Why I want some of the new Macs (was boot rom/BIOS in iMac Intels?)

mac

    Sponsored Links

    Next

  • 1. Quickest way to Force Quit from Classic (10.3.5)
    Greetings! Classic often won't quit for me when I select Stop Classic from the menu control activated from the Sys Pref pane for Classic. I don't knwo what's wrong, but haven't been able to fix this despite repeated attempts. I can Force Quit it from the Classic pane in Sys Prefs, but that's slow to get to. What I'd really like is a Force Quit item in that menu. The 3rd party menu controls I have found either don't work in Panther (Classic Spy 2.1.1, for example) or don't have a Force Quit item either. Anybody have a suggestion? Or a quicker way to get to Force Quit (maybe via an AppleScript, which I am not proficient at)? TIA! George
  • 2. alert when AC unplugged?
    Is there a way to be notified when the AC adapter is unplugged? This morning in the coffee shop some clod unplugged my iBook so she could plug in her Powerbook. I didn't find out until it was time to leave, at which point the battery was seriously drained. I was trying to keep it full for a long drive. Is there anything that provides an alert when the adapter gets unplugged?
  • 3. quicken 2004 vs quicken 2005
    I just noticed that Quicken 2004 ships on the yet to ship iMac g5, while I bought Quicken 2005 a couple of weeks ago. I was just wondering what the differences might be, from those that have used both. New features, better interface, less buggy? Updated tax and financial info, better compatibility with online banks?
  • 4. superdrive vs. combo drive
    I was comparing the specs on the various new iMacs, and noted that the CD side of the superdrive is actually slower than the cheaper combo drive. It's sort of a moot point for me since I need dvd writing, but doesn't that seem like an odd tradeoff? -dave

Why I want some of the new Macs (was Re: boot rom/BIOS in iMac Intels?)

Postby John Steinberg » Fri, 13 Jan 2006 02:26:05 GMT




Irrational exuberance?  The long-standing state of inertia in the Mac
product line?  I like shiny new things?  Pick whichever you like.

On what basis do you make the claim regards speed?  


I just hope my fellow AAPL shareholders don't read the above.</gasp>

-- 
-John Steinberg
email:  XXXX@XXXXX.COM 

                   -=  I link therefore I'm spammed  =-

Re: Why I want some of the new Macs (was Re: boot rom/BIOS in iMac Intels?)

Postby Davoud » Fri, 13 Jan 2006 04:02:29 GMT



John Steinberg:

Amazing. Mr. Fisher has already completed his own benchmarks on the
Mactels. I distinctly heard Steve Jobs say that of course, not
/everything/ will run 2-5 X faster, because hard drives, CD drives, &c
limit performance to an extent. 

I was going to post a list of reasons why I lust after a MacBook Pro
and a Mactel iMac, but I drooled all over the list and now I can't read
it, so I'll go with Mr. Steinberg's reasons.

Davoud

-- 
usenet *at* davidillig dawt com

Re: Why I want some of the new Macs (was Re: boot rom/BIOS in iMac Intels?)

Postby Keeper of the Purple Twilight » Fri, 13 Jan 2006 04:08:16 GMT

I hate the name "MacBook Pro". It sounds just cheesy. PowerBook sounds
so much better. Or even "iBook Pro".

-- 
"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and 
degraded state of m{*filter*}and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing 
is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is 
willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal 
safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless 
made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."
- John Stuart Mill

Re: Why I want some of the new Macs (was Re: boot rom/BIOS in iMac Intels?)

Postby John Steinberg » Fri, 13 Jan 2006 04:22:58 GMT




I'm looking forward to Mr. Fisher's benchmarks, but also have a trip to
the SOHO Apple Store planned just in case those benchmarks are late in
arriving or, although I could not imagine, intercepted and heavily
redacted by the NSA.  [Just type "Jihad' and wave to our men and women
blithely violating our privacy!]

Look at this, they have a page for kids! How cute is that!?
 http://www.**--****.com/ 


At the risk of repeating myself, somewhat, I haven't been this e{*filter*}d
about Apple's new offerings since Mr. Illig was... well, let's just say
attempting to emulate the {*filter*} feats of a very tall and famous former
NBA center. 

[Note: Said player is now deceased.  I wonder...]

-- 
-John Steinberg
email:  XXXX@XXXXX.COM 

                   -=  I link therefore I'm spammed  =-

Re: Why I want some of the new Macs (was Re: boot rom/BIOS in iMac Intels?)

Postby Steven Fisher » Fri, 13 Jan 2006 04:24:34 GMT

In article <110120061226051130% XXXX@XXXXX.COM >,






I can understand this. It is definitely shiny. If I had more cash or a 
less recent Powerbook, I'd be torn right now between the G4 line and the 
MacBook Pro.


What I said wasn't exactly clear. Or, rather, it was... but it didn't 
say what I meant to say. I meant to say something like "No real 
measurements on the speed increase."

Apple compares results of a benchmark specifically coded to compare 
multicore systems with each other. On this kind of benchmark, a single 
core system actually comes across as much worse than reality. So forget 
about the "five times faster" part of the claim.

What is the real speed increase? I don't think anyone knows. Were it a 
single core, I suspect it would probably be about the same as the 
current Powerbooks. Probably a little slower on tasks well suited to 
Altivec. Since its dual core, on software that is able to properly use 
multithreading but not specifically designed to test multithreading, I 
guess it would run about twice as fast. We'll see when people run more 
realistic benchmarks on the thing.


Heh. Well, the next generation will be more useful.

I certainly didn't mean to come across as excessively negative. The 
6100/60 was pretty underwhelming, too, but the second and successive 
generations were a lot more interesting.

-- 
Steven Fisher;  XXXX@XXXXX.COM 

Re: Why I want some of the new Macs (was Re: boot rom/BIOS in iMac Intels?)

Postby Steven Fisher » Fri, 13 Jan 2006 04:27:11 GMT

In article <110120061308165048% XXXX@XXXXX.COM >,




It really doesn't flow well. Three syllables, all harsh. Just MacBook 
would have been better... I wonder if they're planning on renaming the 
iBook line to MacBook? But I'm trying not to judge the product by its 
name. :)

-- 
Steven Fisher;  XXXX@XXXXX.COM 

Re: Why I want some of the new Macs (was Re: boot rom/BIOS in iMac Intels?)

Postby Steven Fisher » Fri, 13 Jan 2006 04:32:41 GMT

In article <110120061422580309% XXXX@XXXXX.COM >,




I'm not sure why you would be. I've already said I'm not buying one. 
Unless, of course, you're just being an {*filter*} in an attempt to get my 
goat -- which won't work.

-- 
Steven Fisher;  XXXX@XXXXX.COM 

Re: Why I want some of the new Macs (was Re: boot rom/BIOS in iMac Intels?)

Postby Helpful Harry » Fri, 13 Jan 2006 04:58:37 GMT

In article < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >,





The iMac hasn't had a name change, so it's unlikely that the iBook
will. I doubt the Mac Mini will either.

The "PowerMac" on the other hand almost definitely will have a name
change since the "Power" part is connected to the PowerPC ...
unfortunately the likely candidate of just "Mac Pro" is pretty hopeless
as well.    :o(



Helpful Harry                   
Hopefully helping harassed humans happily handle handiwork hardships  ;o)

Re: Why I want some of the new Macs (was Re: boot rom/BIOS in iMac Intels?)

Postby BreadWithSpam » Fri, 13 Jan 2006 04:59:25 GMT

Keeper of the Purple Twilight < XXXX@XXXXX.COM > writes:


It can't be "PowerBook" - there's no PowerPC in it.

I was thinking "ProBook".  MacBook does sound silly.

-- 
Plain Bread alone for e-mail, thanks.  The rest gets trashed.
No HTML in E-Mail! --     http://www.**--****.com/ 
Are you posting responses that are easy for others to follow?
    http://www.**--****.com/ 

Re: Why I want some of the new Macs (was Re: boot rom/BIOS in iMac Intels?)

Postby Steve Hix » Fri, 13 Jan 2006 05:13:31 GMT

In article <110120061308165048% XXXX@XXXXX.COM >,




"PowerBook" was scorned and laughed at in some circles back in '91.

People will get used to it.

Re: Why I want some of the new Macs (was Re: boot rom/BIOS in iMac Intels?)

Postby John Steinberg » Fri, 13 Jan 2006 05:14:30 GMT




From there I simply asked for supporting evidence and you retreat to
generic processor blather.  Not exactly compelling, real-world,
benchmarked data.  If you cannot support your claims, don't make 'em,
or at least qualify them so there's no room for ambiguity. 


Your lips say no, no, no, but your words say otherwise.  

I thought you may have had something substantive to add.  Evidently you
don't. No big deal.  This is Usenet, after all.  Opinions are a dime a
dozen. Seems your are over-priced at that and based,  at least in large
measure, on your disposal income.

-- 
-John Steinberg
email:  XXXX@XXXXX.COM 

                   -=  I link therefore I'm spammed  =-

Re: Why I want some of the new Macs (was Re: boot rom/BIOS in iMac Intels?)

Postby Steve Hix » Fri, 13 Jan 2006 05:14:56 GMT

In article < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >,





Noted that you backed off from the initial definite statement regarding 
system speeds.

Re: Why I want some of the new Macs (was Re: boot rom/BIOS in iMac Intels?)

Postby Steven Fisher » Fri, 13 Jan 2006 05:35:52 GMT

In article <110120061514302918% XXXX@XXXXX.COM >,




Just understanding the nature of the benchmark used for the "2-5 times" 
claim makes the claim look ridiculous. If you can't understand that, I 
pity you.

-- 
Steven Fisher;  XXXX@XXXXX.COM 

Re: Why I want some of the new Macs (was Re: boot rom/BIOS in iMac Intels?)

Postby G.T. » Fri, 13 Jan 2006 05:42:57 GMT








You guys crack me up.  The same people that completely bagged on Intel for
years are now all e{*filter*}d to be running on Intel.  It just boggles my mind.

And no price drops, either.

Greg



Re: Why I want some of the new Macs (was Re: boot rom/BIOS in iMac Intels?)

Postby G.T. » Fri, 13 Jan 2006 05:47:28 GMT






Yeah, I have to agree with that.  MacBook Pro sounds like something they
hurriedly thought up at the last second to differentiate the product lines.

Greg



Similar Threads:

1.boot rom/BIOS in iMac Intels?

I haven't yet found anything saying if Firewire Target Mode is available or
if the Intel iMacs have anything better than a typical PC BIOS.

Any info?

Greg


2.BIOS CHIPS : New Replacement Bios Chips or Re - Flash

3.Why I am happy about the new Macs

Because I'll soon be able to get a
flat G5 on eBay for $125

:-)

-- 
Wes Groleau
    "Lewis's case for the existence of God is fallacious."
"You mean like circular reasoning?"
    "He believes in God.  Therefore, he's fallacious."

4.phoenix instant boot bios

5.Wanted to install new program on my iMac

Couldn't - it froze up. Tried again - froze up again.
Went back to my XP Dell, works great. 


6. Wanted to install new program on my iMac.

7. New iMAC G5 wants allways double layer DVD

8. Can a boot ROM redefine a MAC address?



Return to mac

 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 56 guest