Tones2
Mar 29, 12:25 PM
Over FOUR YEARS, which is a major amount of time in this market, I think iOS, Andriod and Windows phones with all be pretty much the same. I think there's going to be a point where that not more more to do with hardware in terms of innovative features. The OS's themselves are really just shells for running apps anyway, and they will all do this fairly effectively in similar ways, a lot like OSX and Win7 are two good OS's. The key will be the app market, which Apple currently holds a huge lead, but in 4 years it would seem that Android and Windows will catch up in terms of IMPORTANT apps to run, so that will be levelized as well.
The iPhone will always have the crazy fanboys to their advantage but Android and Windows phones have the flexibility factor of an open platform where a number of manufacturers can make phones at different price points in different markets.
So in 4 years, I think all will have similar market shares, with iOS being at the bottom of the three just in terms of number of phones because of the closed platform syndrome, but not by much. However, the iPhone will be the most profitable of the three for the OS manufacturers since Apple also maks the hardware.
So let's call it a tie - everybody wins, including the consumer. Remember fanboys - competition and choice is a GOOD thing!
Tony
The iPhone will always have the crazy fanboys to their advantage but Android and Windows phones have the flexibility factor of an open platform where a number of manufacturers can make phones at different price points in different markets.
So in 4 years, I think all will have similar market shares, with iOS being at the bottom of the three just in terms of number of phones because of the closed platform syndrome, but not by much. However, the iPhone will be the most profitable of the three for the OS manufacturers since Apple also maks the hardware.
So let's call it a tie - everybody wins, including the consumer. Remember fanboys - competition and choice is a GOOD thing!
Tony
MagnusVonMagnum
Apr 16, 11:21 AM
God forbid you carry around an inch long adapter in your laptop bag. Is that too much for you?
You keep talking about a non-existent adapter that costs $10 and comparing mini-display port adapters that merely convert signal paths isn't even in the same realm as converting to an entirely different interface. In other words your 'adapter' prices are 100% BS and you know it.
LOL, are you kidding me bro? Do you think USB 3 peaks out at it's max 5 Gbps? YOU are the one dreaming if you believe that. Here's some more evidence for your FUD:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCz_c_rDAXw
USB 3 would completely choke in that situation let alone in a simply hard drive speed comparison. Give me a break. Here's another example for you to look at for some REAL WORLD USB 3 speeds:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrtwtSjzjZI
Don't tase me bro! :eek:
Seriously, you going to compare a demonstration with a professional mass storage array that isn't available to the public yet and which I said at the bottom of my last post is a perfect use for TB (i.e. with professional editing software) with the Lacie consumer grade 5200 RPM SLOW USB3 drive? Dude, you have to compare apples to apples. You're comparing a race car to a Chevette.... That neither proves nor disproves anything about the full capability of USB3. The ad on that box is marketing BS about the "interface" not the drive they're selling (which is a slow 5200 RPM SATA drive which all top out between 40-60MB/sec PERIOD, regardless whether they use SATA, USB3, Firewire 800 or Thunderbolt). Show me a 7200 RPM (or better yet a 10,000+ SCSI rated) drive connected to USB3 AND TB (or even FW800) and then compare their actual speeds. OR find an array that goes fast like the one Intel was using that also has USB3 on it and compare their actual speeds 1 to 1. Showing me Steak Diane on one plate and a hot dog on the other doesn't prove the cook who made the hot dog doesn't know how to cook. It simply proves he was given a hot dog to cook.
In reality with USB 3 you get about 480 Megabits as opposed to the promised 5 Gpbs meaning Thunderbolt will be even faster than two times.
In reality, you need an actual hard drive test that makes sense not comparing a Porsche to a lawn tractor.... :rolleyes:
So you are just ASSUMING that they will cost $250 more than USB 3 drives.
No more than you assuming you're going to get a $10 USB3 adapter. At least my assumption is based on Firewire statistics and early adoption rates. Yours is based on dreaming.
LOL, words can't describe how wrong you are. You think HDD speeds cap out at 480 Mbps? Maybe in your 'practical world' where you enjoy using inferior
I think the 5200 RPM 2.5" drive that came with my MBP capped out around 50MB/sec using a SATA II interface (or 450mbps). Does that prove my SATA chip set SUCKS? NO, IT DOES NOT. When I replaced it with a 7200 RPM Hitachi, it now caps out around 110MB/sec (or 880mbps, well above FW800's theoretical cap even). Even my PPC G4 gets 105MB/sec caps with its 1.5TB 7200 RPM Seagate Barracuda drives (and SATA does eat CPU as well; if I try to run two of them at the same time I still get a total of around 100MB/sec with the CPU pegged at 95-100%. The older PCI bus is also in the way. Thus it's not the SATA interface there that's the problem either, but you might think so if you make assumptions based only on one test number and no idea what's in the computer being used or any statistics about the CPU or Bus while its being used. Your YouTube videos comparisons are absurd in that regard. Cheap mass storage devices (like the Lacie) aren't made for performance. Show me TB making that same drive do over 100MB/sec. It won't happen.
Your 'practical world' when you were just talking about how no one will pay a premium for USB 3.
I never said any such thing. I said they won't pay a premium for Thunderbolt for every-day use. If you're just going to lie and change what I said, I won't bother replying anymore.
USB 3 won't be a premium over anything. It's going to be dirt cheap and a simple performance upgrade for everyone. It already is cheap for new computers and a pretty cheap add-on for existing ones; you cannot add TB to existing computers so there's another problem it has to contend with, especially trying to get a large user base in any reasonable length of time. The longer it takes to get a large installed user base, the longer the prices will stay high on any TB products. It's plainly obvious that TB is going to be a high-end niche product just like FW800, at least for the forseeable future. While Intel's demo is totally cool, it doesn't remotely represent the AVERAGE PC user in any shape or form. Most people aren't editing 4 simultaneous streams of 1080p video on a mega-buck professional high-speed drive array.
I have NO problem with TB technology or its usefulness in certain applications. I do contend that most people aren't going to give a crap about it one way or the other since their computers will not have it or need it for their everyday uses. More to the point, most computers (save maybe those from Apple) will have ALSO have USB3, allowing the user to make the best possible choices for their needs. USB3 will not fail or go away simply because it is a cheap upgrade to USB2 that is fully backwards compatible. Computers will have it just for that reason alone even if the user doesn't make good use of it.
IF TB ever achieves mass acceptance, it will be years into the future. It takes time to build a user base on a totally new technology. USB3 is a simple dump and replace and still works with everything USB2. TB works with NOTHING that already exists (save a few Mini-display port monitors and that's only because it carries Mini-display port video signals). The fact that Intel plans to do USB3 alongside TB on their next chipset shows even they understand that TB is going to be high-end/niche product for some time to come.
I have said in the past that IF Intel had used the USB3 style connector and essentially had USB compatibility + MORE bandwidth THEN they might start appearing on everything. But they chose instead to use a connector that is hardly on anything (but newer Macs) and that isn't much different than starting over with a totally new connector and no compatibility with anything (outside breakout boxes that are essentially PCI cards in a box). When it comes down to it, TB is basically the entire PCIe bus on a single external connector.
You keep talking about a non-existent adapter that costs $10 and comparing mini-display port adapters that merely convert signal paths isn't even in the same realm as converting to an entirely different interface. In other words your 'adapter' prices are 100% BS and you know it.
LOL, are you kidding me bro? Do you think USB 3 peaks out at it's max 5 Gbps? YOU are the one dreaming if you believe that. Here's some more evidence for your FUD:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCz_c_rDAXw
USB 3 would completely choke in that situation let alone in a simply hard drive speed comparison. Give me a break. Here's another example for you to look at for some REAL WORLD USB 3 speeds:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrtwtSjzjZI
Don't tase me bro! :eek:
Seriously, you going to compare a demonstration with a professional mass storage array that isn't available to the public yet and which I said at the bottom of my last post is a perfect use for TB (i.e. with professional editing software) with the Lacie consumer grade 5200 RPM SLOW USB3 drive? Dude, you have to compare apples to apples. You're comparing a race car to a Chevette.... That neither proves nor disproves anything about the full capability of USB3. The ad on that box is marketing BS about the "interface" not the drive they're selling (which is a slow 5200 RPM SATA drive which all top out between 40-60MB/sec PERIOD, regardless whether they use SATA, USB3, Firewire 800 or Thunderbolt). Show me a 7200 RPM (or better yet a 10,000+ SCSI rated) drive connected to USB3 AND TB (or even FW800) and then compare their actual speeds. OR find an array that goes fast like the one Intel was using that also has USB3 on it and compare their actual speeds 1 to 1. Showing me Steak Diane on one plate and a hot dog on the other doesn't prove the cook who made the hot dog doesn't know how to cook. It simply proves he was given a hot dog to cook.
In reality with USB 3 you get about 480 Megabits as opposed to the promised 5 Gpbs meaning Thunderbolt will be even faster than two times.
In reality, you need an actual hard drive test that makes sense not comparing a Porsche to a lawn tractor.... :rolleyes:
So you are just ASSUMING that they will cost $250 more than USB 3 drives.
No more than you assuming you're going to get a $10 USB3 adapter. At least my assumption is based on Firewire statistics and early adoption rates. Yours is based on dreaming.
LOL, words can't describe how wrong you are. You think HDD speeds cap out at 480 Mbps? Maybe in your 'practical world' where you enjoy using inferior
I think the 5200 RPM 2.5" drive that came with my MBP capped out around 50MB/sec using a SATA II interface (or 450mbps). Does that prove my SATA chip set SUCKS? NO, IT DOES NOT. When I replaced it with a 7200 RPM Hitachi, it now caps out around 110MB/sec (or 880mbps, well above FW800's theoretical cap even). Even my PPC G4 gets 105MB/sec caps with its 1.5TB 7200 RPM Seagate Barracuda drives (and SATA does eat CPU as well; if I try to run two of them at the same time I still get a total of around 100MB/sec with the CPU pegged at 95-100%. The older PCI bus is also in the way. Thus it's not the SATA interface there that's the problem either, but you might think so if you make assumptions based only on one test number and no idea what's in the computer being used or any statistics about the CPU or Bus while its being used. Your YouTube videos comparisons are absurd in that regard. Cheap mass storage devices (like the Lacie) aren't made for performance. Show me TB making that same drive do over 100MB/sec. It won't happen.
Your 'practical world' when you were just talking about how no one will pay a premium for USB 3.
I never said any such thing. I said they won't pay a premium for Thunderbolt for every-day use. If you're just going to lie and change what I said, I won't bother replying anymore.
USB 3 won't be a premium over anything. It's going to be dirt cheap and a simple performance upgrade for everyone. It already is cheap for new computers and a pretty cheap add-on for existing ones; you cannot add TB to existing computers so there's another problem it has to contend with, especially trying to get a large user base in any reasonable length of time. The longer it takes to get a large installed user base, the longer the prices will stay high on any TB products. It's plainly obvious that TB is going to be a high-end niche product just like FW800, at least for the forseeable future. While Intel's demo is totally cool, it doesn't remotely represent the AVERAGE PC user in any shape or form. Most people aren't editing 4 simultaneous streams of 1080p video on a mega-buck professional high-speed drive array.
I have NO problem with TB technology or its usefulness in certain applications. I do contend that most people aren't going to give a crap about it one way or the other since their computers will not have it or need it for their everyday uses. More to the point, most computers (save maybe those from Apple) will have ALSO have USB3, allowing the user to make the best possible choices for their needs. USB3 will not fail or go away simply because it is a cheap upgrade to USB2 that is fully backwards compatible. Computers will have it just for that reason alone even if the user doesn't make good use of it.
IF TB ever achieves mass acceptance, it will be years into the future. It takes time to build a user base on a totally new technology. USB3 is a simple dump and replace and still works with everything USB2. TB works with NOTHING that already exists (save a few Mini-display port monitors and that's only because it carries Mini-display port video signals). The fact that Intel plans to do USB3 alongside TB on their next chipset shows even they understand that TB is going to be high-end/niche product for some time to come.
I have said in the past that IF Intel had used the USB3 style connector and essentially had USB compatibility + MORE bandwidth THEN they might start appearing on everything. But they chose instead to use a connector that is hardly on anything (but newer Macs) and that isn't much different than starting over with a totally new connector and no compatibility with anything (outside breakout boxes that are essentially PCI cards in a box). When it comes down to it, TB is basically the entire PCIe bus on a single external connector.
viperguy
May 3, 10:17 AM
Still USB 2.0
Meh.
Meh.
Skika
Apr 20, 11:30 AM
Not big deal. But, im not a fearfull worried paranoid person, which many are.
cube
Mar 30, 01:33 PM
But MS never consistently used the term App to describe any part of their business. Sure it pops up occasionally here and there, almost at random, but that's about it. Historically they've always used 'Programs'. So to use your example, why couldn't they say: "We have this thing called Marketplace. What is it? Well, it's a place where you can buy programs.....". Why are they not happy with that? It will line up so much better with their software genealogy.
I suspect the truth of the matter is they now want to start using 'App' for everything (instead of Programs), because Apple has popularized the term. Its on everybody's tongue now. And MS wants in on it. They want their stuff to be associated with the buzz that Apple created. That's borderline parasitic to me.
Then why doesn't Apple just trademark the word "App"?
I suspect the truth of the matter is they now want to start using 'App' for everything (instead of Programs), because Apple has popularized the term. Its on everybody's tongue now. And MS wants in on it. They want their stuff to be associated with the buzz that Apple created. That's borderline parasitic to me.
Then why doesn't Apple just trademark the word "App"?
shecky
Aug 31, 09:06 PM
WHo cares, frankly i'm tired of all these Apple rumor crap.
i think maybe you are on the wrong website, then.
i think maybe you are on the wrong website, then.
dondark
Sep 13, 11:26 PM
I hope the iPhone can be use iChat and we can video chat with and Mac at any time.
EagerDragon
Sep 10, 08:47 AM
Is the 24" as quiet as the MacPro? Have you been able to compare to the 20"?
The store is noisy, so it is hard to say. To me neither was making a sound.
The store is noisy, so it is hard to say. To me neither was making a sound.
twoodcc
Aug 28, 11:49 PM
Anyone else voting that they drop the price on the BlackBook to match the white MB? What are the chances, eh?
that would be nice
that would be nice
segfaultdotorg
May 3, 11:38 AM
Great update� waiting for the usual suspects to come around to list any [unreasonable] cons :p�
No coupon for a free Lion upgrade. Lame.
No coupon for a free Lion upgrade. Lame.
iCrizzo
Apr 30, 02:20 PM
I have had my iMac for about 9 months.. looks like it will be going on Craigslist next week!! ;)
:apple::apple::apple::apple::apple:
:apple::apple::apple::apple::apple:
Steve121178
Apr 15, 07:07 AM
There is absolutely no advantage whatsoever in having USB survive past 2.0 at this point. With 3.0 barely entering the market, there is no value in letting it get a foothold. It is pathetically obsolete compared to TB.
What is with the comments about wanting USB 3.0 on Macs? What a huge waste of time and money - you should be wanting TB on more peripherals. Even if Intel is going to be dumb enough to keep USB 3.0 around, hopefully Apple will hold the line and refuse to put it in Macs. With Apple's resurgent strength in the computer market while everyone else is tanking, that would be enough incentive to get the peripheral makers to adopt TB.
What are you talking about? Practically all SB motherboards for PC's support USB 3.0. I'm enjoying USB 3.0 speeds on my new PC, plus the ports are backwards compatible with USB 2.0.
Don't get me wrong, I can see what TB offers & I like what I see, but USB 3.0 is here to stay. Intel's support just emphasises how important a standard USB 3.0 is.
What is with the comments about wanting USB 3.0 on Macs? What a huge waste of time and money - you should be wanting TB on more peripherals. Even if Intel is going to be dumb enough to keep USB 3.0 around, hopefully Apple will hold the line and refuse to put it in Macs. With Apple's resurgent strength in the computer market while everyone else is tanking, that would be enough incentive to get the peripheral makers to adopt TB.
What are you talking about? Practically all SB motherboards for PC's support USB 3.0. I'm enjoying USB 3.0 speeds on my new PC, plus the ports are backwards compatible with USB 2.0.
Don't get me wrong, I can see what TB offers & I like what I see, but USB 3.0 is here to stay. Intel's support just emphasises how important a standard USB 3.0 is.
IJ Reilly
Aug 23, 11:09 PM
Apple could blow a hundred million in legal expenses. It's less of an instance of throwing in the towel, and more of an instance of, "You know, the way idiot judges/juries hand out settlements these days, let's just give them a paltry sum, let them think they've won, and still destroy them in the MP3 market."
Not in 20 years, they couldn't. And no matter how often it's said to the contrary, $100 million is still very serious money.
Reminds me of 1997, when Microsoft was forced to invest $150 million in Apple as part of a settlement of a patent lawsuit, a lot of people couldn't wrap their minds around the idea that Microsoft had actually lost. They did then. Apple did today.
Not in 20 years, they couldn't. And no matter how often it's said to the contrary, $100 million is still very serious money.
Reminds me of 1997, when Microsoft was forced to invest $150 million in Apple as part of a settlement of a patent lawsuit, a lot of people couldn't wrap their minds around the idea that Microsoft had actually lost. They did then. Apple did today.
Tones2
Mar 29, 12:33 PM
I do find it humorous that these analysts think they can see 2015 with any semblance of accuracy.
I find it also humorous the number of people in this forum who are positive that this WON'T happen, and don't think THAT is a prediction. ;)
Tony
I find it also humorous the number of people in this forum who are positive that this WON'T happen, and don't think THAT is a prediction. ;)
Tony
AngryCorgi
Mar 29, 11:25 AM
Here were their illuminating predictions in Jan 2010. :rolleyes:
http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUS22176610
Key findings from a new IDC market outlook include the following:
Translation Service for Google
Google Translator Toolkit
http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUS22176610
Key findings from a new IDC market outlook include the following:
simon.hibbs
Sep 1, 07:06 AM
Core 2 Duo will be the star.
End of Core Solo minis.
With you so far, but I don't think Core 2 Duo is realy all that much of a big deal for Apple in the grand scheme of things. It's a small speed bump, with 64 bit as a bonus extra.
All new redesigned MacBook Pro.
All new iMac design with Conroe inside.
iTunes Media Store Movie Downloads.
I don't believe any of this. The intel MacBook Pros just came out, and the main advantage of the 2 Duo is it's socet compatible with it's predecessor. Why screw aroud with a proven design, when there's absolutely no need. You do that sort of thing when the chipset and whatnot changes and you have to redesign the internals anyway.
The same goes for the iMac, it's a great design. They had a chance to rev the designs when they moved to intel and chose not to. They're not going to rework the internals now just for the sake of it. The next opportunity for that is with the next major rework of the mainboard and peripheral connections, whenever that will be.
As for movie download, it's possible but I think it would be a premature move. Further expansion of their TV show range is much more likely as it fits the casual listening/watching pattern of iPod owners.
Finaly, Merom whatnot are being very much overhyped. The main tech advancements for most users came with Core Duo. iMac and mac Mini prices dropped in the UK in the summer so when Core 2 Duo gets announced you can bet they'll be back up at the release price of the respective hardware platform (iMac, Mini, PBP, etc). Thus you will get more power, but you'll pay for it so bang for buck wise I realy don't think it will make a massive difference.
Simon Hibbs
End of Core Solo minis.
With you so far, but I don't think Core 2 Duo is realy all that much of a big deal for Apple in the grand scheme of things. It's a small speed bump, with 64 bit as a bonus extra.
All new redesigned MacBook Pro.
All new iMac design with Conroe inside.
iTunes Media Store Movie Downloads.
I don't believe any of this. The intel MacBook Pros just came out, and the main advantage of the 2 Duo is it's socet compatible with it's predecessor. Why screw aroud with a proven design, when there's absolutely no need. You do that sort of thing when the chipset and whatnot changes and you have to redesign the internals anyway.
The same goes for the iMac, it's a great design. They had a chance to rev the designs when they moved to intel and chose not to. They're not going to rework the internals now just for the sake of it. The next opportunity for that is with the next major rework of the mainboard and peripheral connections, whenever that will be.
As for movie download, it's possible but I think it would be a premature move. Further expansion of their TV show range is much more likely as it fits the casual listening/watching pattern of iPod owners.
Finaly, Merom whatnot are being very much overhyped. The main tech advancements for most users came with Core Duo. iMac and mac Mini prices dropped in the UK in the summer so when Core 2 Duo gets announced you can bet they'll be back up at the release price of the respective hardware platform (iMac, Mini, PBP, etc). Thus you will get more power, but you'll pay for it so bang for buck wise I realy don't think it will make a massive difference.
Simon Hibbs
chedda
Apr 19, 07:21 AM
If they try shafting apple on parts i'm sure another crippling law suit would occur. Isn't apple now capable of making it's own chips didn't they buy up something ? Lot's of telephones and all the tablets are mac copies to some degree i suppose it's the best form of flattery, most people see this.If i'm right all these items are at a lower price point than apple ? I mean come on you would never pay more than an apple product for an item which is heavily influenced right ?
google translate Google
using #39;Google Translate#39;,
rmhop81
Apr 22, 08:34 AM
If Pandora actually worked overseas...just like Hulu...
i'm sure you have an equivalent....
maybe you won't get this cloud service anyways....so what's your point in arguing? lol
i'm sure you have an equivalent....
maybe you won't get this cloud service anyways....so what's your point in arguing? lol
HaiRy
Apr 25, 01:00 PM
Hilarious to all those people who jumped on the THUNDERBOLT bandwagon. No thunderbolt devices yet and they have the hideous old case design.
:rolleyes:
That's just idiotic. I upgraded from a 2006 MB to a 2011 15" i7, to say I'm satisfied is an understatement. Hideous it is not even near - I've played with the new designs before but nothing comes close to it sitting on your desk.
You're getting all pissy over something that's just a rumour and you don't even know if you're going to like it or not!
:rolleyes:
That's just idiotic. I upgraded from a 2006 MB to a 2011 15" i7, to say I'm satisfied is an understatement. Hideous it is not even near - I've played with the new designs before but nothing comes close to it sitting on your desk.
You're getting all pissy over something that's just a rumour and you don't even know if you're going to like it or not!
cfanyc
Aug 29, 08:12 AM
another tuesday bites the dust.. oh well...
Eidorian
May 3, 12:27 PM
If the monitors cannot daisy chain, you need a hub for the port(s) to which you connect multiple such displays.Thanks, I was just curious.
blondepianist
Mar 29, 01:52 PM
I always assumed, probably wrongly, that there was some file size limit or that it could affect performance when using it for large files (I mostly work with huge ProRes files.)
Just FYI...
File size wouldn't affect performance at all, as long as you're copying between locations on the same drive. The "file" that you see in the GUI is actually a link to a location on disk where your data is; all the OS has to move is the link, which is very tiny.
Just FYI...
File size wouldn't affect performance at all, as long as you're copying between locations on the same drive. The "file" that you see in the GUI is actually a link to a location on disk where your data is; all the OS has to move is the link, which is very tiny.
AppleScruff1
Apr 23, 09:40 PM
Why does anyone doubt that the new Air will be outstanding? My money is on Apple doing a nice job on the Air as they did with the MBP.
BWhaler
Sep 5, 03:55 AM
Come on MBP update... :-)
(Although I am sure it's not at this event, I gotta hope...)
(Although I am sure it's not at this event, I gotta hope...)
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar