/Motorola/LG/Acer/HTC will have what should be a growing number of Honeycomb tablet apps, but they're all priced the same making it difficult to differentiate. Motorola tried to be a first mover with Honeycomb. Samsung is throwing various sizes against the wall to see what sticks. LG's best claim is the first to 3D. Acer has its previous experience with Windows. HTC hasn't really played in the tablet market before. In the end it looks like they'll end up competing with each other, not Apple, for that 10-20% of the market. Whoever loses will be heavily discounted on Black Friday, and the market will settle by the next CES.
For Apple this isn't the iPod or the iPhone due to external factors. It's too early and the market is still figuring itself out. As long as Apple is setting trends and everyone else is responding, the iPad is in the catbird seat.
No comments:
Post a Comment